RAILWAY APPEAL BOARD.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19966, 7 December 1926, Page 4

RAILWAY APPEAL BOARD.

SITTINGS CONCLUDED. When the Railway Appeal Board resumed its sittings yesterday morning me hearing was continued of the appeal by I rederick James, Raines against supersession by A. W. Weilsted. Mr Orquhart, wao appeared for the department, said he wished to dispel the impression that there had been inconsistency on the part of the department in the appointment of business agents. Mr Weii--1 tted had had 20 months' training as a business agent. The Chairman (Mr J. C. L. Hewitt. S.M.) said it wqs admited that Raines was the better man in certain jobs, but Mr WelJsted had had 20 months experience at the t.me of his appointment, 'lho board would be right in assuming that Saines would have shaped well as an agent. The only question was that of experience. Mr Hampton: You have got to consider what the whole of the circumstances weie to warrant the member concerned losing his position on Grade 3, especially in view of tho admitted fact that the man could have done the job. The danger is tiiat different men might be placed in certain positions. Where is it going to end? Mr Urquhart: I don't think anyone can Bay where it is going to end. This is a matter of who was the better qualified. The Chairman said that from a business point of view, Mr Wellsted's experience would mean much to him. The board.adjourned to discuss the case and on resuming the Chairman announced that the decision was to hear the evidence of all ■ the other appellants. They were < all in the same boat, more or less. The business view would be that Wellsted's promotion was not an experiment. Raines's cause could not have been stronger, as it was admitted that he was a good man. BOOKING CLERK'S APPEAL. The next appellant against A. W. Wellsted's promotion was Charles Edward Barnes, booking clerk at Dunedin station. Hector Porteous West, District Traffic Manager at Dunedin, said that appellant had been in charge of the telegraph room at Invercargill, station master at Milton, and in the Dunedin booking office. By his wider experience Weilsted had all the qualifications for the job. The appointment of Barnes would be more or less an oxperiment, for though he possessed certain qualities for the position, he lacked experience. Both Raines and Barnes were well recommenced. They were equal in many ways, but Raines had train-running knowledge, although more reserved than j Barnes. Weilsted, by his natural qualifications, ability, and training was much I more fitted for the position of business agent than appellant. During the Exhibi- ! tion appellant was doing practically the' same work as the business agent at the Exhibition; but his work dealt only with a section of the commercial branch. Daniel Rodie, commercial manager of railways, gave evidence similar to that given by him in the previous appellant's case. He considered that Wellsted's experience made him more fitted for the position than appellant. On behalf of appellant, Mr Hampton called Kenneth James Chambers, station master at Dunedin, who gave it as his opinion that appellant would be suitable for a position as business agent. He had a sound knowledge of railway work, and was conversant with tho tariff. "If appellant were given the opportunity," con eluded witness, "I consider that he would do just as good work as Mr Weilsted." He would give satisfaction both to the client and to the department. Francis Finlayson, audit - inspector, said he looked upon appellant as a ' very efficient officer. He was much above the average, and possessed the desirable qualifications of leadership—tact, and force. His control and supervision at Milton were always goodi and as officer in charge of the reservation department in Dunedin during the Exhibition he had done excellent work. Witness knew Mr Weilsted and Lad no hesitation in saying that appellant was the better officer of the two —he had that indefinable thing known 8a personality, which counted for a lot when one had to deal with the public as a business agents does. Appellant, who stated that he had been 26 years in the service, also gave evidence. He was confident that he could fill tho position of business agent with satisfaction to the department and its clients. That concluded the evidence, and the Chairman intimated that the board would consider the case. Mr Hampton then stated that the other appeals set down for hearing had been withdrawn. # He took that opportunity of expressing his appreciation of the fact that during the hearing of the appeals there had not been a suspicion of bitterness on cither side.