Watersider Resigns As Protest Against Compulsory Levy

Northern Advocate, 9 August 1938, Page 3

Watersider Resigns As Protest Against Compulsory Levy

fPer Press Association. copyright.J CHRISTCHURCH. This Day

LEVY ON MEMBERS OF THE LYTTELTON BRANCH OF THE NEW ZEALAND WATERSIDE WORKERS’ UNION FOR FUNDS FOR A LABOUR PARTY NEWSPAPER HAS DRAWN A PUBLIC STATEMENT FROM A CHRISTCHURCH MEMBER OF THE UNION, MR JOHN DONNELLEY. WHO HAS RESIGNED AFTER 11 YEARS’ MEMBERSHIP. Mr Donnelley, who refused to pay the levy because ho considered (limit was not constitutionally enforceable, was some weeks ago deprived of his vote in union affairs.

Absolutely True. Criticism of the compulsory levy on members of the union for such a purpose recently made in the House cf Representatives by Mr S. G. Holland (Opposition—Christchurch Nona' drew a resolution of protest from the Wellington branch of the union. To this Mr Donnelley has sent a written reply, stating that what Mr Holland said was absolutely true. Mr Donnelley undertakes to give evidence in support of Mr Holland's statement if the Government is prepared to appoint a magistrate to take evidence. Explaining his attitude, Mr Donnelley said that the decision to make a levy compulsory had been passed on a vote taken by a show of hands, and not a secret ballot. That procedure was against the union’s constitution, he said, and his own opinion. In that he had been supported by legal advice.

“As soon as , the decision to make the levy compulsory, sc that members who did not pay it were deprived c-f a vote, was announced, I decided to resign," said Mr Donnelley. His resignation had been made cn July 27, but, according to the union’s rules, he maintained, he remained a member until October 27.

Maintaining- Principle

Mr Donnelley said that his motive in resigning from the union and in making public his protest was to- maintain a principle. He did not believe in such compulsory payments, and was prepared to fight for that principle. “I have noted with surprise the action reported in the daily press by your branch of the union in reference to the Lyttelton watersiders’ case mentioned in the House by Mr S. G. Holland, M.P.," says Mr Donnelley in his letter to the secretary of the Wellington union. "Your union says that Mr Holland's statements are wrong. Now I. as a member of the branch at Lyttelton, wish, to 'inform you, your members and the public generally that Mr Holland’s remarks were absolutely true, and if the Government is prepared to appoint a magistrate to take evidence I will undertake to supply the evidence required. Since When?

“Since when has your branch been appointed to deal with the business of the Lyttelton branch? Mr Holland’s statement had to deal with the Lyttelton branch only, and if the Wellington brand! does not compel its members to pay levies against their will to the -Standard’ newspaper or the Now Zealand Labour Party, or to the ‘fighting fund,’ to make new members pay £ 1 17/- before they start work, then I am pleased to learn of it."