BRISBANE TRAMWAY CASE.
COMPANTS ATTITUDE, TOWARDS I UNIONISTS.
NO DISCRIMIKAfriON INTESNDiED.
(Pteir Preea Association.)
SYKNEIY, December 5. At the Arbitration Court onl th» Brisbane tramway case, Justice Higgins asked the company's counsel to state their future attitude towards Unionists. Counsel replied that the company could not undertake to discriminate. Mir Biggins said unless they under,take to discriminate they would be (driven to a stronger course, granting preference. If a company's union was formed to draw away members from the Tramway Employees' Association he would only 'grant preferen|ce bejcause the mien would be unable to protect themselves otherwise. Counsel contended there w!as no dispute a* the time of the plaint. The men ratified! it and therefore there was no longer any interest in obtaining the award. He left the desponsibility -with Mr Higgins. The latter replied: 'Tour position is this: Tou resist the award, resist the union, oppose everything, and 1 jvon'tJ consent to anything.'
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/THS19121206.2.42
Bibliographic details
Thames Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 10380, 6 December 1912, Page 5
Word Count
154BRISBANE TRAMWAY CASE. Thames Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 10380, 6 December 1912, Page 5
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Thames Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.