THE SHIPPING DISPUTE

Southland Times, Issue 19458, 24 January 1925, Page 5

THE SHIPPING DISPUTE

ARBITRATION JUDGE’S ORDER. SHALL IT BE OBEYED? SYDNEY MEN OBDURATE. (By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright.) (Australian and N.Z. Cable Association.) SYDNEY, January 23. After lengthy consideration the Sydney branch of the Seamen’s Unicfn decided not to accept Mr Justice Powers’ award insofar as it affected the picking-up dispute in this port. The resolution was carried by only a small majority after a stormy meeting. The Union meets again to-day to consider the position further. Fruitgrowers are suffering considerable loss owing to the shipping strike. In one consignment alone the loss was nearly £2OOO, and prices in the Sydney market are at least two to three shillings a case lower than usual owing to all the local fruit being forced into the one channel. MELBOURNE, January 23. The Federal Committee of Management of the Seamen’s Union has sent further telegrams to branches instructing them to accept Mr Justice Powers’ award. Replies have been received from all but Sydney stating that branches are prepared to leave acceptance or rejection in the hands of the Management Committee. Despite Sydney’s attitude, there seems to be little likelihood that the Committee will refuse to give Mr Justice Powers the assurance he demanded in Court yesterday. Action will be taken if necessary to discipline the recalcitrant members of the Sydney branch. HOBART, January 23. Local watersiders at Launceston who are coaling the Nairana left work in the afternoon presumably on receipt of a communication from Melbourne. The matter was placed before the crew who undertook the work of coaling the vessel. No trouble occurred. POSSIBILITY OF A SETTLEMENT. WALSH FAVOURS A CONFERENCE. SYDNEY, January 24. (Received January 24, 2.30 a.m.) The seamen decided to defy the Arbitration Court and suffer deregistration rather than go to the picking-up places named by Mr Justice Powers. MELBOURNE, January 23. In tho Arbitration Court, Mr Justice Powers heard the seamen’s dispute. Mr Walsh gave a definite promise that the members of the Union would return to work pending a conference to determine the matters in dispute. Counsel for the shipowners then surprised the Court by pressing for deregistration in face of this promise, stating that the undertaking given by Mr Walsh was illusory and the men had no intention of carrying it out. The case was then ordered to stand over till later in the day when the Judge said he could see that the undertaking was not illusory. When the Court reassembled Mr Justice Powers reserved his final judgment until the seamen honoured the undertaking to man the ships, ordering the men to start work on Saturday.