RAILWAY LEAVE

Greymouth Evening Star, 21 September 1945, Page 8

RAILWAY LEAVE

DEPARTMENT'S PROBLEM WELLINGTON, September 18. “We honestly think that the manpower position will be much better in six months, but we don’t say that it will be completely solved,” said Mr K. G .Reid, the Railways Department’s advocate, at yesterday afternoon's sitting of the Railways Industrial Tribunal. Mr A .F. Taylor, the Department’s assessor, asked: “Do you think that the Department in six months’ time might be in a position to grant annual leave as it falls due to the existing staff?” “Yes,” replied Mr Reid, “we might be able to do it if we got back every one of the men at present in the Armed Forces.” He added that his assumption was based on every man being back at work and fully rehabilitated.

, “How long would it take to work off the arrears of leave?” asked Mr Taylor. Mr Reid said that the arrears of leave amounted to nearly 40,000 days. To work . off these arrears in 12 months would require another 1655 employees, and even that figure was largely theoretical', because those men would require to be fully trained, and there would not be that number on the labour market. If the claim before the Tribunal, that for long-service leave, were granted within the next 12 months, it seemed obvious that the current and accrued annual leave would have to go, said Mr Reid. SECOND DIVISION CLAIMS Among the claims presented to the Tribunal was one that, in addition to the prescribed annual leave, Jong service leave on full pay be granted, ranging. from one week after 10 years’ service to 12 weeks after 40 years’ service. The three second division organisations supported the claim. It was agreed that there wasat present no provision for long service leave in any of the New Zealand Government services.

For the applicants it was urged that within a very short period there would be no man-power difficulties in the Railways Department, and that so far as financial considerations were concerned, there was the compensating factor in reducing the incidence of sickness due to the nature of railwaymen’s work. The Department opposed the claim on the grounds that man-power difficulties had not yet been overcome, and that the Department’s financial position had deteriorated since the previous sitting of the tribunal. Another claim by the same three organisations asked that the provisions framed by the tribunal last year regarding double pay and an extra day’s annual leave for work performed on Anzac Day, Good Friday, and Christmas Day apply to the other departmental holidays. For the Department it was pointed out that on the departmental holidays in question a large staff had to be employed to handle the heavy passenger traffic. The existing penali rates for. special and other departmental holidays were, it was urged, a good recompense for working on those days. The claim was opposed also on the ground of the additional expenditure involved. Decision on both claims was reserved.