THE EIGHT OF APPEAL HARBOUR BOARD EMPLOYEES.

Evening Post, Volume LXXV, Issue 29, 4 February 1908, Page 3

THE EIGHT OF APPEAL HARBOUR BOARD EMPLOYEES.

A COMMITTEE SUGGESTED. PROPOSAL DEFEATED. Ths grievances of Harbour Board omployeet. were tho subject of some discussion at a meeting of the board yesterday, when Mr. R. Fletcher moved : — That, an Appeal Committee be formed consisting of the secretary (who 6hall act as chairman and convenor), harbour ' master, wharfinger, engineer, and one delegate elected by the permanent employees of the board, such delegate to be- elected every second year. ' The Appeal Committee shall investigate and deal with any complaint laid before it by, or on behalf of, any of the employees. No employe© shall be dismissed until his ca-se has been considered by the Appeal Committee. In the absence^ of any one of the four officers hia place on the committee is to be taken by the officer acting for him. A deputy delegate is. to be elected biennially to take the place of the- delegate during any inability to attend a meeting. All meetings of the Appeal Committee are to bo considered by its members strictly confidential, and all • communioations from the committee, cither to tho board or to the employees, are to be made through the secretary. Mr. Fletcher said the motion was one which should appaal to, every member of the. board. At the present ( time there was a good deal of dissatisfaction amongst the staff because of the difficulty in getting grievances remedied and complaints adjudicated upon. Mr. Hislop said he would second the motion, but he did not liko tho term» of it in one or two respect?. lie thought the chairman and another member of the board should act oti the Appeal Committee. At tho same time he desired to help to smootho away any grievances existing amongst the employees. Mr. Wilford said the only thing . he did not like about the motion were the words "no employee shall be dismissed until his complaint has been considered by the Appeal Committee." Mr. Shirtcliffe said it was only another, instance of the tail wagging the dog. Ho would vote against the motion. Tho board surely had confidence in its executivo officere. There was the right of appeal now to the Wharves and Accounts Committee. Mr. Beauchamp said a, motion of this kind, if passed, would seriously weaken the position of the executive of the board. It would be a, most retrograde step. The board nov encouraged employees with grievances to take their capes before tho Whirves and Accounts Committee. Mr. Tounsend said ha would certainly vote against the motion. It was quite unnecessary. Mr. Fletcher, in reply, said he did not propose to interfere with the functions of the 'Wharves and Accounts Committee. He proposed that the Appeal Committee should be the final court of appeal. The motion was lost.