WHARF WORKERS

Southland Times, Issue 22734, 9 November 1935, Page 6

WHARF WORKERS

APPLICATION TO COURT REGISTRATION OF UNION REFUSED “SEAGULLS” AT AUCKLAND (Per United Press Association.) Auckland, November 8. An appeal against the refusal of the •Registrar of Industrial Unions, Wellington, to register the Auckland Dock and Wharf Workers’ Society, was heard by the Arbitration Court. Mr Justice Page presided. The society was represented by Mr Hall Skelton and the Auckland Waterside Workers’ Union by Mr J. Roberts, of Wellington. Mr Skelton said the position had arisen owing to the fact that the Auckland Waterside Workers’ Union was a restricted union as far as membership was concerned. In addition to unionists there were a number of nonunionists or “seagulls” who worked on the wharf. There were occasions on which all unionists were employed and it was then that the “seagulls” and sometimes strangers as well received work. , , The Auckland Dock Wharf Workers Society had been joined by 78 “seagulls” to whom the doors of the union had been barred, said counsel. These men had been deprived of the privileges of unionism. They were all genuine workers and in busy time's their services were frequently required, and they were a useful body to the Waterside Workers’ Union, but the position was unfair because the “seagulls” may start to do certain work, but they were replaced by unionists immediately the latter are released from another job, continued Mr Skelton. In order to place themselves in the same legal position as the Waterside Workers’ Union, the “seagulls” formed a society and made an application to the Registrar to be registered as an industrial union. “We say that on the law as it stands, the Registrar is bound to register this society. I think the registrar in refusing very properly suggested that in the circumstances it would be better to let the court decide the question, then both parties would have the satisfaction of knowing that it was the decision of the coui’t.”

Evidence was given. In addressing the court in reply to statements made on behalf of the society, Mr Roberts supported the Registrar’s action in refusing to register the organization. He submitted that there were a large number of men on the wharf who were victims of circumstances and who, in many cases, bore just as good a character as the unionists. “But the union cannot carry all these men and if the Arbitration Court thinks it can, it is making a big mistake,” said Mr Roberts. His Honour said the Court would take time to consider its decision.