UNION BOYCOTT

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23273, 16 February 1939, Page 14

UNION BOYCOTT

SYDNEY BUSINESS MAN NO SERVICE AT HOTELS FORCED TO GO ELSEWHERE ME. F. GOLDBERG'S STORY [BY TELEGRAPH —PRESS ASSOCIATION] • CHRISTCHURCH, Wednesday A boycott by members of the Hotel Workers' Union against Mr. Frank Goldberg, of Sydney, governing director of the Goldberg Advertising Agency, has resulted in the visitor having to leave two hotels in the city, and he has had to make private arrangements for the remainder of his stay in Christchurch until the newspaper proprietors' conference at Eanmer Springs.

Mr. Goldberg, who arrived in the city yesterday, said this morning that the alleged reason for the boycott threats was that he had discouraged tho Labour Party, that he had assembled the staff of the Waterloo Hotel in Wellington and advised them to vote for the National Party, and that he had said that all who voted for Labour had received a "bonus" of £5 each.

In his efforts to find the cause of the actions directed against him, Mr. Goldberg has consulted the Prime Minister, Mr. Savage, who said the matter would be adjusted. Mr. Savage himself had agreed that Mr. Goldberg was entitled to undertake publicity for the National Party, and that everything ho had done had been within his rights. Beginning of the Trouble

Tracing the history of the boycott threats, Mr. Goldberg said they had begun in Auckland last September while he was at a leading hotel. Ho had been called out by the manager, who told him that the secretary of the Hotel Workers' Union (Mr. Young) had threatened to declare tho hotel "black" if Mr. Goldberg received any service at all.

"I immediately had a conference with Mr. Young," continued Mr. Goldberg, who said the secretary had explained ibis position fairly. The Seamen's .Union and the Hotel Workers' Union in Wellington, said Mr. Young, declared that Mr. Goldberg was stated to have slighted the Labour Party, and he was supposed to have advised the staff of the Waterloo Hotel to vote National.

Mr.'Goldberg said he told Mr. Young how ridiculous the charges were, and that he was entitled to make criticisms. Shortly after .this Mr. Goldberg left on his return to Sydney. Warnings to Hotels Returning on his present visit to New Zealand, Mr. Goldberg passed through Auckland without incident. Reaching Wellington he booked in at the Waterloo Hotel, hut before breakfast the manager informed him- that the secretary of the Seamen's Union, Mr. F. P. Walsh, and Mr. Young, had been into the hotel and told him they would treat it as a hostile act if Mr. Goldberg stayed in the hotel. ■ 'While the hotel people would not say that I had to go, they put it up to me that their beer supply would be stopped if I did not go," continued Mr. Goldberg. This threat was actually put into effect, continued Mr. Goldberg. To save the hotel management any embarrassment, Sir. Goldberg left it quietly on Saturday. On his arrival in Christchurch yesterday morning, Mr. Goldberg went to the United Service Hotel and refistered, but while he was having his reakfast he received an urgent message from the licensee, who told him he had . received a message from Mr. Walsh in Wellington. Mr. Walsh had told the manager that if Mr. Goldberg was in the hotel to get him out immediately or complications would occur. Mr. Goldberg pointed out that could not be done, but again to "save the manager embarrassment ho moved to Warner's Hotel.

Sir. Goldberg this evening voluntarily left Warner's Hotel. The staff of the hotel had refused to serve him with food or drink or to perform any service for him whatever. Interference With Liberty "I don't know if they are going to carry this thing through to Dunedin," Mr. Goldberg said. "I doubt very much if the Ministers of the Crown approve of it. Even if I haid made the statements they accuse me of I have a right to make them, but the statements attributed to me are ridiculous. Mr. Savage agreed that I am enttiled to express my opinion. He definitely agreed that it could not be tolerated. "I certainly did a fair amount of work for the National Party under the direction of its leaders and executive, and criticised Labour. It is definitely interference with individual liberty. It is a flagrant boycott, undertaken, I presume, to show the power of some men. J admit they have the power, but they should not use it on individuals who bring money into the country and epend it." When a reporter called at the office of _ the Canterbury Hotel Workers' .Union to ask Mr. R, Williams, assistant secretary; for comment on the situation in the absence of Mr. Brooks, the secretary, he was told by a member of the office staff that Mr. Williams would not &ee him and had no statement to make to newspapers. Others who declined to make any statement on the situation when approached were Mr. B. R. Collins, managing director of Warner's Hotel. Mr. E. Boulton, manager of the United Service Hotel, and Mr. A. Wilson, president of the Canterbury Hotel Workers' Union, who is a chef at Warner's Hotel.