BANK OFFICERS

Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 130, 3 June 1936, Page 11

BANK OFFICERS

GUILD OR UNION?

MINISTER'S ADVICE

'■Wl liS BALLOT PAPERS'

Some "friendly advice" was given to the Bank Officers' Guild today by the Minister of Labour (the Hon. H. T. Armstrong), when he made a statement in reference to the confidential memorandum sent out by the guild to its members regarding the formation of an industrial union. The Minister's aclvice was that when the ballot papers were returned they should be burned before the count was made.

"The Bank Officers' Guild has published the contents of a confidential memorandum sent out to the employees of banks along with the ballot papers for such employees to vote for or against the formation of an industrial union," said the Minister. "This document was published, we are told, in order that the fair-minded public may judge whether my condemnation was Justified.

"In reply, I wish to say that after reading their statement, I am more convinced than ever that my condemnation was more than justified. The memorandum sent out by the guild executive contained some correct information, but, like the 'curate's egg,' it is only good in parts. It is not much consolation to the patient for the doctor to assure him that there is a lot of good ingredients in the medicine he is asked to swallow, if there is sufficient poison in it to kill him, and that just about describes the said memorandum. "The document contains what the Officers' Guild calls vital facts. The facts are numbered 1 to 21. Let us examine some of them. AN EXAMINATION. "No. 5 says: 'If it is decided not to register ,a union, we have the assurance of the Minister of Labour that we shall not be absorbed in a general clerical union.' The fact is that both the Prime Minister and myself told them quite clearly that if they did not register, they would certainly be absorbed by another union, which is quite the opposite to the information conveyed by the guild executive to its members.

"No. 10 says: 'The possibility of retrenchment should be borne in mind.' One would wonder if that was intended as a threat or just a warning that some of their employees would lose their jobs if a union was formed. Then they draw attention to the privileges and liberties they enjoy. The circular sets out to convey the impression that the bank officers' experience of a union in Australia was not a happy one. As a matter of fact, the bank officers in Australia have had unions and worked under awards of the Court for years. TJiey can get outside of the arbitration law at any time they like, but they are not so foolish. Now, if the truth were told to bank employees of New Zealand, it would be that the bank officers of Australia fought in the Arbitration Court for the increased wages and improved conditions they have obtained, and increased wages to bank employees in New Zealand were granted only after they had been 'fought fdr and'obtained in Australia. "Another of the vital facts spoken of in this remarkable circular says that the guild opposed the nationalisation' of banking at the last election, but that they are non-political. Did one ever read such a mass of contradiction as this circular contains?

"Paragraph 21 "of the circular says that if the ballot is in favour of the formation of a Union, it is proposed to place the matter before the executive council of the guild for consideration, so evidently there is no guarantee that they will apply for registration of a union whether the employees want it or not. "TO FRIGHTEN EMPLOYEES." "There are many other statements in |he circular intended to frighten employees against the formation of a union, but space will not permit dealing with them all. However, the joke of the whole thing is that after grossly misrepresenting the whole position and doing everything possible to frighten the bank employees against a union, they say that they do not wish to influence their voting. "I asked the president of the guild to let me have a copy of the ballot paper, and he kindly sent one along. The issue on the ballot paper is Just for or against the formation of an industrial union, but there is a flap attached to it on which the voter must sign his name, the bank he works in, and the branch of the bank. It is true that the scrutineers are asked to tear off the flap before opening the ballot paper, and I am not suggesting for a moment that the scrutineers would not be fair and above board, but at the same time, no one could claim it to be a secret ballot when the name of the voter has to be "attached to the ballot paper, and also the bank he works in. Under these circumstances, it is quite clear they could get only one result and any Court of law asked to rule from the result of a ballot obtained under such conditions, would certainly declare it to be null and void. A SEPARATE ORGANISATION. "I am speaking in the interests of the bank assistants themselves, and think it my duty to draw their attention to these facts, but as the memorandum sent to the bank assistants with the ballot paper is dated May 20, it is clear that, for the most part, they have voted before now and the damage is done. However, they can blame the executive. of their guild if it results in their losing the opportunity of retaining i their own identity as a separate organisation.

"Reading the guild memorandum and ballot paper gives one the idea of how some dictators in Continental countries secure such large votes in their favour.

"I will conclude by offering this piece of friendly advice to the Bank Officers' Guild, that they should issue further instructions to their scrutineers, asking them to burn the ballot papers when they come to hand, before the vote is counted at all."