BRANCH SECRETARY

Grey River Argus, 15 February 1940, Page 5

BRANCH SECRETARY

SUED BY UNION For Books and Damages [Per Press Association.! TIMARU, February 14 A case of some interest commenced in the Magistrate’s Court here tu-da>, when the Canterbury Builders' General Duoourers' Union and F. Pope, and J. Fogarty, Trustees of the umon, proceeded agamst J. A. MaeKay, demanding me possession of cnatteis and nooks beiong.ng to the Union, valued at flo, and genera, damages of £5. ivir K. Archer appeared for the plaintin and Mr W. campoeil i:ov ttu uetenuanl.

After legal argument, it was agreed to add A. iviore, K. Murray, O. J. merxee, anu A. vvnLams as defendants, but only as individuals, and not as members oi tne Timaru Branen Executive. (Juti.ning the case, Mr Archer said tlkn pnur to octooer 16, 1939, Mackay was a salaried officer on the umon, and Secretary of the 'Umaru, jarancii. cm October 16, Mac Kay’s services terminated as a salaried ofncer. Mac Kay, at the outset, was engaged on the basis of 50 per cent, of tne monies collected. In September, IU3B, tne Union Executive altered the conditions for the naym-nt of meinbersiup fees, and raised the sum payable. Shortly after, the Executive readjusted Mackay’s remuneration, he to be paid 16 weekly. However, Mac Kay ignored this, and he continued to draw 50 per cent, of the fees collected. At the annual meeting of the Timaru Branch in July, 1939, it was disclosed that Mackay was continuing to draw the 50 per ce L, but it was not till July or August, when tne books were presented for audit, that the amount was disclosed. It was then found that he had drawn for a yeiir £650 3s, which was equal to £l3 ut week, instead of £6 a week. He

also drew £ll2 as traveling exp.nses. He actually drew 50 per cent, for 3 months without the consent of the Timaru Branch, which, later, authorised him to do so, despite the decision ol the Central Executive. Mr Archer also detailed correspondence between th Union and the Branch demand ng the handing over of the chattels. Mabel Howard, Secretary of the Central Executive, was in the box just on four hours, giving evidence along the lines of Mr Archer’s statement. Plaintiff’s case had not concluded when the case was adjourned till February 27.