UNION SUBSCRIPTIONS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 72, Issue 234, 2 October 1929, Page 13

UNION SUBSCRIPTIONS

CLAIM AGAINST MEMBE7R TODGMEWT FOB PLAINTIPY. I An interesting judgment relating to the payment of subscription foes duo i to an industrial union vva? delivered by Mr J. H. Salmon S.M. in tho Magts tratc ‘s Court yosforday. 'Pho plaintiff was the Wollingtop Dis triot Hotel, Club and Restaurant Work- i or? Industrial Workers tfnion of Work or? (Mr Curtis) and defendant G. S. i Hunter (Mr Currie). On -Tunc 3, .1926, stated his Worship, tho defendant signed a form of application fop membership of the Wellington District Hotel, Club and Restaurant Workers Industrial Union of Workers. An entrance foe of 5s was apparently paid, because tho defendant was duly enrolled as a member of the Union. The defendant ’s name still appeared on the roll of membership of tho Union, hut he had paid no contributions in terms o.f its rider for the past three years -in fact, ho had paid no weekly contributions since his admission to membership. Authority was given to the Wanganui branch sc.cfotary, Mr F. J. Nott, to sue all members in arrears of 12 months’ contributions, plus 10s fine for being 48 weeks in arrears. .Mr Nott caused a plaint note to be filed, naming tho Wanganui Hotel (Tub and Restaurants Union (Wanganui branch) as; plaintiff and G. S. Hunter, care of Erns Hotel, Taihape, as defendant, and claiming to recover £3 .18s, being tho balance due for subscriptions up to July 3, 1929, At tho same time ho caused a summons to bo issued to the defendant, and in it tho plaintiff named was the ‘ Wellington Hotel, Club and Restaurants Union (Wanganui branch>. No evidence was called by tho do- . fondant, but two points wore raised; | The fir?" was that the power to sue for . subscriptions was a statutory One and i tho only union entitled to sue was tho i parent body, that action could be taken I only in the name of such union, and , that this bad not been done. Tho | second point was that the plaintiff.; if entitled to recover, could recover I only twelve months’ subscriptions as Rulo 7 of the Rules of the Union pro video that .members twelve months in i arrears should be struck off the roll. fn regard to the first defence, the! Magistrate, after quoting authorities.' thought that rhe proper course was to j substitute the name of the Wellington I T'isrrict Hotel Club and Restaurant j Workers Industrial Unuion of Work ‘ er? for the name of the non-exist-eot plaintiff union appearing on tho plaint note.. It was to be observed that this was not tho addition of a plaintiff without the consent of such plaintiff, but rather an amendment of title. In tho second defence it was assumed apparently that every person who was 12 months in arrears with his subscription was automatically struck off tho roll. It was open to the Union, under the rule cited, to strike off the defendant’s name, but this had not' boon done. No injustice could b' done i to a member by failing to strike him , off immediately he was twelve months ' in arrears with his subscription?. On i th*' other hand a substantial injustice I might be dene by the too strict enforce- I mont of tho rule. His Worship hold that both defences I must fail. and. accordingly, entered ! judgment for the plaintiff jn its sub- ■ stitutod title, for £3 18s with 22? costs. ■ £1 16s 6d solicitors’ foes and 12s witness ' expense?.