RAILWAY INQUIRY

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 25 June 1924, Page 7

RAILWAY INQUIRY

FINDINGS OF APPEAL BOARD. MINISTER’S POWER OF VETO. (BY TELEGRAPH —PRESS ASSOCIATION.) WELLINGTON, June 24. At the railway inquiry consideration was given to the power of the Aliuister to veto the. findings of the Railway Appeal Board, wljieii consists of a magistrate, a representative of the first division, ancl a representative ioi the second division. Mr M. Connelly (president of the A.S.R.S.) argued that the Act should be amended. Members found themselves in an anomalous position If a man committed a breach he was dismissed, reduced or fined by the general manager. He could appeal to tne Appeal Board, which gave a decision. If it was a two to one decision against the appellant, the Alinister often vetoed the finding. The late Hon. Wm. Herries (ex-Alinister for Railways) had stated that he never exercised the veto without consulting his depart|nental heads. In other words, the Minister stated that the general manager was asked to say whether he was wrong in the first place. Naturally he would not admit being Avrong, and the Alinister issued a. veto.

The hoard aatis one that gave the department quite a fair position, but. the men were losing confidence in the board altogether, and it was time that the position was remedied. The hoard \vas not functioning as it should function. If the Department got a. two to one decision it stood, but if the men got_ a two to one decision it was invariably vretoed.

Air Sterling, on behalf of the Department, explained the provisions of the Act. He stated that Dower to v'eto, according to Mr Connelly, was apparently used to the great disadvantage of the men. The fact was that cases of veto uere very few and far betiveen, and generally occurred when the chairman was in the minority. The chairman was totally disinterested, and it was impossible to argue that, the chairman’s' views should not be taken very seriously.

The Appeal Bourn- was unique, said Mr Sterling, in that the Department was not represented on at apart from the chairman. Both members avere employees. It could barely he suggested that the ‘ first division member Avho was elected fully represented the Department. Some- check was necessary on the findings', Ayhich Avere often majority decisions. The Department’s vieAv AA-as the power of \-eto should lie abolished. If the Department had direct- representation it might- afford a solution of the difficulty, but Avliile the Board was constituted as it Avas at present they had to haree some check on its operations. Air Justice Frazer said the P. and T. Board constitution appealed to him more than that of the' Raißvays Board. He asked Air Connolly hoA\- a hoard consisting of a magistrate, a. Departmental representative and a representative of the men appealed to him. Air Connelly replied that they had a request before the inquiry for the abolition of the poAver of veto, and they had to stand to that.

IN CASE OF CRISIS. WELLINGTON. June 24. A most- important, motion at to-day’s conference of the Ra.ihvay Officers’ Institute Avas tli-dl folloAA-ing from the Wellington branch: “That the conference instruct all branches to obtain evidence on the attitude of its members toAyards any industrial crisis that may arise Avith a view to giving the executiVe committee definite authority as to lioav to act in the future.” A note was attached to the motion as folloAvs: “During the last two strikes in the service the executVe committee were in the position of being unable to definitely instruct its members as to their course of action.”

The conference was discussing this question when the sitting adjourned.