ALLEGED UNLAWFUL STRIKE.

Greymouth Evening Star, 13 March 1917, Page 2

ALLEGED UNLAWFUL STRIKE.

CLAIMS TO RECOVER PENALTIES, AGAINST BLACKBALL MINERS' UNION. , An action was commenced in the Magistrate'*; Court, Greymouth, this moraine aeains't the Blackball Miners' Union, wherein it wati sought to recover, on the information of Thomas George Feiider, Inspector of Awards, the sum of £4OO penalties from the defendant union for instigating unlawful strikes at the Blackball mine, and also with inciting a continuance of such unlawful strikes'. The da ten or the alleged offences were the 23rd and 24th January and sth February, two separate offences in which it was sought. t;i recover £2OO penalty in respect of each under section 6 of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act Amendment, 1908.

Against Walter Wilkinson, Clarence Ward, and George Lcitch, members of the above-named union, three informations, in which the Inspector of Awards'sought to recover ,£lO in respect to each, were laid for (1) being parties to a strike at Blackball on tho 23rd January, 1917; (2) being parties t.i a strike at the same place on the 25th January, 1917, and (3) for inciting the continuance of an unlawful strike on the 25th January. The claims were made before Mr. T. Hutchison, S.M. Mr. M. Hannan appeared on behalf of the Inspector of Awards and Mr. P. J. o'Began (Wellington) for the defendants. It was agreed to take all the informations Together. Mr. O'lkgan said he would admit all the facts except in so far as they were unlawful, and intimated i.har he did not propose to call evidence.

Mr. iiannan said he proposed to call Mr. Leitch (manager of the mine) to give formal evidence in regard to letters: and membership of the union. Cuitinuing, Mr. iiannan said that on Tuesday, 2ord January, ar 11 a.m., there was a dispute in regard to the payment of binn boys, who claimed full wages whether they worked full time or n<t. The boys knocked "it work and men were put in their places. During the changing of shjfts in the afteiuoon at 2 o'clock, the men had a conference, there was a show of hands, and the oncoming shift went home, in the evening, Mr. Leitch was informed that the men did not propose to go to work unless full time was paid the hoys, for time lost during the holidays. Later. Mr. Leitch received an official communication from the union, stating that they refused to work unless the binn hoy?: received pay for time lost during the holidays- Tins demand Mr. Leitch refused, and work ceased at the mine. Oil the 25th January some of the men went to work and others refused to work on that date because men were doing work that the binn boys had been doing. Thoiie. who did go to work on the 55th were jeered at and incited not to go back to work. On the 25th work ceased a'ad on the 26tli there was no work at all, and itwas therefore alleged another strike took place on the 26th. In reply to his Worship, Mr. liannan said he could not say if the boys were members of the union, and through Mr. Leitch said the boymade a demand for full time whether they worked or not. Mr. O'Kegan said the boys had been knocked oil' two hours earlier on a particular date and claimed full time i'.,r the shift." The reason they made no demand till the Tuesday after the pay-day (Friday) was because they had been paid by the clerk, and had not f.ejn the manager till the Tuesday, Mr. liannan said the custom was to pay miners by the ton : the boys had been paid s' l much per day according to the actual number of hours worked. Mr. o'Regan said that work was resumed without the matter being settled: it was still pending attd on Mr. Leiteh's suggestion had been referred t i a conference.

hi regard to the information as to the alleged offence on the sth Februaiy, Mr. Hannan said it concerned the right of the miner* to take a holiday. The union had demanded that no workman (other than necessary) should w..rk on pay Saturdays. A fall took place in the mine prior to the oth.Femruury and Mr. Leitch employed men to remove the fall. The miners ''took u, holiday" on the Monday in consequence of the men being employed on the pay Saturday. Counsel submitted thai a strike occunyd on the Monday, fith February. They had not been prosecuted for another strike in November, in which the mmo was idle for nine days, in connection with the Military Service Act. ihe management were getting full up of these small strike.!, and had desired action.

Mr. O'Regan .said that pay Saturday was' a holiday in all Dominion coal inineti, and was in accordance with the rule;. The miners did not actually object to the work done on the pay Saturday, but what they did object to was the picking of particular men for the pay-day work. The union should have been consulted in the selection of the men. Mr. Hannan replied that the union had written a letter to the manager on ilie question, in which reference wiii'i made to favoritism of employees. The union simply demanded to be consulted when miners were needed for shift work. I'or tin* oeicnco, Mr. O'Began submitted that the industrial agreement governing the working at me Bluett bull mine was null and void. The agreement had been fixed'for a period from the lUtii March, 15)14, to loth March, 1917, but was dated <>tu March, 1914. He quoted Section 2d of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1908, to show that an industrial agreement could not be made for a greater term than three years. The date of the making of the agreement was the date on which it was executed, therefore the Blackball agreement, being dated 6th March, 1914, had been made for a period of three years and nine days. Counsel cited the case of the Gisborne Waterside Workers (9 Gaz. L.R., 117), Wellington Slaughtermen's case (10, Gaz. L.ft.) and others: in support. Mr. Hannan said the Act provided

that parties must be bound by award, and also that where an award was in force it continued until.superseded by another award or industrial agreement. Even supposing the present industrial agreement were null and void, the parties were still bound by the old award. Counsel further quot. od Section 9 of the. Labor Disputes Investigation Act, which he submitted applied to the present claims, and that this particular section also provided again.',* unlawful strikes in cases vihere no union or agreement existed. Mr. O'Regan contended that the old union at Blackball, which had been bound by an award, had ceased to exist, having cancelled its registration, Tha- ,:..ion had gone out of existence, and with it the award. Mr. Han'.jan pointed out that the defendant union must have been in existence prim- to the 1911 agreement and- for a couple of month.-; at least had worked under the old award. Mr. 6'Regari,maintained that it was not so. In 1908 the old union had been fined .£75 for striking and had subsequently cancelled its registration under the Act, avid, therefore, there was no union. Up to the 1913 strike there was no industrial agreement, but there had been a collective agreement, quite distinct from an agreement under the Act. The old award could have no application in the present case.

Mr. Lcitch, through Mr. Hannan, said the men had been refused employment unless they formed an arbitration union immediately after the strike. The defendant union was formed and its, members signed and went to work under the agreement existing prior to the strike and Hie formation of the defendant union. His \V<n. Inn reserved his decision.