BUILDERS’ UNIONS

Grey River Argus, 14 August 1937, Page 9

BUILDERS’ UNIONS

Dispute Before Court CROSS PURPOSES ALLEGED. [Per Press Association]. PALMERSTON N„ August 13. Contending that the Hawkes Bay Builders’ and General Labourers Union had no authority to enter into an agreement for a settl?'->eiit of n dispute, had not '.ompiied wi.h the requirements of the Act, and had jurisdiction in the Wellington industrial district, the Labourers Related Trades Union was in conflict with the former organisation, in a case oi an unusual nature, in the Arbitration Court. , , Mr R. J. Reardon, who appeared for the Hawke’s Bay Union, said it reached a complete settlement with the employers of the Conciliation Council, and applied for a ratification of this by the framing of an award on its terms. Judge O’Regan commented that the Arbitration Court placed a restriction on the multiplicity of unions, but it was a curious thing that both those in the case before the Court were re gistered. The Judge was informed that the Bay Union’was originally an offshot of the Wellington Union. Mr P. M. Butler, for the latter submitted four principal grounds of objection. He alleged that if the recommendations were made into an award, it would deprive workers in the area concerned, of the benefits oi a more beneficial settlement. He contended that the settlement in the Wellington case was in many respects better in wages and conditions than the Bay application. He alleged that local bodies in the Bay joined with the Bay Union in an attempt to prevent a settlement being arrived at in the Wellington dispute, and contended there were indications pointing to a conspiracy between employers in the Bay, and the Bay Union to prevent a Wellington settlement being applicable in that area. The proceedings were adjourned till Monday, when the books of the Bay Union will be produced.