RELIEF OF UNEMPLOYED

Taranaki Daily News, 23 November 1932, Page 2

RELIEF OF UNEMPLOYED

“DISPUTES" COMMITTEE RELIEF WORKERS' REQUEST. TWO FROM EACH SIDE WANTED. The Constitution of the proposed “disputes committee”' to which relief workers’ complaints could be referred was discussed at a meeting of the North Taranaki Unemployment Committee yesterday. Mr. J. Brown presided. The Unemployment Committee considered that a body of three —one from each side, with an appointment of an independent chairman, would be suitable, but the Relief Workers' Union asked for two from each party with an elective chairman to make five. A letter was received from Mr. R. Fulton and a deputation consisting of Messrs B. Thorne and Lawrence attended. The committee decided to adhere to the “one from each side decision, but to receive nominations from the workers for the position of chairman.

“I am instructed to inform you tha

the union is not prepared to accept the disputes committee as appointed by the committee, the reasons being the same as given previously,” wrote the secretary, Mr. Fulton. The reconsideration of the question was asked with a view to setting up the committee as suggested by the union—two from each side, with the right to appoint its own chairman. If that were done many of the disputes would be settled to the satisfaction of all concerned and a “better feeling will then exist between the committee and the union.”

Mr. Thorne said they had placed before the men the offer of three on the committee. The men were anxious for two men on each side. Mr. Thorne said he thought the committee would like straight talking—he felt they had come to a deadlock, and what was wanted was a better feeling on both sides. The men were perturbed by Mr. Brown’s saying that he was not going to be governed by Mr. Fulton. Mr. Lawrence and he had not come to dictate, Mr. Thome emphasised. They did not object to Mr. P. E. Stainton as chairman, because they realised the good work he had done. The democratic method of election was the best, and after the disputes committee had been constituted it should elect a chairman. Mr. Lawrence also spoke.

Mr. Brown emphasised first that the committee would not go back on the idea of a committee of three, although it was willing to discuss the matter of the chairman.

Mr. C. P. Smith asked if the relief workers had not confused the issue and regarded the disputes committee as a body that would more or less usurp the functions of the main committee. Mr. Thorne said there was no intention to usurp the committee’s position. Mr. H. E. Blyde asked what was the objection to one from each side on the committee.

It was against the consensus of opinion, replied Mr. Thorne. There were now over 500 on the register; while one representative would have been enough for a much smaller register two would now be necessary. Was it that one man would not carry the confidence of all the men? asked Mr. Blyde.

“I would not say that,” was Mr. Thorne’s reply. He imagined a deadlock would arise more often with one on each side than with two. The chairman would be regarded as a referee. Mr. Brown said the position was plain —they would discuss the matter of the chairman.

The matter would have to be referred to the workers, said Mr. Thorne. It was wrong, in his opinion, for either side to take up a position from which it would not move.

Asked if he had any opinions regarding the chairman of the proposed committee, Mr. Thorne said Mr. Stainton would have been quite acceptable, but it was the undemocratic method of election that was the cause of the protest. It was pointed out that Mr. Stainton had not been appointed by the committee.

There had been a misapprehension in that case) said Mr. Thome. It had been thought that Mr. Stainton had been appointed by the committee. Could not the disputes committee be tried out as a body of three? asked Mr. Blyde. If it were a failure the position could be reconsidered.

Mr. Thorne and Mr. Lawrence thanked the committee for its hearing. After the deputation had retired the matter was discussed and finally it was decided to inform the relief workers’ section that the committee was prepared to consider their . nomination of an independent chairman, but that the committee had decided to adhere to the original constitution of a body of three.