SHIP HELD UP.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20539, 14 February 1935, Page 5

SHIP HELD UP.

Dispute Over Engagement of Stokehold Man. OWNERS OPPOSE JOB CONTROL. (Special to the “ Star.”) SYDNEY, February 7. Sydney has just been experiencing another of those foolish “ revolts ” against the employer which from time to time jeopardise the interests of the worker and impede industrial recovery. Last Tuesday week the Howard Smith coastal steamer Canberra was to have sailed for Brisbane. She was timed to leave at 8 o’clock, but her departure was put off for an hour, and at 9 p.m. the 370 passengers were informed that a dispute with the crew had arisen and there was no chance of starting that night. Many of those on board were going to Queensland for a hokday, and they had no idea that their departure would be delayed. Passengers were given the option of staying on board that night to await developments, or cancelling their passages and receiving their money back. Many of them stayed on the Canberra, and next day negotiations were renewed between the Howard Smith Company and the shipping union. By 2 o’clock in the afternoon, as there seemed no chance of a settlement, the passengers who had stayed on were notified that the vessel would not start and that their mfcney would be refunded, while other arrangements were made for transhipping cargo to Brisbane.

The Howard Smith Company then prepared to take the Canberra off the coastal run and lay her up indefinitely rather than submit to the dictation of the Seamen’s Union in a matter of such vital importance as this quarrel involves.

Cause of Trouble. The dispute which has caused all this trouble illustrates very aptly the determination of a certain section of the Seamen’s Union to foment strife with the employers and the ingenuity that they display in effecting their purpose. The difficulty started in Brisbane some weeks ago. when the company refused to take on a certain man in the stokehold. This man has some influence in industrial circles, for 18 months ago he had actually succeeded in ousting our old friend Jacob Johnson from his position as secretary of the Seamen’s Union for the time, and when he was refused employment at Brisbane he proceeded to organise a tentative strike. The Canberra got away on that occasion after being held up for 19 hours, but the rejected fireman seems to have vowed vengeance on the company. Knowing that a vacancy would occur sooner or later, he came down to Sydney to wait his opportunity. Last week, one of the coal-trimmers on the Canberra was taken ill, and at a stop-work meeting of the union held last Tuesday morning it w T as resolved that only the man who had been rejected in Brisbane should offer for the job. In the afternoon there were a number of unemployed seamen in attendance when the usual “ call ” was made, but the only applicant was the Brisbane “ reject.” The office refused to take him on, and another “ call ” was made, with the same result. Management’s Decision. The company then decided that they could not possibly surrender to the union on this important question. The management of Howard Smith’s announced that they could not accept dictation of this kind. If they were forced to engage every man proposed by the union. “ an intolerable situation would arise,” and. quite apart from their objection to this particular man, the company decided to fight for the principle of “ free selection ” as against “ job control.” As the union refused to come to

terms, Howard Smith’s paid off the crew of the Canberra—ls 6 in all—at the usual twenty-four hours’ notice, and proceeded to await developments. No doubt they felt that time was on their side, for it was already known that the members of the Seamen’s Union were by no means unanimous about the policy that their leaders had directed them to follow. At the stop-w T ork meeting which decided to force the rejected fireman upon the company there were only about fifty men present, and these were said to be mostly Communists and unemployed. It is said that most of the union officials and the great majority of the Canberra’s crew were opposed to the stoppage. But at the special meeting called on Wednesday to consider the position, those who supported the strike decision maintained that the union had accepted the principle of the roster, and as the name of the man in dispute came next on the list, the union force the company to accept him. iiose who favoured resuming work argued that, as the man had been previously dismissed by the company, he had lost his claim to preference and that, in any case, if the company would not take him, he ought voluntarily to stand aside rather than take away work from 150 other seamen. However, the meeting by 84 votes to 32 refused to man the vessel unless the rejected fireman was taken on; and they resolved also to compensate him for the loss of wages that he had incurred through the company’s previous refusal to employ him in Brisbane. Attorney-General’s Opinion. For a few days the union remained inactive. But it then seemed to dawn upon those responsible for this “ stopwork ” challenge that they had taken a dangerous step which might produce very serious consequences. As shown above the union’s action was so unjustifiable that it had produced the worst possible impression elsewhere. The matter was brought under the notice of the Federal Attorney-General and he at once an-

nounced that, to obviate such attempts at job control, he would recommend the Government to bring all seamen under the Transport Workers' Act. The effect of this would be to compel all seamen engaged in the interstate trade to be registered, with the penalty of cancellation against all participating in a strike. This proposal aroused bitter resentment among the seamen and the South Australian branch of the Seamen's Union declared that, rather than submit, its members would organise a general strike. The New South Wales Seamens Union certainly had not contemplated "industrial war” on this scale, and now. thoroughly alarmed, they deputed Mr Jacob Johnson to lay the dispute before the Federal Seamens Union for its adjudication. Evidently wiser counsels have prevailed: for vesterdav the Sydney branch of the Seamen’s Union decided unanimously that the dispute be " called off ' and that the owner’s claim to a ‘ free selection ” be allowed without further challenge. And so ends this foolish and unjustifiable attempt to ” make trouble with great inconvenience to the public and heavy loss to shipowners and seamen alike.