RAILWAY APPEAL BOARD.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XXXXVII, Issue 13622, 1 March 1912, Page 5

RAILWAY APPEAL BOARD.

WELLINGTON, February 28. Five casus came before tliu Labway Appeal Board at a silting held (~-day. Dr. A. McArthur, S.M., presided, and with him were Messrs C. F. Ryan (First Division) ard Mr Marlin Lee (Traffic Division), Tiie Department was represented by Mr 11. Davidson. Mm. liiomsun, stationmastor at Groytown, appealed against the promotion of M. A. Wellings and I’. J. McGovern to grade 1) on the classification list of 1911. Appellant submitted that the spirit of the Act had been set aside. Men had been promoted over his head when there were no vacancies, and this was contrary to regulation I!). Clauses 1 and 2 of regulation 40 had been ignored by the Department, especially the last part of clause 2. He ought to have been promoted, and t!.< Department could have hail its remedy bad it .seen fit. He had asked for the attendance as witnesses of Messrs Whit* (ombe (Chief Traffic Manager), Munro (Clnef Traffic Auditor), Dawson (Traffic Inspector), Wellings, and McGovern. A reply was received stating that Messrs Muuro end Dawson would attend, hut the attendance of Messrs McGovern and Welliugs could not he arranged for. Mr Whitconihe’s name was not mentioned. He had been superseded after 16 years’ service by men who probably could not do 5 per cent, ol his work. With very little tuition he could perform their duties. Mr Davidson said the appellant had been wholly trained in the traffic branch ct the Department, hud given satisfaction, and when a vacancy occurred for which he was eligible his claim for promotion would bo considered. • Messrs McGovern and Wellings had been employed for several years in the head office on special work relative to the locomotive and maintenance branches. None of the members of the traffic branch who had been passed over possessed the knowledge necessary in Messrs McGovern s and Welling’a positions. The appellant was not prejudiced or debarred from advancement to any position within the scope of his training. Mr McArthur said the Board proposed to adjourn the case sine die, so that the matter could be carefully gone into. In the case of Wm. Keith Olds, who appealed against the withholding of four months’ salary owing to absence on account of ill-health, decision was reserved. Mr Davidson contended that if a man only worked eight months he could not be considered to have given twelvemonths’ elleient service as provided before an increase of salary could be made.

Allred John McPherson, cadet, appealed against his annual increment being withheld on the ground of his not having (jualilied in telegraphy. He said he had to work .such long hours that he had no time to study. Dr. McArthur said any man worth his salt could study in his spare time. The appeal was dismissed. John Cheesoman, signal and interlocking inspector at Wellington, appealed against his non-promotion from grade 7 to grade 6, hirst Division. Mr D. McKenie represented the Second Division in this case. On behalf of Cheeeemnn it was stated that when it was decided that his appeal would be hoard, Mr T. Ronaync, General Manager, asked tho appellant who he would want as witnesses. He replied he would want to call fhe General Manager, Mr Jas. Burnett (chief engineer), and Mr Hi J. Wynne (signal and electrical engineer). Messrs Burnett and Wynee intimated their willingness to attend, but the General Manager wrote regretting the Department could not allow them to do so. The reason for this could not be understood. Mr Davidson stated that the General Manager considered the appellant was adequately imid for his duties. He would’ be promoted if a vacancy for which he was mialilicd occurred. The matter wa«s adjourned sine die. Goo. Thomas Benefield, cadet, loco, foreman’s office, Wanganui, appealed against tho withholding of the annual increase of salary for nine months owing to absence from duty through an accident sustained outside the Department. .Mr 6. C. Lee represented the Second Division in the. case, which was dismissed on the ground that the appellant had only worked, three mouths out of twelve.