SHIPPING DISPUTE

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 51, 1 March 1934, Page 13

SHIPPING DISPUTE

SEQUEL IN COTJET

MANY MEN INVOLVED

A waterside workers' dispute' which occurred early in February had its sequel in the Magistrate's Court today, when the Inspector of Awards proceeded against 59 waterside workers, all members of the Wellington Waterside Workers' Union, claiming a penalty of £ 5 from each man, alleging that they took part in an unlawful strike arising out of a dispute with their employers about the conditions of their employment. All the cases were heard together, except that of one man who denied that he was asked to work. The proceedings were taken under section 9 of the Labour Disputes Investigation Act, 1913. Mr. J. G. L. Hewitt, S.M., was on the Bench. -. Mr. P. S. K. Macassey and the Inspector of Awards, Mr. J. Gcorgeson, appeared for the Department, and Mr. J. Roberts and Mr. J. O. Johnson acted for all the men. ' - Mr. Maeassey said that on Tuesday, February 6, the men wereengaged, with others, to put cargo on the motor-ship Orari and finish loading it. It was the practice, when men. were required' to work overtime, for the. foreman to tell them so at about 4 p.m., and the men had to work overtime if required. There were about 180 men loading the Orari, about 50 on the wharf and the rest on the ship, and all were informed that they were required to work over-' time from 6 p.m. A spokesman from the wharf men asked if they .were going to be paid for the same time as the men on thcr ship worked, and. the foreman replied that they, would be paid for the actual time they worked. The men then declined to work overtime. THE BONE OF CONTENTION. The position, said Mr.'Maeassey, was that in loading frozen meat as was being done on the tirari, the men on the wharf finished their work from half to three-quarters of an hour before the men on the boat, who had to finish stowing the cargo and. fastening the hatches. The wharf men and. the ship men were paid for the times they actually worked' The wharf men contended that they were entitled to be paid for the full working time of the men on'the ship, and the bone of contention was that they asked for half an hour's pay, at 3s an hour, for work they did not do. , When ordinary cargo was being loaded the wharf nien and the ship .men. finished work at-almost the same time and the employers did not distinguish between them in the- pay, but in handling insulated cargo the ship men took a long time extra and the employers refused to pay the- wharf men for that extra time. ■•-•■■■ SHIP'S DEPARTURE DELAYED. There was originally an award between, the waterside workers and the ship owners, said counsel, but that was cancelled and its place was taken by an agreement which expired in November, 1933, but the parties, were still working on" the basis of that agreement. On two other nights, after February 6 the men also refused to work overtime, the. result being- that the ship was delayed in its departure, some of tho frozen meat cargo became Eoft, and had to be sent back to 'the freezing works to be reconditioned; and there ■was serious loss to the employers. There- was also the possibility of the boat missing the market in London. Mr. Maeassey referred at length to legal authorities. '' was given by William Hyde, New Zealand Shipping Company, foreman, and William Bennett, manager of the Wellington Waterside.'Co-operative Labour Association. (Proceeding.)