RAILWAY SERVANTS’ UNION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXV, Issue 9430, 3 June 1891, Page 3

RAILWAY SERVANTS’ UNION.

TO THE EDITOR.

Sir, —I quite agree with. “Nil Desperandum’s ” remarks with reference to the benefit insurance scheme lately introduced into the Eailway Servants’ Union; but I do not anticipate the great influx of “lost sheep” which your correspondent reckons on, for the simple reason that it was not owing to the absence of such a scheme that the “ sheep” got lost. Neither was the real reason owing to “ the weakkneedness and individual antipathy to selfsacrifice on tho part of some of its members,” but rather the disinclination of many to follow the leadership of those who seemed -bent on perpetrating a series of blunders. The Eailway Commissioners treated their employees’ deputation while at Wellington with the greatest courtesy, granting them very large concessions, and no doubt intended to deal fairly . and honestly with the employees. I do not for one moment impeach the Commissioners with any infringement of these concessions which may nave taken place since; but what treatment do wo find them receive in return ? At a banquet held in Christchurch in honour of the deputation they arc covered with ridicule and angered by threats from these employees. Instead of the Union leaders concentrating their energies in developing tho usefulness of their own Society for tbo benefit of its members and for rendering assistance to the Commissioners, they involve it in outside trade disputes, keeping its members in a continual state of agitation and suspense; and, as o fitting climax to all this, they allow it to get mixed up with the Maritime Council in the catastrophe which that body brought on the Trades Unions connected with it. In their eagerness to participate in a straggle which that Council permitted itself to be forced into at an opportune time and with insufficient reasons, they gave it out that they were affiliated with it, although such was not the case. Their letters to the Commissioners were dictatorial in manner, and individual members were insolent to superiors. These are the real reasons for so many “sheep” straying from the fold, and I honour those who, viewing with regret the mistakes to which they were committed, still stuck to their colours in the hope that in time better counsels and abler leaders would prevail. As one who has a heartfelt interest in the Eailway Society, and who pointed out these errors from the beginning with as loud a voice as his position enabled him to do, I rejoice to see that wiser measures are to be placed before the members for their approval; and, if I mistake not, "Nil Desperandum’s ” letter is meant as a blow to this policy.-—I am, &c., PRUDENCE.