Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

ARBITRATION COURT

THE WORKERS’ REPRESENTATIVE. MR M'CULLOUGH’S RENOMINATION. * [Special to the ‘Star.’] CHRISTCHURCH, September 14. At' a largely-attended meeting of the No. 1 Branch of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers it was decided to nominate Mr M'Cullough as workers’ representative on the Court of Arbitration. ,A motion was unanimously ' agreed to condemning the action of the court in breaking the agreement of t]\e stabilisation of wages by reducing the wages of shearers, and supporting Mr M'Cullough in the action taken by him in resigning from the, court as a protest against the agreement being broken.

According to come trade union secretaries the interpretation given by the At-torney-General in respect of the appointment of a workers’ representative (nominated) and a deputy workers’ representative acting (nominated) dors not appear to fit in with tho procedure adopted in the past when unions registered underlie Industrial Conciliation ami ■Arbitration Act have been requested to send in nominations for both positions. Mr C. Renn, who is secretary of several unions, informed a reporter that as he read the AttorneyGeneral's interpretation he took it that the Attorney-General considered that the unions only nominated a person for tho position of workers’ representative (one of the nominated members of the court), and that the deputy (the acting nominated member) was appointed by the GovernorGeneral from those persons who had been nominated for the position of workers’ representative. Tn the past the union had been asked to nominate persons to fill tho {wo positions—that of workers' representative, and that of doruty workers’ representative. Tho interpretation of the At-torney-General appealed tn he that they were only railed upon to nominate for ouo' position, and that the Governor-General fettled who was to he tho workers’ representative and who is to he the deputy. It had been the custom for candidates for both positions to circularise the unions in support of their candidature, and Mr Renn could recall un in sta uce whore, one candidate had stood simultaneously for both positions.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19210914.2.19

Bibliographic details

Evening Star, Issue 17766, 14 September 1921, Page 3

Word Count
329

ARBITRATION COURT Evening Star, Issue 17766, 14 September 1921, Page 3

ARBITRATION COURT Evening Star, Issue 17766, 14 September 1921, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert