CLAIM FOR UNION FEE.
Timber Worker Sued. OBJECTION TO HOSPITAL CONTRIBUTION. The Westland Timber Yards and Sawmills Industrial Union of Workers proceeded against Janies McVey at the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, for the payment of £l, alleged to be due from defendant in respect of membership fees. Mr W. J. Joyce appeared for the plaintiff Union, and Mr H. F. Doogan for the defendant. Mr Joyce said the claim was due for the period ending March 31. 1928. According to Rule 4 in the book of rules governing membership of the Union, a member was required to pay a half-yearly subscription of 20s, payable in advance. The rules were registered in 1924. The amount had been due for some •considerable 1 time past. The Committee had power to remit 50 per cent .of the half-yearly contributions. by a resolu ion of a~iy meeting of the Committee, but this had not been done in defendant’s case. Mr Doogan intimated that defendant had just informed him that he was prepared to pay th e £1 if the Secretary of the Union would give him a clearance. Defendant did not think that he owed the £l, but he was prepared to pay it if hs could get his discharge. Mr Turley replied that the amount could be paid in the ordinary way—according to the rules. Mr Joyc e pointed out that the Union had recently fixed the fee at £2 per year the additional amount being for the maintenance of beds at the hospital for the benefit of members. The defendant, however, had objected to the payment of the lies pital fee. Frederick E. Turley, Secretary and Treasurer of the Timber Workers’ Union, gave evidence that defendan' had not paid the £1 for the half-year, and had given no reason fwr failing to do so. He (defendant) had simply said he would not pay., and that he would not be bothered wi h the hospital scheme. That, however, had not decided the question. They had to remember that the Union was committed to a £lOOO hospital scheme, and could not carry on unless these fees were paid. No resolution regarding any portion of the £2 for last year had been made by the Committee.
To Mr Doogan: The year before, subscriptions were paid Hom January Ist and July Ist.
Mr Doogan: How is it that the claim is made for the period' ending March 31? Mr Turley explained that an allowance bad been made to members in connection with th c hospital scheme, which came into operation on July 31. Instead of charging £2 for the last year, the Union had made an allow aace of three mon hs. They had no need to do that, but it was done with the object of bringing all members in advance with their dues for payment to the Hospital Board. He had called on McVey at his hut at Gladstone, and he (defendant) had said that he would pay the £l.. but would not pay the £2. Witness had a receipt made out for £2 .and had t 0 alter it accordingly. If defendant wished to pay the £l, he could d 0 so in thc ordinary way, but he could work in a mill once he had got a clearance. Mr Ogilvie expected a man to pay his dues, and wouldn’t stand for that sort of thing. Defendant was the only member out of sixty who had refused to pay thc additional fee for the hospital scheme. He had simply refused to have anything to do with it. The rule would never have been adopted except for the arrangement with the hospital. Defendant contended that he should have got his discharge on September 31. He had given the Secretary £1 and said that he wanted his discharge. The Secretary had told him to call at the office, but he found, when h e did so, that the office was shut. “It was just a verbal mutual arrangement. ” He had refused to have anything to do with the hospital scheme. The Magistrate pointed out to defendant that he (defendant) was bound by the rules of the Union, and. one of the rules was that a member’ should give three months’ notice of his intention to withdraw. Defendant: Why did he (the Secretary) offer to give me a discharge if I called at the office? The Magistrate: You must give three months’ notice in writing—that j 8 thc rule. . Judgment was given fvr the Union for £l, with costs 10s.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GRA19290213.2.61
Bibliographic details
Grey River Argus, 13 February 1929, Page 7
Word Count
753CLAIM FOR UNION FEE. Grey River Argus, 13 February 1929, Page 7
Using This Item
Copyright undetermined – untraced rights owner. For advice on reproduction of material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.