TROUBLE AT OTIRA

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVII, Issue 119, 21 May 1914, Page 3

TROUBLE AT OTIRA

UNION'S VERSION <BT TELEGRAPH.— PRESS ASSOCIATION.) GREYMOUTH, 20th May. Hearing that there was trouble at the Bealey end of the Otira tunnel, an Argus reporter interviewed Mr. H. T. Armstrong, secretary of the Workers' Union, as to the causes. He gave the following acount : — "Since Messrs. M'Lean and Sons gave up the contract for the Otira tunnel, the' Public Works Department carried out the work on day labour, and acording to statements made by the Ministers the system has given satisfaction, and they were satisfied with the progress made. About three weeks ago a, notice was posted at the_ Bealey end stating that, according to instructions from the Minister, the tunnel would be done on contract from 4th May. The men then held a meeting to discuss the position, and passed a resolution refusing to take the contract. They also sent a deputation to the engineer-in-charge to explain their reasons for not taking the same. The engineer agreed to hold the contract back for a fortnight, and in the meantime they would try to arrange that conditions and prices would be more satisfactory to the men. The deputation agpih met the engineer a week later, and informed him that they were instructed by the men to refuse to take work on contract. However, they discussed with him prices and conditions, and the engineer then agreed 'to increase the prices and put the tunnel in working order, and to supply more tools, trucks, machines, and many other things considered necessary before starting work on contract. The deputation then reported to a meeting of the men, but tho contract was again refused by them. Mr. Armstrong then telegraphed the Minister of Public Works, protesting - against the contract system and contending that it would increase the accidents, which already wore far too numerous. The Minister's reply was to the effect that his engineer had reported that progress was unsatisfactory, and that a change to the contract system was necessary. "The next move by the Department was to send Mr. Cowing, who is in charge of the Bealey end, to interview every man individually and put down names for or against contract. Some were told that if they did not take contract they would be locked out. Others were told that no one would know how they voted, but the 'boss' had to know in every case. Perhaps this is the kind of secret ballot that Mr. Massey is go. ing to give us in the new Bill. On Sunday last the men had another meeting, and notwithstanding objections to the contract system, agreed to take contract sooner than have trouble aa soon as the conditions agreed to by the De* partment had been complied with. However, the Department has not kept their part of the agreement, but instead have locked the men out and closed down the work. According to the Industrial Disputes Act, passed last session, whether a union is registered under the Arbitration Act or 1 not, fourteen days' notice must be given to the Minister of Labour of their intention to strike and by the employer of his intention to lock out. This was not done by the Department, and it will be interesting now to see whether the Public Works Department will be prosecuted for a breach of the Industrial Disputes Act. Tho men were willing to start contract work as soon tas the Department complied with their part of the agreement. Another square deal for Labour," added Mr. Armstrong.