RAILWAY DEPARTMENT.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 16454, 5 June 1919, Page 6

RAILWAY DEPARTMENT.

THE LONGTON CASE. GENERAL MANAGER FIRM. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, June 4. 'The General Manager of Railways (Mr. R. W. M‘Villy), in the course of a statement regarding the Longton case, says that the question for consideration of the department was whether Longton. who, the Appeal Board found, had on occasions adopted an insubordinate attitude towards his superior officers, was fitted for and deserved promotion to a higher grade. The regulations of the department definitely provided that the road to promotion should be efficiency, merit, good conduct and suitability. It was the practice to review the railway staff once a year. When the review of 1918 was made, it was considered that Long toil, by reason of his insubordinate conduct, was not suitable for promotion to the next grade, and it was against that decision that he appealed. Promotion to the next grade would have placed Longton iry a position of responsibility, where ho would have to control and maintain discipline of a staff varying in number according to his location. It was clear, from the board’s decision, that they recognised that Longton was insubordinate and deserving of punishment. “Surejjy,” Mr. M‘Vill!y states, “the interval which separates a member from one meriting promotion is sufficiently great to need no emphasis. The department has neither reduced nor dismissed Longton, nor has it inflicted direct punishment for insubordination. What has been done in effect places Longton in exactly the same position as any other member who he considered was disqualified for promotion by reason of unsatisfactory work or conduct of any kind.” , The view taken by the department was that the promotion of Longton would place a premium on insubordination and indiscipline, and would have a pernicious influence on the staff of the service. The Minister had, on more than one occasion in replying to representatives for the abolition of the veto, stated that he was willing favourably to consider this request, provided tho department had proper representation on the board. Tho suggestion for the alteration of the constitution of tho board in this direction was rejected by the societies representing the employees. That being the present position ,it was clear that public interest must be protected by the right of veto being retained by tho responsible authority. The statement concluded by pointing out that unanimous decisions of the board had been vetoed by each succes give Minister o£ Railways from the inception of the board.