RIVAL UNIONS OLD AND NEW SECRETARIES AN UNUSUAL CLAIM. "

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVII, Issue 72, 26 March 1914, Page 8

RIVAL UNIONS OLD AND NEW SECRETARIES AN UNUSUAL CLAIM. "

Arising out of strike aftermath, atthe Magistrate's Court this afternoon, George Farland. waterside worker, proceeded against Charles Albert Purdey, secretary and treasurer of the Wellington Wharf Labourers' Industrial Union of Workers, claiming the sum of £3, as wages for certain work executed in accordance with the following resolution carried at a meeting of the union held on 7th February last: — "That a committee, consisting of the secretary (Mr. Purdey). Mr. Geo Bruce, and the mover (Mr. Geo. Farland) be appointed to enquire and report and make recommendations to a meeting to be subsequently called to decide as to whether, and to what extent, there has been a due observance by the employers of the terms of any agreement relating to any employment on the waterfront. Further, that they be given credentials under the seal of the union and remuneration at wharf rates." Mr. P. J. O'Regan appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. H. F. Yon Haast defended. Mr. O'Regan stated that his client had acted in accordance with the resolution, and he was engaged five days in carrying out his obligations. Farland had claimed from the defendant wages at 12s per day, but the defendant had not paid. .George Gray Farland, a member of the defendant union, and a waterside worker, said that he had been employed on the wharf since the strike. A special meeting of the new onion was held on Saturday, 7th February. The meeting was called for 2 p.m., and commenced at 25 minutes to 3". Some 400 or 500 men were present. 'Members of the executive were at the door, admission being by financial members' books. To his knowledge the resolution above-men-tioned was carried, and in accordance with the resolution he waited on the secretary and the executive and placed the matter before them. Since then he had been continually working in terms of the resolution. A subsequent meeting was held, at which he submitted the report. The meeting was not called by tho secretary, but the members of the union requested him to call the meeting, the secretary having failed to do so. He was engaged by the Westport Coal Company on a vessel, shovelling coal. He had left off his work on several occasions to attend to the duties delegated to him at the meeting. Cross-examined by Mr. yon Haast, witness said that when the motion was declared carried he heard nobody ask for a division. The executive did not say that they would not recognise the business transacted at the meeting. He was not told that Lis services were no longer required. When he met members of the executive he wanted to discuss matters in a friendly way. There seemed jto be an " air of indecision "' among the members of the executive present. He left the room later, and when he returned the executive stated that they were willing to choose twenty men to confer with twenty men selected by witness in order that the business done at big meeting might be reviewed*. Witness refused to adojjt this course, stating that he had not the power to attend such a conference, to overhaul business done at a duly constituted meeting. He received no instructions from the executive as to bis work, relying solely on the resolution which was passed at tho general meeting. Witness made an investigation of the conditions of the waterfront, and later drew, up a report. The number present at the Saturday meeting was between sixty and eighty. There were close on 3000 names on the books, and each financial member was entitled to a vote. In the busy season there were usually about 1600 workers on the wharves. (Proceeding.)