[p RICHARDSON.

I.—9a.

40

148: Subject to supervision and the approval of the general manager?— Yes, but not subject to the supervision. _ 149 Can you not go to the general manager and discuss questions ol this kind with him, and is he not always prepared to discuss such matters amicably with you? —Yes, but in these particular questions he usually takes the chief inspector's ruling 150 Do you not assume from that that he does it because he considers, rightly or wrongly, that the chief inspector's view is the correct one?— Ill those three particular cases we assume that the selection was not a wise one. 151. That is the opinion of the union?— That is the opinion of the whole ol the employees. 152 You say that the company may have likes and dislikes : do you not think there is the question of popularity sometimes amongst the men?— Yes, but in these cases there has been none. Two of the men probably would not have been heard of in the service had their difficulties not cropped up. ...,,. , 153. You quoted a case where the management made a distinction between linesmen and linesmen's labourers' wages? —Yes. 154. Do you think that under clause 6 as it stands such a dispute would be settled by the Appeal Board as a matter of appeal?—The union would take it there. 155. Is not that a matter of interpretation of an award or industrial agreement?—No, I could not say it was, because it is a new clause they have created outside the agreement. 156 But do you not think it is a matter for the Court which made the award, or, rather, has jurisdiction over an agreement, to decide what is meant by a clause in the award or agreement?— That is so. . . . , 157 Then do you not see that it is a matter for the Arbitration Court and not tor an Appeal Board?— Our contention is that we should expect to get fair treatment from an Appeal Board in a question like that. . . _ 158. Do you not see that the matter is one that would be settled by the Arbitration Court and not by an Appeal Board?— No. 159 Do you not know this: that without any Appeal Board at all, your union had the right togo to the Arbitration Court to ascertain whether or not the company in distinguishing between linesmen and linesmen's labourers were doing the correct thing I—l cannot say that 1 do. 160. Did the union ever consider that question as to whether it should take the matter to the Arbitration Court?—No, Ido not think so. 161 If you had the right of going to the Arbitration Court, as I assure you you have upon a point of that kind, why should you not do that instead of trying to get a separate Board of Appeal to consider a case of that kind?—As I pointed out, we had complaints made to the management that we did not think it was in accordance with the agreement, and they, after mature consideration, conceded to two of the men Is. Id. per hour. I have no doubt that if that penny had not been conceded to those men, in all probability, if the Arbitration Court is the right place to take it, it would have been brought up there. 162. What you say is that the matter was settled by agreement between the company and the union? —That is about it. . 163 When the question arises as to whether you have a sufficient number ol cars, let us say for the requirements of the Auckland traffic, who do you think are the best judges of that—the City Council or the people of Auckland, or the person appointed by the Minister ?—Well, if the person appointed by the Minister was in or about Auckland during the rush traffic, or took a keen interest in the traffic conditions of Auckland, I think he would be a very good authority 164 Do you not know that the Auckland City Council are fairly keen about keeping the company up to the mark in regard to the requirements of the traffic?—l am surprised to hear it. 165. The number of your cars, I understand, has been doubled within a few years !— Question—that is, in seven years. _ 166. Do you think there are enough cars for the requirements of the Auckland people running at the present time?—l do not think so. 167 How many do you think there should be?— Roughly speaking, I think there should be from ten to fifteen more cars. , . 168 Do you mean, in addition to those under construction—you know there are eight under construction ?—Yes, the large type of cars. There should be ten or fifteen more. 169 The people in Auckland are, I suppose, as keen as people in other centres about getting what they consider to be their rights?—As far as my judgment goes the people of Auckland have never had their rights yet. 170 You think the people of Auckland cannot be left to themselves to keep the Auckland Tramways Company up to the mark with regard to the requirements of the traffic?—My opinion is this- "that if I was absolutely clear in my mind, and I think if the employees and general public were absolutely sure in their mind, that there were no City Councillors and Mayors interested, then in all probability the people of Auckland would get what is termed " fair treatment." 171 Mr Fraser"] You mean personally interested? —Yes 172 Mr M Myers ] I was not asking you about the City Councillors —I asked you about the people of Auckland?— That is the perception of the people of Auckland when the question of the number of cars and that sort of thing has been discussed. I have heard it said repeatedly, " What can we expect from a City Council that has part of the interest! " 173 Do you know as a matter of fact that on various occasions they have made demands en the Tramway Company with regard to extra cars?—l do. 174 And with regard to other matters? —Yes, but I have not known of those demands being acceded to in any very great hurry