TRAM UNION’S INTENTIONS ARE QUESTIONED

Grey River Argus, 29 September 1949, Page 8

TRAM UNION’S INTENTIONS ARE QUESTIONED

WELLINGTON, September 28 An objection to the workers’ submissions being heard was expressed by the advocate for the employers. Mr. R. E. Dawson, when the hearing of the New Zealand tramwaymen’s application for a national award was opened in the Arbitration Court today. Mr. Dawson said his objection was on the grounds that he had grave reason to doubt whether the union was prepared to agree to the Court’s decision if it proved unsatisfactory. Mr. Dawson was asked to submit evidence of the actions and statements of officials of the New Zealand Tramway Union in support of this contention.

After hearing argument Mr. Jus.tice Tyndall accepted an undertaking from the secretary of the New Zealand Tramway Workers’ Union, Mr. P. A. Hansen, that the union would, in fact accept the Court’s decision.

His Honor then ruled that the evidence offered by Mr. Dawson should not be heard. “This is a most unusual situation. I take it that the applicant union has come here under th-? rights of the Industrial Conciliation and .Arbitration Act to get a decision from the Court,” said his Honor. Mr. Dawson: It is the employers’ contention that the union has shown marked objection to coming before Court.

Mr. Hanson: I object to this statement being placed before the Court. The employers’ procedure is most unusual. The Union should have been notified of this before coming to th e Court and, further, I submit that it prejudices our case. Mr. Justice Tyndall: You have not heard their case.

Mr Dawson: We are led to believe that the union will agree with the Court’s decision as long as it suits it. Should the Court make an award which disturbs the conditions contained in the Rigg decision, then it seems quite clear that the union will not accept it. Mr Hansen then explained the steps which had followed the union’s threat to deregister and said that the union now had full knowledge that, if it brought a case to the Court, it must accept the decision. His Honor: No hedging about it Will the union accept the decision of this Court? Mr. Hansen: The answer is yes. The Court then heard the union’s case.

Mr. Hansen said the tramway workers’ employers were trying to use the Court of Arbitration to break down the conditions which had applied in some centres for years. His Honor: Breaking them down? It depends on which side of the fence you are.

“While we readily admit it is competent for the employers to bring forward counter-proposals to that effect,” continued Mr. Hansen, “we would expect some evidence to have been produced which showed that the existing position is impracticable. Instead, we find a dogmatic demand not that conditions should be varied or amended but that they shall be worsened, thereby putting aside established protective provisions that have been thoroughly investigated and have stood the test of time.