THE TRAMWAY STRIKE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 13336, 16 November 1906, Page 6

THE TRAMWAY STRIKE.

SERVICE WORKING SMOOTHLY

AGAIN.

Almost the sole topic of conversation in the citv and suburbs f yesterday morning whs the tramway strike of the previous evening. The very general feeling on the part of the public was one of satisfaction that everything had been settled so amicably, and the trend 01 events at the conference, reported at length in yesterday morning's issue, met with general approval, the temperate tone of the discussion being especially commended. As far as the men themselves were concerned, the outburst seemed to have cleared away a lot of misunderstanding, and there was a cheerfulness and spirit in their work that had been noticeably lacking for a week past.

Yesterday morning Mr. A. Rosser cabled to the secretary of the Sydney Tramways Union that everything had been settled satisfactorily. This, of course, followed on the cablegram of the previous day, asking the Sydney union to prevent " blacklegs " coming over. On Wednesday Mr. Rosser telegraphed to the Premier and Minister for Labour,.-—"Twelve tramway employees were discharged this morning by .he company for refusing to teach men to take their places. Remainder of men strike this afternoon out of sympathy. Understand that unlicensed drivers are being put on, to danger of travelling public."

The Premier replied to this as follows: — " Your telegram re action of Tramways Company putting on unlicensed men, etc., is to nand, and I have referred the matter to the Labour Department. The matter is to be specially watched, and in the interests and safety of the travelling public no inexperienced men should be allowed to undertake such duties.—J. G. Ward."

Yesterday morning Mr. Rosser telegraphed to the Premier, stating: Tramway striKe ended satisfactorily to men. All points conceded by the company. Thanks for your wire of assurance." The managing director of the company, Mr.' P. -u. Hansen, when interviewed by a Herald representative yesterday, said he did not believe there was any uneasy feeling amongst the men that they would be quietly replaced by others, but as far as he was concerned the whole matter had been concluded, and the service was working as if nothing out of the ordinary had happened. There was no need for any uneasiness; his attitude in future, as in the past, would be always that of the utmost fairness. He had now arranged that in future no man should be finally dismissed by anyone unless that man's case had been finally and completely placed before him (Mr. Hansen); any. man who desired it would be given opportunity of making a statement of his case on his own behalf. In conclusion, Mr. Hansen desired to contradict the statement that lie had been escorted to an oil launch by the police. In fact, just before ten o'clock he had left the Waverley Hotel, and waiKed down to the Devonport ferry boat. ■ .

THE EDITOR. NEW ZEALAND HERALD. Sir, —The Herald has for so many years pursued consistently the equitable policy of respecting equally the rights of employers and employed that I am surprised at the misleading complexion you have placed in your issue of to-day upon the tramway difficulty, and the unfairly biassed tone of your sub-leader on the subject. The article, in particular, is a menace to every employer of 'labour in the community, and, in its-obvious* intention, is aV direct incitement to lawlessness as opposed to conciliation in the matter of labour difficulties. When you say that the men were naturally resentful at the refusal of the tramway management to remove what must be regarded as reasonable grievances," you take up a position that is as manifestly untenable as it is unjust. The facts in your possession, if calmly and impartially considered, furnish you with overwhelming proof that the Tramway? Company has not refused to remove any grievances that were reasonable.

In the first instance, if the employees of the company had „asked for a further inquiry into the cases of the two men dismissed, stating that additional evidence was forthcoming, we would have been quite prepared to grant the request. The employees, however, stated that they intended to place their case before the Trades and Labour Council, and believing they would follow that course, I awaited their action with the intention of submitting outside of the case at the .same time.

" Their demands,' you say, "were only for that fair and decent treatment which is customarily % considered the right of honest and capable workmen." We have never disputed the fact that honest and capable workmen are entitled to fair and decent treatment. On the contrary, it has always been our policy to conserve these rights to our workmen, and the fact is not disputed by them. Your assumption that they have been denied fair and decent treatment is stated in defiance of. the fact that this dispute was a personal matter relating to two employees, both of whom had been previously warned, and did not affect the great mass of the employees. In this connection, your head-lines are wholly misleading when they say "Men's Demands Conceded.'' This* is quite contrary to the facts disclosed in the context. The first demand was that Beaston should be reinstated, and this we refused to concede. In view of Mr. Rosser's assurance that another employee has confessed to having written the offensive words, we have given Beaston the option of resigning, in order to remove the stigma of this charge from him, and this course we would, as a matter of justice, under the circumstances have followed, whether there was any strike or not; it was a'concession to the man that he was fairly entitled to. But, in view of our other 'causes of dissatisfaction, we.have consistently refused to reinstate him, but accepted his resignation. , ' ■,

So far as the other demand is concerned, that employees accused should have the right of calling witnesses in their defence, we admit, and have always admitted, this principle as a fair one, so that there was nothing to concede.

It is equally unjust to the company and its officials to say that the whole trouble could have been avoided by the exercise of a little tact and discretion. Probably you do not realise the amount of tact and discretion necessary to successfully run an extensive service of. this kind, but with 360 hands to control, and complaints from the public of daily occurrence, to say nothing of the harassing conditions under which we so often have to work, the position is a difficult one for even the most tactful and discreet management. I- have set forth these facts in justice to my company, because I believe that its side of the question has been flagrantly misrepresented, and I trust to your sense of honour and justice to give my letter insertion in complete form. The Auckland Electric Tramways Company, Limited. ... P. M. Hansen-, Managing Director. [The construction which Mr. Hansen places on our sub-leader commenting on the tramway strike is too grotesque for serious argument. Nor do we see than any good purpose is to be served by discussing the various points which he raises. These may be safely left to the judgment of the public.—Ed.]