UNION MERGER

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19803, 3 December 1938, Page 4

UNION MERGER

GISBORNE ACTION INTENTION EXPLAINED REPLY TO AUCKLAND “Those responsible for the publication of the allegation, having had advice from the registrar of unions on the point, have not the excuse of ignorance in causing to be published such misleading information,” said the secretary of the General Labourers’ Union, Mr: P. M. Butler, in issuing a denial in Wellington of statements contained in an Auckland message that it was proposed to form a General Workers’ Union.

Mr. Butler explained that the Poverty Bay Labourers’ Union, which was a small separate union on the East Coast, desired to become part of the larger union, which embraced Wellington, Nelson and Westland. The members of the Poverty Bay union decided this matter by a plebiscite vote, and accordingly made application to the registrar of unions for amalgamation. There was no other union affected. There was no intention to absorb any other union. Registrar’s Action

The registrar, in accordance with the usual procedure, asked unions with similar members in the Auckland district for their comments. In writing to such unions, the registrar said:—“ln asking for your union’s view on the question of the proposed amalgamation, I would point out that there is no question of the continuance of existing unions being affected, the only union in the northern industrial district which would cease to exist being the Poverty Bay General Labourers’ Union.” The registrar had also said that steps would be taken to preserve the existing position, adding: ‘There should be no objection from your organisation to the registration of the amalgamated body.”

“In the face of tjiis information and advice, it is hard to understand why any responsible officer of a trade union should make a misleading statement of the nature which appeared in the press,” said Mr. Butler.

Commenting on the same message, the secretary of the New Zealand Federation of Labour, Mr. F. D. Cornwell, said that apparently those responsible for the information appearing in the press were not clear regarding their facts. It was incorrect to say that there had been a proposal for the registration of a new union which would absorb other unions.