NGAHERE DREDGE DISPUTE
NO SETTLEMENT REACHED MEN REQUEST LOST WAGES There is no indication of a settlement being reached in the dispute between the Ngahere Gold Dredging Company and 30 of its employees, who were’dismissed on Monday, following their failure to report for work that day, King’s Birthday. Suggestions that work on the dredge should be resumed, pending an investigation of the position in rpgard to the holiday, have come to nought, because the men have •set it down as a condition that they, should receive payment for the time lost by the dispute, before resuming, and the Company has agreed to make payment only in the event of a tribunal deciding that the men are in the right. A conference was held yesterday between the parties, but no progress was made towards the settlement of the dispute. The conference was attended by representatives of the Trades Council, Dredge Workers’ Union and the Company, including Mr. C. C. Davis; Chairman of Directors of the Company. Mr. C. Rawlins (Inspector of Awards) was also present. '■
UNION’S STATEMENT. In an official statement issued at the conclusion of yesterday’s conference, the Union’s spokesmen alleged that Mr. Davis offered to toss a coin to decide whether the workers who were dismissed on Monday should resume and be paid four days’ pay for time lost, if they won the toss, or whether they should receive nothing. This offer was rejected by the Union delegates, who, it is stated, informed Mr. Davis that they were not prepared to risk the bread and butter of the men and their families on the toss of a com. The Union reported that, after a discussion on the points at issue, the Company’s representatives made an offer that if the men returned to work, an independent tribunal would be set up, and if the Company was proved ip the wrong, four days’ pay for loss of time since the men were dismissed would be paid. This offer was not accepted by the Union, it being pointed out that on Tuesday an offer had been made to the Company that the men would return to work that afternoon provided they suffered no loss of pay. A secopd offer, made on Thursday, was also refused by the Company. The Union and Trades’ Council'officials, following a consultation, then offered that the men would resume work at 4 p.m. yesterday, if they received immediately two days’ pay for wages lost through the Company’s action in dismissing them, the remaining two days’ pay to be decided by the tribunal. This offer was rejected by the Company, Mr. Davis saying that it was not a “sporting offer.” Mr. Davis then made his offer to toss a coin for four days’ pay or nothing, and the Union refused emphatically to have the men return to work under such conditions. The union delegates considered the offer made to the Company by the Trades and Labour Council and the Union was a sporting gesture, because it would have meant that operations at the dredge would have been recommenced immeidately, and if the men were proved in the wrong, they would have suffered the loss of two days’ pay, whilst the Company would have to pay four days’ pay if it were proved to have acted wrongly. This offer was rejected by Mr. Davis with the remark that he did not “give a hoot if the dredge didn’t work till after Christmas,” according to the Union statement.
COMPANY’S VIEWPOINT. . “The negotiations, that have been conducted with a view to securing an amicable settlement of the dispute at the Ngahere dredge, and the results thereof, are explicitly set out in a telegram sent yesterday to the Minister of Labour by Mr. C. C. Davis, Chairman of Directors of the Ngahere Company,” stated Mr. T. Blackie, manager of the company, when .interviewed, to-day. Mr. Davis’s telegram to the Minister (Mr. Webb) was as follows: “Reference Ngahere, company offered on Tuesday that provided dredge started by midnight the question of payment for Tuesday idle should be left for decision tribunal set up by yourself with Magistrate as chairman, other award conditions to remain unaltered until superseded by’ new award. Same offer renewed Thursday through Mr. Mostyn but leaving the three days for decision of tribunal. Have personally renewed offer to-day with payment for four days for tribunal’s decision. Union delegates have declined all offers as above. They insist upon guarantee of payment for full time lost before commencement. Company unable agree this. Have made every endeavour but cannot get further.” Questioned as to what was actually in dispute between the company and its employees, Mr. Blackie stated the only dispute now existing was whether the employees were to be paid for time lost during the stoppage, even if their action in refusing work last Monday was wrong, or whether they were to be paid only in event of their refusal to work being found to be justified. The stoppage of work had occurred, in the first place, by the employees of the company, when requested to work on Monday last, refusing to do so, and’ the company informing the employees that the employment of those so refusing had been terminated by their own action. The company claimed that, by refusing to work, the men had committed a' breach of the award, and their action constituted a strike, whilst the men con-: tended the company had committed a breach of the award and the action of the company in declining to employ the men on Tuesday constituted a lock-out.
