FORMER TELLER GIVES EVIDENCE ON CONDITIONS

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 22877, 22 February 1949, Page 4

FORMER TELLER GIVES EVIDENCE ON CONDITIONS

BANK CLERKS’ CLAIM

(P.A.I WELLINGTON. Feb. 22. The heaving of the claim for an award by New Zealand bank officials was continued in the Arbitration Court yesterday before Mr. Justice Tyndall. Cecil Keatley Hamilton Donnell, former first teller in the Wellington branch of the Union Bank of Australia Limited, who resigned in 1943, said in evidence that he was required to work at high pressure since he joined the bank in 1921. The bank tried to avoid the payment of overtime as a matter of policy, he said, two main methods being used. “I know that, when a man would record his time, on many occasions the times that he recorded in the attendance book were altered to lesser times by controlling officers after the employee had signed the book,” witness said. His Honour: .Just a minute till I get the first thing right. According to you, there is a school for forgery conducted in the Union Bank. Do you suggest that responsible officers would alter things? Witness: Yes. His Honour: No wonder we have a lot of forgers around the country if that is correct—and I find it hard to believe. However, you are on oath. “Told to Take Time Off” Witness said another practice was that if a man in charge of the time cards discovered a few days before the end of the 80-hour fortnight that a man had worked in excess of his time the controlling officer would come along and say, “You are two or three hours in excess of your time. I want you to knock off at 3 p.m. today or take an extra hour off for the next few days so that you are not being in excess of your hours at the end of the week.” On occasions, witness added, a man on a particular class of work in a bank would not be able to cease work at 3 p.m. He would go home and leave things to somebody else. He had even known men to have up to hours for lunch hour. Witness also described how bank officers were obliged to make good any losses they incurred and said he had known of losses that had been paid, running from single figures to £BOO. His Honour: Do you know of any gains that occurred in the bank? Witness: If a bank officer takes home samples, he does not last very long. Surpluses in a teller’s cash are put in the surplus cash account. Witness added that although he had paid about £390 in contributions to the pension fund, that amount was not refunded on his resignation. To the advocate for the union witness said there was a fear complex among bank employees. His Honour: What were they afrSid of? Alleged Penalties Witness: They were frightened of earning the displeasure of the controlling officers. That would result in a reduction of salary, non-promotion or various indignities. “I have even had the experience of being warned by a controlling officer that it would be better for my banking career if I dropped my Bolshie attitude.

His Honour: So you were a Bolshie, were you? Witness: Oh no, sir. I was standing up for the rights of myself and my fellows in this.

Cross-examined by the advocate for the New Zealand Associated Banks, Mr. W. J. Mountjoy, witness said he had left the bank because he was dissatisfied with the conditions of employment He had always considered that the employees in a bank were not prepared, because of a fear complex, to come out and state what they felt themselves. “I have always, since leaving the bank, endeavoured to improve conditions for the present employees. I consider there are many employees in the Union Bank who will thank me for what I am doing today.” To Mr. Mountjoy witness admitted that he had no record of the hours of overtime he had w'orked and could not give accurate details now. He had no access to the bank’s present records and had no knowledge of the present-day conditions after six years’ absence. He could not recall a soecific occasion on which his own hours were altered but could name a dozen men who had had it happen to them. When witness named several employees Mr. Brunt fadvocate for the union) asked for an assurance that no action w'ould be taken against them. Later Mr. Brunt asked the court s permission to present written statements by junior officers about alterations to entries in the attendance book. Bank Clerk Gives Evidence. John Stuart Nelson, a bill clerk, corroborated the previous evidence that bank employees were told to leave early to ensure that they did not work more than an 80-hour fortnight and that they were obliged often to work at high pressure to get their work done within the time. He said he had faked his arrival times to the benefit of the bank. It w r as for reasons of fear as well as loyalty that he did this. . He realised, continued witness, that if he remained in trading bank employment he would have to accept transfers and have no opportunity to establish a permanent home for many years, probably not till he resigned or retired. For this reason he had recently resigned to take un an appointment with the Reserve Bank as from March 2. He would therefore have no fear of any action, either direct or indirect, against him because of his appearance in court to give this evidence. To Mr. Mountjoy. Nelson said he had only once been asked to transfer. He was asked at Christmas to go to Featherston on short notice to take a temno”nry relieving jobs. There v'as no indication as to how long he would be there. He did not accept the transfer. Robert Eyre Sowther, a clerk of the inspector’s department, of the Union Bank of Australia, Limited, and A. W. A die, a bill clerk of the Commercial Bank of Australia, Limited, also gave evidence. The court adjourned until today.