RAILWAYS STAFF

Evening Post, Volume CXXVII, Issue 110, 12 May 1939, Page 11

RAILWAYS STAFF

THE APPEAL BOARD

MR. ROSCOE'S RESIGNATION

GENERAL MANAGER'S

COMMENTS

Copies of letters written by Mr. J. S. Roscoe, secretary of the North Canterbury branch, of the Railway Officers' Institute, to other, branch secretaries of the institute, after his resignation from the Railways Appeal Board as representative of the first division of railway employees, are published in the current issue of the "Railways Magazine," and answered in a message to the staff by the General Manager, Mr. G. H. Mackley.

.The first letter is from the North Canterbury branch of the R. 0.1., following the resignation, requesting immediate representation to the Minister of Railways for the appointment of an expert committee with the powers of a Royal Commission to inquire, into alleged causes of dissatisfaction with present staff control and administration.. The letter concludes: "Don't lefr the executive committee get away with the proposal for a conference with the management that will produce little more, than our annual conference representations."

"It is obvious," comments Mr. Mackley, "that this postscript was not mr eluded. in the copy of this letter sent to the executive committee.

"The reasons for his resignation given in Mr. Roscoe's letter of March 31 will not stand the test of intelligent examination," continues the General Manager. "Mr. .Roscoe- states that his experience of appeal cases convinces him that no appellant has a chance of winning an appeal until.the new board is appointed, but overlooks the fact that in cases he has adjudicated upon he has supported 88 per cent, of the decisions of the board, and also overlooks the serious reflection cast upon the integrity of members of the board, particularly the chairman, who is a Magistrate. Mr. Roscoe's statement is extraordinary in view of his published declaration: 'My personal relations with my colleagues on the Appeal Board are the happiest possible.' OFFICERS NOT "COACHED." "Mr. Roscoe's further statement that officers are coached in the evidence they are to give leaves only one implication, that senior officers are not true to the oath they take, a reflection absolutely without foundation," states Mr. Mackley, who proceeds;' "I would expect all witnesses, either for the Department or the appellant, to be completely impartial, and to speak the truth-in accordance with their solemn oath. Any officer who failed to so act would not only embarrass the Department, but he would not be a proper- person, • to- have inr. a _ position of control. From my long association with, and knowledge of, proceedings of the Appeal Board I can say definitely that every endeavour is made to present the case for the Department with the utmost fairness, and I am satisfied ;ttfa't-\ariything .fo. the ..op.ntrary exists only "in/Mr. Roscoe's imagination. "Mr. Roscoe. speaks of. the. loss of 'the right of appeal against. . nonrecorrtmendation,'" continues' Mr. .Maqkley, "but should know that there has been no such right.'of appeal at any time since he ac.ce.pted appointment to the board." ';' ~ It was alleged by Mr. Roscoe that accelerated promotion in special positions'gave the "plums of the service to an honoured few," but Mr. Mackley definitely denies favouritism, and says that all appointments are made strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Government Railways Act. INSTANCES LACKING. "One would have expected that in charging the Department with maladministration, Mr. Roscoe would have quoted some instances had there been any; but not once, either in his communications with the Press or in his propaganda amongst officers and members of the Officers' Institute, is a single • instance of maladministration quoted," declares Mr. Mackley. "Another error of Mr. Roscoe's is in stating that 'the right of appeal in relatioh to dismissal for alleged drunkenness and alleged peculation is denied by the Department.''.ln reply to'this I say there are no dismissals in the Department for either 'alleged drunkenness' or 'alleged peculation.' The real position is that when drunkenness or peculation are admitted or proved and dismissal follows, then—in accordance with the terms of the Act —'in no case shall any person who has been dismissed for peculation or drunkenness be again appointed on the permanent staff of the Department.'

"The course I am pursuing in this message is somewaht unusual, but the circumstances necessitating it are exceptional, and I aria constrained to deal with the -matter also for . another reason." I. find that .besides the misleading propaganda distributed by Mr. Roscoe through the channels mentioned, he has received the support of the offiical organ of the Communist Party of New Zealand, the 'Workers' Weekly,' which, in an article on March 24, applauds him and his action, and follows up these laudatory comments with' remarks very similar to those contained in the propaganda issued by Mr. Roscoe himself to the branch secretaries of the Railway Officers' Institute. These latest developments convince me that Mr. Roscoe's real objective is not concerned with the best interests either of the majority of railway officers or of the public. It is therefore my obvissu public duty fo make known what is going on, in order that influences which might do harm to an important Department of State may be counteracted."