The Company agreed, at the request of the Minister of Labour, to have the question of whether the men or the Company were at fault referred to a tribunal to be set up by the Minister for determination and in event of such tribunal finding the Company to be at fault the Company would pay the men for all time lost. The men, however, refused the Company’s offer and demanded unconditional payment for all time lost before resuming work. Mr Blackie stated that an application for a new award was now before the Arbitration Court, so that the decisipn of the Court would settle the question of future working conditions and the existing dispute was, therefore, limited to the sole question of unconditional payment to the men right or wrong, or payment only
in the event of their being in the right. He further stated he h,ad pre r viously declined to make any statement, intended for publication, relative to the dispute, as h£ considered any such publication would not tend to facilitate an amicable setlement. The men’s representatives, however, had not only definitely turned down the very reasonable proposals of the Company to abide by the decision of an independent arbitrator, but had, throughout the negotiations, freely used ithe colufpri£’pf the Press for what could be described to he homing other than propaganda. He noted that in a statement published in today’s ‘Argus,” quite evidently supplied by a representative of the men, it had been stated that an offer by the men to reduce their demand for unconditional payment before returning. to work to two days’ pay was a sporting gesture. He had not hitherto met a sport who demanded he should collect, win or. lose. It was also stated that the Union is not willing to risk the bread and butter of the men and thpir families oh the toss of a coin. It was to be noted, that if the contention of the men is correct, that the Company is in the wrong, payment of /wages for lost time would have been assured, and. they would have had nothin" to lose by agreeing that such payment was dependent on a decision in their favour by the tribunal to be set up by the Minister. The offer of the Company to pay wages for all time lost was, stated Mr. Blackie, purely a voluntary one put forward with aft earnest desire to secure an amicable settlement. Independent of such offer and even if the Company, were in the wrong—and he was satisfied this- was not the case —it would have been liable for payment of one-half day’s wages only per man—the award providing for termination of employment by four hours’ notice on either side. Such offer of the Company displayed more consideration for the men’s family interests than either the action of the men in refusing the offer or the suggestion of the “Argus” contributor that the stoppage may spread. NO OTHER DISPUTES f Interviewed as to the statement appearing in to-day’s “Argus,” that a general stoppage of work on dredges is not improbable, a representative, of the Placer Mines Federation —the Association representing the dredge owners—stated there was no reason why a general stoppage should be expected. The Ngahere dispute was one solely between the Ngahere Company and its men. Friendly relations existed between the management and the men on other dredges. An application had been made some months ago for a new award. Many terms of the award had been settled between the parties before the Concilliation Council and those on which agreement could not be reached had been referred to the Arbitration Court for settlement. Both parties were desirous that the Court should hold an early fixture at Greymouth for finalisation of the award, and it was expected that such sittings would take place before the close of the year.
WORKERS’ MEETINGS A meeting of the West Coast Trades Council, is being held at Greymouth to-day, to consider its attitude to the dispute, and the Dredge Workers’ Union will hold a special meeting tomorrow afternoon. MR. DAVIS’S STATEMENT CHRISTCHURCH, November 29. “I have made every endeavour to use conciliatory methods to-day, but they were useless. There is no doubt that the Ngahere Company was singled out for this special treatment by the union. When the men refused duty on Monday, the Ngahere dredge was the only dredge which did not work.”
■ This statement was made by the chairman of Directors of the Ngahere Gold Dredging Company, Ltd. (Mr. C. C. Davis), on his return to Christchurch this evening from Greymouth, when asked for his comment on the dispute between the company and the men through which the dredge has been idle this week.
“It is the third occasion on which that special treatment has been meted out to the company,” Mr. Davis said, “so it is not an isolated instance. It is just a mattei’ of reaching the limit at which we will have to have an understanding of what the future is to be. The position is really serious, as gold is one of the most vital products in New Zealand’s war effort, because it becomes dollars almost at once, and nothing is wanted more than dollars to-day. The company claims and legal advice bears this out, that the men left their employment by refusing duty on Monday. They posted a notice that they would not work that day. This is contrary to the terms of the award which is still in force.” Mr. Davis said that he had sent a telegram to the Minister for Labour (Mr. Webb), in which the company’s offers and his personal renewals of them were set out. The telegram also stated that the men’s delegates had declined all the offers, insisting on a guarantee of payment for the full time lost before commencing work. The company, the telegram added, was unable to agree to this. It had made every possible effort, but could not get further. '
Misunderstanding of the word “company” led to an amusing incident, related in a letter received in Auckland from England. “Two English women were returning home one day when two Polish soldiers spoke to them. They said they were very lonely, and would not the girls invite them one day to tea? One of the girls, who lived in a flat, said she would see what her mother said, and send a correct invitation. The mother wrote, and said she would be pleased to have their company to tea on a certain date at a certain time. On the day, they heard a tramping bf feet coming upstairs, and when the girl answered the door she beheld 30 soldiers. It was a Polish company. The result was that the neighbours offered to take some in, and they were scattered through several houses.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GEST19401130.2.38
Bibliographic details
Greymouth Evening Star, 30 November 1940, Page 8
Word Count
2,064NGAHERE DREDGE DISPUTE Greymouth Evening Star, 30 November 1940, Page 8
Using This Item
The Greymouth Evening Star Co Ltd is the copyright owner for the Greymouth Evening Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of the Greymouth Evening Star Co Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.