Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

NO DISMISSALS

BOROUGH COUNCIL STAFF REPLY TO UNEMPLOYED ROSTER SCHEME PROPOSED NO ACTION TAKEN An allegation that the Gisborne Borough Council bad dismissed men from its stall' was refuted at the council meeting last night. A letter from the Gisborne Unemployed Workers' Movement which made Ibis allegation opened up a discussion in which a proposal was made that, in order lo avoid the possibility of any future dissatisfaction, men desiring work should bo selected in rotation or balloted for from a prepared roster containing the names of all citizens desiring work with the council. After a. long discussion it was agreed to lake no net ion in the propositi. A letter from Mr. It. Tborne. tile lion, secretary of the Gisborne Unemployed Workers' Movement, staled: —

"At it meeting! of the unemployed held in Gisborne on Monday, September 7, 1 was instructed to notify yon that this meeting condemn.-; the action of tho Borough Council in dismissing men. We consider this action contrary to the policy of the Goverment. which is endeavouring to put men into full time work."

The Mayor, -Mr. 0. W. Coleman, M.P. : We have not dismissed any men. We took- on some casuals for a particular work, anil when the work was stopped the services of some of them were dispensed with, but 1 state emphatically that the council has not dismissed nny permanent employees. LONG-TERM CASUALS Cr. P. W. Bushnell suggested that some casuals were kept on so long that they understood themselves to be permanent. The .Mayor said that was so. Nome such men were not, suitable for a, particular work to be undertaken later, and it must he left to the engineer to decide which men were required. Cr. 11. E. Maude said that, the council had at one time passed a resolution that no complaint would be considered unless a specific instance was mentioned. The .Mayor moved that Ihe council should reply that, no men except a. few casuals had been dismissed. The motion was carried. Cr. N. 11. Bull moved that the council should revert to its previous system of describing its individual employees as permanent or casual as the ease might, be and of differentiating- between them when

submitting information regarding the stuff on flic oi dor paper.

This motion was carried. Cr. Bull '.hen moved that a rosier of

all citizens preparing to give their set'

vices to the council as casual workers should be compiled and each on the list

be given the opportunity of working for the council in turn, either by ballot or selection.

The .Mayor felt, that, the engineer should be allowed lo select, -his men, otherwise the council might have reason

for complaint thai the works were not efficiently done. DISSATISFAt Tl< ).N AIXEGED

Cr. Bull said that, there was an undercurrent of dissatisfaction in certain quarters that men had been unable lo secure employment, and his proposal would remove any cause for tins in the future. Cr. (.;.. Bradley Smith, seconding the motion, said he believed there had been some complaints, and while he did not think the, complaints were justified the

adoption of the roster plan would strengthen the council's position, in reply to Cr. U. E. Maude, the Mayor said that the present position was that the engineer drew men from a list he had, and if the council was going to restrict the engineer's choice of the men the council would not, be able (o complain if the work were not, done efficiently. The engineer, Mr. K. ft. Thomas, said that he drew his men now from the placement office, but. be also kept a list himself.

Cr. Maude said that he had no objection to a, rosier, but the selection of men by ballot or rotation would not be in the best interests of the work'. Cr. 11. IT. Do Costa said that he sawno advantage in the proposal; the engineer must have a free choice of men. Cr. P. W. Bushnell stated that while he was sympathetic with the motion, he; did not think the engineer should be cluttered up with so many restrictions, and if the engineer would spread the work about as much as possible it should suit the conditions. Cr. ,1. 11. Hall said thai the motion would create the- danger of unsuitable men being employed on certain work, and. taking everything into consideration, he felt that, the roster system would not work. The roster at. the; placement office was classified, but the rosier proposed for the council would not be, and would be open to all citizens, according to the motion. THE FIRST CONSIDEBATION The Mayor said that the aim was to spread the work out more, and he 1 thought, (hat the. council could well leave the matter to the engineer. Cr. D.. S. Thompson also opposed the motion. Cr. If. Holmes maintained that efficiency should be the first consideration ol the engineer's department, and opposed the motion. Cr. 11. E. Maude moved an amendment "that in connection with the employment of casuals the engineer be asked to spread same so far as possible consistent with efficiency." Cr. .1. Webb seconded the amendment, and said that the council would be doing wrong if if interfered with the engineer's prerogative. Gr. Bull said that he did not wish the engineer to be hampered in the selection oT men for skilled work; hut most of the casual work, tie believed, was unskilled. However, in view of the views expressed by (he council, he was prepared to withdraw his motion in favour of-the amendment, lie made no charge of favouritism, bill, considered that the council would be able to protect itself from any such charge by the adoption of I he roster system be had proposed. ' Cr. Smith agreed to the withdrawal of the motion, and also agreed thai, (here was no suggestion of favouritism. At this point, the Mayor asked I he engineer to explain what, points he took info account when employing labour. Mr. Thomas said he. received dozens of applications from men !'.:•■ knew would not be suitable, lie knew that he was accused of favouritism, hut when be appointed a man be knew that the man was working in the interests of (be borough. On I be Mayor's suggestion, the amendment also was withdrawn, and the discussion ended.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PBH19360923.2.133

Bibliographic details

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19127, 23 September 1936, Page 13

Word Count
1,053

NO DISMISSALS Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19127, 23 September 1936, Page 13

NO DISMISSALS Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19127, 23 September 1936, Page 13

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert