FACTORY DISPUTE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23809, 9 November 1940, Page 13

FACTORY DISPUTE

STRIKE AT PETONE SEQUEL TO A DISMISSAL WAR LAWS TO BE INVOKED [TIT TELEGRAPH J'HESS ASSOCIATION'] WELLINGTON, Friday Statements were made to-day 011 behalf of the employees and the employers in reference to a dispute which occurred on Wednesday at the factory of W. D. and H. 0. Wills at Petone. The secretary of the Wellington Tobacco Workers' Union, Mr. T. J. C. Tucker, on behalf of delegates from workers at the factory, said: "The cause of the trouble was the dismissal of an employee of the company, and it is the union's opinion that the worker was dismissed because of his union activities. The worker concerned was an assessor on the disputes committee which met in Wellington on October 26. "Following the dismissal of the worker the employees of the company stopped production in the factory at 10.30 on Wednesday morning, and an ultimatum was presented to the company that unless the worker concerned was reinstated no further work would be done at the factory. Ultimatum Rejected "The management rejected the ultimatum, and refused definitely to consider any disputes committee or any approach from the workers who had taken action unless they resumed work. A meeting of workers at the factory was held at two o'clock yesterday afternoon, when 300 attended, and the situation was fully discussed. It was decided unanimously to remain on strike until the claims of the workers had been accepted. "The Labour Department has intimated that it will invoke the National Emergency Kegulations and will deregister the Petone branch of the union. The position has now reached a deadlock. The workers are now applying to the department for a visit from a liaison officer to try to facilitate a settlement of the question. The workers decided to picket the factory, and the police have also established a picket." Reason for the Dismissal The company's industrial adviser. Mr. W. J. Mount joy, secretary to the Wellington Employers' Association, has made the following reply:—"The stateI ment made by the union that a worker was dismissed because of his union activities is incorrect. The company is not opposed to unionism, and prefers to have its industry governed by the existing labour laws. "The man's services were terminated in a proper and friendly manner because they were no longer required. He was paid all the wages due to him and given a full year's annual holiday pay, although he had not completed a year's service. He was also given a certificate setting out the particulars of service rendered. No blemish whatever was placed on the man by the firm. His services were just discontinued. Any employer may rightly determine the service of a servant so long as he meets all legal and moral requirements. 184 Unionists Still Working

"The firm has tho reputation of being, and is undoubtedly, one of the best employers of labour in the Dominion at the present time," continued Mr. Mountjoy. "Thero are 184 unionists at work in the factory, apart from foremen, forewomen, etc. No attempt has been made by _ the company to employ non-unionists. The meeting held yesterday was not attended by the 1&4 unionists who have voluntarily continued to carry out their duties at tho factory. Some of the workers who stopped work on Wednesday morning returned to work to-day."

it was further stated on belialf of tlio employers that tho meeting of the disputes committee took place on September 26, not October 26.

"""j : \