FAR-REACHING POINT

Evening Star, Issue 18333, 21 July 1923, Page 4

FAR-REACHING POINT

WATERSIDEES PROSECUTED

WAS ENGAGEMENT SUSPENDED’

[Per United Press Association.] NEW PLYMOUTH, July 20. Have shipping companies the right to order off work watersiders '“standing by.” and at the samo time order liio.ni back for work tho same day? This question was raised in coart here to-day before Mr Mowlcm, S.M., when tile Inspector of Awards claimed penalties of £lO each against fifty-five watersiders, alleging that they took part in a strike. The men were engaged working tho liner Opawa, but or, May 8 heavy rain prevented them from starting work in ihe norning. The men were ordered to stand by, and at 10 o’clock were told to conic back at 1 o’clock, being paid two hours’ stand-by lime—from 8 to 10. At 1 o’clock only five turned up. J. Heberts, secretary of the Federated Waters!dere, appeared for the filly-four defendants, and asked for an adjournment, as the validity of the clauses in the award was being questioned in tho Supremo Court.

Tho Magistrate derided to proceed on the Lv.v ns it stood.

For the plaintiff, evidmeo was given that ihe stevedore had lu!d the men at 10 o’clock that all hinds should bo back at 1 o’clock. Only five turned up, but all except one resumed next morning, being told by the foreman to go back to their odd jobs. It was contended that there was no suspension of engagement. For the defence, Mr Roberts quoted tho definition of a “strike,'” and contended that there had not beer; any collusion by tho men, and no breach of contract. He brought evidence to show that the engagement of the men had been suspended by the stevedore at 10 o’clock, who (it was alleged by the defence, but denied bv him) had quoted the clause of the award under which ho had suspended their engagement, and at the same time had ordered the men back.

The Magistrate said that the point was a far-reaching one, and he would give his decision in writing.