COUNTY COUNCIL SUED

Evening Post, Volume CXXIV, Issue 87, 9 October 1937, Page 15

COUNTY COUNCIL SUED

ALL ACTIONS FAIL

ALLEGED VICTIMISATION

(By Telecrapl)—Press Association.)

I CHRISTCHURCH, October 8 Four actions brought against t Akaroa County Council by the Labo Department failed in the Magistrat Court today, the Magistrate dismissi one as trivial and giving judgment 1 the defendants on each of the thr others. The following breaches were leged:—(l) That the defendants as party bound by the New Zeala Local Bodies award dismissed frc their employ Peter Hoglund and T. Rhodes merely because they we members of an industrial union workers and were entitled to the bei fits of the award. A penalty of £ was claimed. (2) That between I cember 14, 1936, and July 20, 191 wages were not paid weekly or fo nightly. A penalty _.f £10 was claim* (3) That suitable accommodation h not been provided to enable the wot ers to change, and dry their cloth and to have their meals. A penalty £10 was claimed. (4) That betwe June 1, 1937, and July 5, 1937, th took proceedings with the intent defeating the provisions of the Nc Zealand Local Bodies award. A pe altv of £10 was claimed. Mabel B. Howard, secretary of t' General Labourers' Union, said she ; tended a meeting of council employei Hoglund, one of the men dismisse was in the chair. During the meetii Hayward, a membei of the counc twice came in, and Hoglund asked hi to leave. The councillor, witness sai was very much under the influence liquor. After Hayward left the do was locked, and the meeting proceeds Mr. Thomas, for the council: Do y< suggest that because Hayward atten ed the meeting of the union at whi« Hoglund was in the chair, thercfo Hoglund was dismissed? Witness: Yes, I do. Mr. Thomas: That is, then, the bas of this charge of victimisation. —Yt STAFF REORGANISATION. Colin Stewart, clerk to the Akarc bounty Council, read from the minut oook the council's decision to reorga ise the staff by dismissals and callir for fresh applications. Of 14 o' lands, 12 were taken on again. Ho und and Rhodes were not re-engage Witness said Mr. Butler, secretary ( ;he union at Wellington, telephone ,o him. Butler described the council iction in dismissing the men as "d ;picable tactics, a flagrant breach < he award, and an act of victimis; vion and intimidation." The counc met next day and decided to take n action. Witness said he received telephone message on September from Mr. T. H. McCombs, M.P., sayin that the Labour Department and th union were prepared to drop th charges of victimisation if the counc: would reinstate Hoglund. Mr. Thomas, for the defence, sai he had never appeared in such a scar dalous Labour prosecution. It wa based on suspicion. Councillor Haj ward was not proud of the inciden when he intruded on the labourer: meeting and had told no one of th incident.. Members of the council, in evidenct said that when applications for pos ; tions were under consideration the; were not aware that Hoglund had pre sided at the labourers' meeting. The Magistrate dismissed the firs charge as trivial. He said he failed t see where the prosecution had estafc lished any of the other charges. H was satisfied the councillors acted a they thought best in the interests o the ratepayers. Judgment was give: for defendant council on the othe: three charges.