DISMISSED.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXIII, Issue 17692, 5 July 1927, Page 4

DISMISSED.

A FAIRLIE PETITION. CASE OE COUNTY EMPLOYEE. Some little time ago a ganger m tlie employ ol : the Mackenzie County Council dismissed one of the men m his gang. The Council has discussed the matter on several occasions, and at their meeting a month ago decided to drop the matter. At their meeting yesterday tlie Council received a petition signed by ;(6 ratepayers asking that the matter be re-opened, and that Charles Davis, the man in question, be heard. Mr' W. T. Smith said that the matter had been settled at the previous meeting, and he moved that it he not rewas seconded by Mr J. McCort, who said that it would be wrong m principle to re-open the matter ''-hum had been settled on the advice of the engineer and the ganger, the two men who were responsible to the Council. The engineer had told them that he had heard both sides and was satisfied that no iniustico had been done, that should end tho matter. Mere the Council collectively or individually going to undertake the supervision or the gaiigcr ? He was not. Mr F. H. Buckley inquired whether the Council wore not compelled to reopen tho matter on receipt of a petition of this kind? By re-opemng it the Council would suffer no loss of prestige. It might he that an error of judgment had been made. Tho pet;tioners would nob liavo signed tlie petition had they not considered that an injustice had been done. He moved as an amendment: “That the Council hold an inquiry.” This was seconded by Mr JdL. I ■ Mnnaton. Mr Smith sr,**- that Davis was under the ganger, and the latter \\as under the engineer. It was for them to settle the matter. The Council could not go into it without reflecting on the engineer. ~ Mr Buckley: “I object to that. The chairman said that no man could he dismissed without enlisting ' sympathy; but ho was strongly against rc-opening this matter, because a vital principle was involved. They had adopted tho policy of men being appointed and dismissed by the ganger, under, the engineer, and tho Council Had no-right to interfere. They did not want to upset that arrangement. If they granted an inquiry in this cn.se every man who might be dismissed m the future would want an inquiry; no man who was dismissed was of opinion that his dismissal was justified. Io grant tlie inquiry would undermine tho author)tv of the'gangers and make for insubordination. After Davis had been dismissed he had put his ease before the engineer who had immediately taken stops to ascertain the ganger s reasons for tho dismissal, and was quite satisfied that the dismissal was justified. , Mr Buckley: “Can you prove those grounds?” , The chairman said that if they went further and brought a lot of men into the matter they would merely be inviting trouble without doing any good: and they did not want to get into 'the position that- another local body not far away had got into, through members interfering in the dismissal of an employee, when they had not brought any credit to Themselves. If tho engineer referred the matter to them they could consider it, but ho had not done so, and the matter should: rest where it was. With regard to the petition he understood that'a member of the Council had been instrumental in promulgating it. If that was so it was an. undesirable thing to do. When a decision was arrived at by the Council those in the minority should loyally abide by it. Mr Buckley: “To whom do you refer?”

The chairman: “I refer to Mr Manaton, and I do not think that it is a correct thing for a member of tllo Council to do. The ratepayers have the matter iii their own hands, and if they are not satisfied with our actions they have their remedy at election time.” (Hear, hear.) Mr Manaton denied that he had been instrumental in promoting the petition, and said that lie had only asked one man if he cared to sign it. All the names had been given voluntarily. The petitioners considered there was something behind it all, and they wanted to get at the bottom of it. He had a lawyer’s advice to say that they could claim an inquiry on a petition of twelve ratepayers.. The chairman: “Who started the petition?” Mr Manaton: “Air Davis did. All I did was to do what the ratepayers, whom I represent, asked me to do.”

The chairman: “Is the Mr Davis to whom you refer the man who was dismissed ?”

Mr Manaton: “Yes: don’t blame me for it.”

Mr Smith: “AVo are wasting lime.” The chairman said that as Mr Manaton had disclaimed any connection with the petition he would withdraw what he had said concerning his connection with it.

Mr A. F. Campbell pointed out that the petition did not give any reason for ail inquiry. The engineer and ganger were satisfied that no injustice had been done, and if the Council reopened the matter it would be equivalent to finding fault with the judgment of the engineer and the ganger. If the petitioners had given any reason for an inquiry, or brought forward any fresh evidence it might be a different matter. At it was lie failed to see anv grounds for re-opening it. _ Tlie chairman said that tho petitioners had brought forward no fresh evidence or reasons for an inquiry, but they only asked that Davis should be heard. Although 36 signatures were attached to the petition, it would be quite easy to get as many names on a counter petition. Ratepayers had gone to him and told him that the Council had done tlie right thing at a previous meeting when they had dismissed the matter.

Mr Buckley said the whole thing seemed to hinsre on the jurisdiction of the ganger. He felt sure that an injustice had been done. It seemed to him that they had taken the ganger’s word against that of Davis, and who was to say the ganger was right and Davis wrong. Davis had been working for the Council for twelve yeans while the ganger had been in the Council’s employ about as many months. At no time had the ganger reprimanded Davis so far as he was aware—at all events no strong reprimand had been given. The Council should stand for British justice, and he hoped his amendment would he carried. ; The amendment was then put and lost, those voting for it being: Messns Buckley, Page, and Mnnaton, the rest against. The motion' was then put and carried. Mr McCort: “I hope that finishes it.” Mr Buckley: “If I was Davis, it wouldn’t.”