RAILWAY APPEAL BOARD.

Grey River Argus, 21 April 1909, Page 3

RAILWAY APPEAL BOARD.

WELLINGTON, April 20. Two appeals were heard by the North Island Railway Appeal Board to-day, each case being that of a train examiner, classified in grade 1 on the classification list of 1907, but placed in grade 2 during the following year. The Board comprised Messrs H. Eyre Kenny, S. M. (chairman), C. P. Ryan (representing TRe first division, and D. McKenzie (representing the second division). Thomas Edward Hutchngs, train examiner at Woodville, was represented by Mr T. W. Filson, and complained of a reduction in grade which prevented him receiving- further increment. He had been a train examiner for twelve years, and there had been only one complaint against him. He was in charge of the staff of i/ree examiners and a boy. He had" never been informed of the reason for his reduction. Replying to Mr R. W. McVilly, who represented the Railway Department, appellant said his wa^res. had sus- ' fered by his reduced grading. George A. Pearson? locomotive engineei at Wellington, #aye evidence on behalf of the Department, to the eff ict that the work at Woodville was unsatisfactory, and Hutchings was informed that unless things improved he would be transferred to the workshops. The Board's decision was reserved. A similar appeal was made by tram examiner H. J. Seaton, of Cross Lreek who stated that his work was more responsible than that of 'train examiners in other places, yet seventeen men of less experience than himself had superseded him by being/ placed in grade 'i on the Y9OB list. When he complained he was informed that he had been passed over because he lacked experience in lifting, and had not been iong enough in the examiner'i position. Several witnesses were called by Mr Lee, who conducted the appeal, to show that Seaton had been "lifting of locomotives at Cross Creek, a more intricate operation than ordinary "lifting." A letter was produced indicating that the appellant was in July, four months after his reduction to grade 2, regarded as a senior train examine rat Cross Creek. The hearing was adjourned until next morning. An Auckland clerk, J. T. Harris, had lodged an appeal against his dismissal. Being unable to attcner, owing to illness, he forwarded a statement of his case, which was accepted as evidence by the Boaid. G. McVilly (chief clerk in the General Manager's Office, testified briefly to the Department's attitude. The decision was reserved.