WORK ON WHARVES

Taranaki Daily News, 9 November 1935, Page 7

WORK ON WHARVES

“SEAGULLS” AND UNIONISTS. arbitration court question. By Telegraph—Press Association. Auckland, Last Night. 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 to-day. Mr. Justice Page presided. The society was represented by Mr. Hall Skelton and the Auckland Waterside Workers’ Union by Mr. J. Roberts, 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 non-unionists or “seagulls” who worked on the wharf. There were occasions on which all the unionists were employed and it was then that the “seagulls” and sometimes strangers as weir received work. The Auckland Dock and 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 times their services were frequently required. They were a useful body to the Waterside Workers’ Union but the position was unfair because • the “seagulls” might start to do certain work but they were , replaced by unionists immediately the latter were released from another job. To place themselves in the same legal position as the Waterside Workers’ Union , the “seagulls” formed the 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,” said Mr. Skelton. “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 court.” Evidence was given. 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 organisation. 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 tilfc to consider its decision.