WAGES DEDUCTED

Manawatu Standard, Volume LXI, Issue 142, 17 May 1941, Page 6

WAGES DEDUCTED

FOR PATRIOTIC FUND. (Press Assn.) HAMILTON, May 16. A decision by a meeting of miners at Pukcmiro in June last year to have a day s wages deducted from their wages for the sick and wounded patriotic appeal had a sequel before Air Justice Johnston’ in the Supreme Court, Hamilton, when two claims ior damages against the Northern Coal Aliners' Union were heard. Plaintiffproceeded on the grounds that they ' refused to be dictated to by the union as lar as their donations were concerned. The claims were brought against the union by Matthew Gardner, a miner, of Piikemiro, and Gordon Partis, a miner, of liuntly, botfi of whom were stated to have lost their employment as a result of their objection to the resolution. The former plaintiff claimed £250 general damages and £32 special damages, and the latter £2-50 general damages and £6O special damages. Introducing the case for the plaintiffs, counsel said that the action was brought •by two men who were formerly employees of Pukemiro Collieries. They had "been employed there for a long time and were members of the defendant union. ' At the time the present action arose there w as a consideraole effort throughout New Zealand to raise funds for patriotic purposes. Toward this end a meeting of men at Pukemiro was held, when the matter of contributions i to the patriotic fund was discussed. Plaintiffs said that no previous intimation of the meeting was given. It was decided that each member should donate a day's pay, the money to be taken out of his Avages. A good number of the union members accepted the resolution, but Gardner and Partis refused to agree to the deduction. They declined to agree to having the money stopped out of their pay. As a result of their action a special meeting took place, when Gardner’s and Partis's refusal to accept the resolution was discussed. It was decided that union members refuse to work with them until they paid. The decision ot the union was communicated to the management, which realised that there would cither be a strike or further work must be refused Gardner and Partis. The men could not get Avork there or at any other mine, and had to take employment at a smaller remuneration. Through the action ol the union they were deprived of the opportunity of'earning miners’ ivagcs, and they were out of work for about six weeks.

“Their objection was that they contended the union had no right to interlore with their wages,” said counsel. “They said that they should receive their pay dockets intact. The question of the laudability ’of the cause for which the money was being collected is beside the point. The two men are prepared to contribute to patriotic funds as far as they arc able, and the proof of this can be found in the fact that on the day before the meeting one of them made donations totalling ISs.” The whole point at issue, lie continued, was the legality of the union in interfering with the wages of any of the men. The jury found that the defendant union was not justified in the action it had taken, and awarded each plaintiff £25 general damages, and £32 special damages to Gardner and £6O to Partis.