The Timaru Herald. FRIDAY, MAY 30, 1919. RAILWAY APPEALS.

Timaru Herald, Volume CVIII, Issue 16822, 30 May 1919, Page 6

The Timaru Herald. FRIDAY, MAY 30, 1919. RAILWAY APPEALS.

The Ministerial power of veto over decisions of' the Railway Appeal Boards, whose exercise in the Longton case' has provoked strong protests from the raiiwaymen, is not now objected to for the first time. The Railways Classification Act of 1896 provides that "every member who is aggrieved with any decision of his superior officer may appeal therefrom in manner hereafter provided/ 5 and it eoes on to say that "every decision of tho Appeal Board shall be submitted to the Minister, and no such decision shall take effect unless and | until 1 signifies his approval ; thereof." The right of appeal which is given to employees is, therefore; an incomplete one, and has always been so since the railways were released from Commissioner control. That is not to \ say that the fioitt is valueless to jthe men. In the srreat majority ,of cases which' come before the '■ Boards, consistingr of three members with a Magistrate for chairman, the appeal of the man who has a grievance is rejected or al- : lowed, and the Minister approves ,the judgment. Mistakes which 'ouperiors must sometimes make are remedied, and, in other cases, false grievances of an individual, which might mislead his fellows and cause them to feel uncalled for indignation if they were not investigated publicly, are shown |in their true lierht ' by the trial J afforded. But if the Minister! can support the decisions of the Boards in most cases why should he not do so in all? Contentment with a system which, upon the whole, does make for surer justice for employees and more understanding", is liable to lie seriously diiininished if not destroyed when, in -particular cases, the Minister asserts his power to be not only a party to the trial but the final judge of it, reversing the decision which, after full inquiry, has been given against him- -

In a class of cases there is something to be said for tie remarkable power possessed by cue Minister of beins 1 at .the same time judge and prosecutor. Sir Joseph Ward put the argument for the right of veto when he said maary years ago, speaking with particular regard to casss in which the safety of the puo'.lc was concerned, that there must be one head of the Railway S.°ivice, responsible to the public, and that head could only be tie Minister. His final responvhility could not be handed ovar to any Board. Successive Railway Ministers have always taken up that position, which may' even be unanswerable when the safety of the public is involved. If the Department had strong- reason to believe that any particular man was not a safe man to be running trains it would do exceedingly wrong to let him run them, thou-rli its evidence of his careJess habits or unsuitable temperament might be insufficient for the purpose of obtaining* a. conviction from a Magisterial Board. "When obiectioTLS to the right of veto were discussed before the vP^]* 1 *""* eight :se3£9

atro Mr McVilly, who is now. the General Manager of Railways, . ■stated that: "Except in cases whore the public safety is in[volved the Department and the Minister have never interfered.'"' |But the Longton case is not ofthat kind. Longton was a booking clerk, and booking- clerks are not concerned with the safety of trains. The offence charged against him was that he. "lacked a sense of discipline," and on that charge, one would think, the Minister might be. willing to ae-r ... cept the decision of the Appeal Board, more especially as it -was given unanimously. It is stated that a unanimous decision of the Board has not been overruled since the late Hon. J. A. Millar was of Railways. yThe':■''■' Hon. Mr Hemes mav have rea-'j sons for Ms veto in this case, but it is not to be wondered at that dissatisfaction has been caused, during the fortnight that he has refrained from stating them. It is not easy to sup-gest how the Appeal Board system might be altered so as neither to impair the which must, res* with the Minister in extreme cases j nor to lessen benefits which it can have at present. * But the whole question is one that might be - discussed with profit by the Minister and representatives of the railway societies in a friendly conference, and, however the system is left, the power of veto, which makes the Minister a legal. party who cannot lose unless' he consents to do so, should be used just as sparing!- as possible. It is reported to-day that the Longton case has been before the Cabinet, and a decision has been reached by them which will be made public, as soon as it has been received by the representatives of the railway societies-.