“VINDICTIVENESS”

New Zealand Times, Volume LI, Issue 11875, 8 July 1924, Page 7

“VINDICTIVENESS”

"GROSSLY UNFAIR" STATEMENT AS TO RAILWAY 48-HOUR WEEK. MINISTER’S OUTSPOKEN REPLY. The Wellington Labour Representation Committee passed unanimously a t a recent meeting a resolution which “strongly condemned the Mui/er lor Railways for the vindictive action taken by him against members of the A.3.R.5. on their resumption of work after the strike, and for his enforcement of the 48-hour week, before the tribunal had any opportunity of adjudicating or. the dispute.” In sanding tho resolution on to the Minister, tho committee said, “We sincerely hope yon will 'not have the. . power to act similarly after the next elections.” MINISTER’S REPLY. To this the Hon. J. G. Coates has written as under: '“The committee is apparently unaware of, or conveniently ignores, what actually took place. A definite arrangement was entered into between the, executive council of the sorietv and myself, that I should meet them on the 14th of March, and, go through the whole of the matters in dispute.. The conference took plaoe, but tho executive insisted upon a decision being first given on the wages question without the case being heard in respect of the other 71 requests. This I could not agree to, and consequently the executive jettisoned the arrangement, -and asked that the claims be referred to a board. This was agreed to, and a -board on the exact lines ask ed for by the society was set up and commenced sitting on March 24th. The executive, however, adopted the same tactics as it did at the conference with myself, and the board’s operations were rendered abortive by the society’s representatives withdrawing, as the hoard would not agree to alienate the wages question from the other claims

“This action precluded consideration t>f niany other important matters such as the extension of the weekly hoars to 43, and indicates quite clearly not only that vhe statement of your committee that I enforced the resumption of the 48-hour week before giving the tribunal an opportunity of considering it is totally incorrect, but that the in. ability of tho tribunal to consider the question was entirely duo to the,action of the society’s representatives in terminating the activities of the board. Even at that stage every possible effort was made by me to facilitate further negotiations to obviate trouble, and another tribunal was actually under offer to xhe society to hoar their claims when they decided to call a strike. ■‘SOCIETY SCRAPPED ITS AGREEMENT.” “By striking the society undoubtedly scrapped its agreements with the Government. and thereby forfeited the whole of the concessions and privileges which, had been enjoyed by its members. Although the Government was in a position to withdraw these concessions, with the exception of the reinstatement of the 43-hour week—four which the men aro leoeiving 48 hours’ pay—and the abolition of the 8-hour day, the omen are ■ art present working under the condition, of the agreements in force when the strike was declared. With regard to the resumption of the 48-hour week, I may say that instructions were given on May 14th providing for rostering on the extended hours, whereas it was not until Monday, June 2nd, that tho society intimated its acceptance of the board which is at present dealing with the claims ”

In conclusion says the Minister: “From the foregoing it is quite clear that the society has been afforded every possible opportunity of having its claims thoroughly examined and considered. Its representations hare been heard by the Government with toleration and patience, but the society, after failing to fully take advantage of the facilities' provided, took recourse to unconstitutional means of forcing its claim on the Go vernment regardless of the fact that they had failed to establish a -case before the class of tribunal they had been agitating for for some consider able time. With regard to the final paragraph of your letter, if it is intended to support the unconstitutional action taken by the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants on Easter Monday, when every facility was placed at its disposal for its claims to be dealt with in a constitutional' manner, I can only conclude that the subsequent step taken by the society in withdrawing its affiliation with the outside organisation will be distinctiy to the advantage of the railwaymenconcerned.”