A COPPER CATASTROPHE

NZ Truth, Issue 985, 11 October 1924, Page 8

A COPPER CATASTROPHE

Was It A Bit Of Temper ?

Conductor's Disratement Removed

(From "Truth's" Christchurch Rep.)

Those who have ever been burdened with coppers by a tram conductor may find interest m reading of the action taken by ah irritated passenger on a Christchurch car and the resultant trouble which overtook Conductor John Stewart Young of the Flat City. It seems that one Cyril R. Rule tendered a two shilling piece for a twopenny fare, and m change was handed four three-penny pieces, seven pennies, and six half -pennies. He protested, and was informed that he should have had the right fare. Later, Rule boarded the same car again, and m paying his fare handed Young, the conductor, four half-pennies, two at a time, remarking: "You'll be more civil next time." Some time later Young got the surprise of his life on being shown a letter of protest that Rule had written to the Tramways Board, and he was still further chagrined when, after interviewing the general manager, he was disrated for a month to the status of first-year conductor. Against the punishment Young lodged an appeal. He urged that by the disratement he would lose a year's seniority and a certain amount of pay, but his appeal was based principally on the matter of the principle involved. He contended that he had broken no rule and had not been guilty of any misconduct which would- justify the punishment meted out to him. These were the pointe on which an Appeal Board, under the chairmanship of Mr. H. Y. Widdowson, S.M., had to adjudicate. In evidence, the conductor, Young, asserted that he was not uncivil m any way on either of .the two occasions Rule was on the car, and his only reason for giving him the copper change was that after a while copper became inconveniently heavy m a conductor's change bag, and it was therefore expedient to get rid; of it as soon as possible. Witness admitted that a passenger hnd once assaulted him on the Spreydon line, and it was likely that this was on account .of witness having given him half-pennies m change. TTithess, however, reported that incident himself, but was given no instructions then about giving copper to passengers for change. Had he been told on that occasion . that the board disapproved of it, the present trouble would not have occurred. For the Tramway Board, Lawyer Dougall said the appeal was trivial m its facts. It was a question of whether the appellant had acted normally m giving a passenger change of the description which he had given Mr. Rule. It was certainly not the act of a man ol common-sense to give a passenger m his change seven pennies and six half -pennies. Mr. Widdowson: Doesn't it cut bo Mi ways? Supposing a passenger tenders his fare jn half-pennies. The conductor can't very well refuse them.

Lajvyer Dougall continued that conductors were forced to accept halfpennies, but they could always gat them changed m the Square. In appellant's case there had been nothing on his part all through but an attempt to justify himself m what he had done. At no stage did he express regret. Mr. Widdowson: He contended that be was within the regulations. Later, when Mr. Thompson, the general manager was called, he stated he had not seen a letter which Young had written before the interview to the traffic supervisor, but he had seen it later. "It indicates," said '■• witness, "that he still ' thinks he was right m what he did, but that because? the board says he was not right he will not repeat the action. He does not go 'o the extent of saying that his action was wrong." • In giving its decision the Board said the whole trouble seemed to be that, at the time of appellant's interview with Mr. Thompson, the latter had not seen the letter which appellant had then sent to the traffic supervisor, saying that there would be no recurrence of his action. Had/Mr. Thompson seen the letter its sentiments would doubtless have altered his attitude. In other words, if the interview* with Mr. Thompson had not taken place 'and he had seen appellant's letter instead, the minis' 1 T^nt would Vi^' - e >">n "1,11 r°l I*" 1 Therefore the Appeal Board would order that the ch».ateme..i. <>.• puiua'ument of Young be cancelled and th:it he be restored to his old position.