MINING CRISIS THREATENED

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LIV, 24 March 1921, Page 5

MINING CRISIS THREATENED

MINERS DEMAND A 'CONFERENCE A SEVEN DAYS’ LIMIT The miners Juive determined to toko drastic, measures if the Coalmine Owners’ Association does tint immediately grant 1 an unconditional conference for the purpose of discussion of the new demands • made by the federation, says the. Post. As a matter of fact, _ the federation has given notice that if the inference is not arranged within seven. days from yesterday such steps ns a.ro deemed necessary to enforce it will be taken. Thus Now Zealand fares still another crisis in its coal-mining industry. The owners are insisting upon tho withdrawal of six clauses of the demands-—abolition of contracts, sixhour day, five-day week, no afternoon shift, payment for holidays, payment for time lost. The miners will not «gree to this. The latest communication "Tom Mr. J. Arbuckle, secretary of tho federation, to Mr, T. 0. Bishop, actingsecretary of the Mine-owners( Association. is aa follows: ’“Dear Sir,—l have to acknowledge receipt of your letter of 19th (March, in which you express regret that any executive should feel resentment at the coal owners’ reply to our request for a. conference, also that I should characterise the statements made in Mr. Pryor’s letter as untrue. “In reply thereto, I have to reiterate tlie statements made in my Inst letter, which you have been unahlp to confute, but try to evade the matter by stating that the differences between Air. Pryor’s statements and my own in. regard to the February, 1920, conference were so slight as to be almost negligible. How you can arrive at that decision is a mystery, to me, because Mr. Pryor stated that th e demands were withdrawn, and I, on the other hand, stated that they were all discussed. “In regard to Broken Hill. Mr. Pryor stated that the findings of the board were against the men. T stated they receive seven hour? per day and five days a week. . Either Air. .Pryor’s statement or mine is untruthful, and, to set this matter right, lam prepared to donate ten pounds (£lO to the Wellington Hospital if my statements are ipcorrect, you to do tho same if Mr. Pryor’s statements are otherwise than truthful; and, seeing that you endorse Mr. Pryor’s statement in regard to Broken will make the same offer to yourself, so if you arc prepared to back.up your (statement, the Wellington Hospital will at least benefit to tho extent of ten pounds (£10). and tho public will know the real facts. ■ “In regard to your statement iu connection with Broken Hill, you stale that ‘except on minor points, Hie decision of* the special tribunal was against the men. Moreover, the effortof certain concessions granted to the men by the tribunal has been that, owing to. the fall in the price of metals, the mines have been put out of action, as it has been found impossible to mako them pay on the now basis.’ Now, I may bo a little more dense than, most people, but I have asked myself this question a great number of times, and cannot answer it to make it coincide with your statement that the decision went against the men except on minor points, and, at the same time, the concessions granted make it impossible for the company to make the mines pay expenses. lam afraid that this is like most statements made by the coal owners; for the purpose of misleading tlioublic, “Another statement you make which is ’in keeping with the above policy is the one that there urns a delay of twenty, days before our reply reached your office . I think tho reason was well khbwn to you, if not to you, then to Mr Pryor, also the public., ,1 told Mr, Pryor that the matter would hnye to bo dealt with by th e gxecutice, and that they could not meet until MrO’Kourko returned froth Australia. Tho statement also appeared in the pressthat the matter was to come before the executive, which was meeting in WclJingtofg You may as well liavo told the public that it took you eight days to reply to our request for a conference, and that you did not require on executive meeting to arrive at a decision. “Now, in regard to the real point at issue: the granting of a -conference, h’oeiag that the coal owners have always expressed the wish for spirit to prevail between themselves and the workmen, I would point out that the refusing of a conference to discuss the minors’ proposals is certainly one wav of bringing about a better ■Understanding. . . “Seeing that your associations have rejected every proposal for a conference other than a withdrawal of the demands. I have now,.to inform you that my federation now demand that a conference be arranged within seven days, otherwise they will take what stops they deem necessary -to force a conference. —Yours faithfully, etc.”