MANPOWER CASE

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 7, Issue 92, 21 July 1944, Page 5

MANPOWER CASE

APPEAL AGAINST DISMISSAL

PAPER MILLS PETITION

DECISION RESERVED

A further appeal case brought by J. Whitehead (Mr B. S. Barry) against the decision of the Manpower Officer granting permission for his dismissal by the Whakatane Paper Mills (Mr G. Otley) was heard at the Industrial Manpower Committee sitting in Whakatane yesterday. After hearing the evidence produced by both parties the committee reserved its decision.

Prior to the hearing, Mr Barry ■drew attention to the iact. that the hearing entailed almost the identical evidence, of the previous case wlien his client's appeal had been upheld. The present move by the company, was he alleged merely a means of securing the same thing which the Committee had refused to uphold before. In view of this Mr Barry claimed that such representations had already been adjudicated upon> and that therefore there should be no need to rehear the evidence.

Mr Otley claimed that a completely different set of circumstances .governed the present case. The management had decided in view of the fall in orders to dispense with four workmen from the pasting room. Three had already gone without appealing, the fourth was a man who possessed a second-class engineer's ticket and in view of this • qualification it Avas decided to transfer him to the power house, where Whitehead was the only un-ticketed man, and dispense with Whitehead. There was nothing personal or vindictive about the move. It was purely a matter of re-organisation, where four men had to go and the appellant happened to be one of them. After a brief adjournment the Committee contended that as a new set of circumstances obtained, the should be heard and evidence called for substantiation. The Committee consisted of Messrs J. O. Liddell (Chairman), K. Simpson and N. Crimp. Mr McGlone, Manpower Officer, was also in tendance. Secretary's Evidence Evidence by J. W. Wright, the ••company's New-Zealand Secretary, showed that it had been found that • operations in the pasting room had .been carried on at a considerable .loss and were costing much more than that allowed for- in the Price Tribunal's allocation when, fixing the price. As a result and in view of falling orders it had been decided to reduce the number of workers in that department from 14 to 10. The men dispensed with included "the foreman and other employees : of some years standing. The - fourtlj, man was a ticketed engineer named ...Bock, and in order retain his ser-< vices where they could be utilised to the best advantage, it was decided to transfer him to the power ;house. This left a surplus of Whitehead, the only unqualified man in "the power house. Application to the Manpower Officer had been made to put Whitehead off and this had been granted.

To Mr Barry, he agreed tha.t the man Avho had been transferred to take.Bock's position in the packing room had been given the dual job •of working the tier-wagon as well and in this way it was thought to cut down costs. He admitted that the new man had not varied his activities since lie entered the packing department, and that he was as yet still full time on the tier-waigon. "It was true that 26 men were employed in the packing room, also that the company was advertising for labourers—but only for casual carpentry work. As far as he knew Bock had been quite satisfactory in the power house and there had been 110 complaints. Making for Efficiency The: second engineer,. Mr R. ! Coombes, maintained that if Bock replaced Whitehead greater efficiency would result. There vfere three shift'engineers, three, greasers and three firemen. Of these Whitehead alone was unqualified. In the event of an engineer being called away the; regulations decreed that a ticketed man should be standing by both in the power house and in the boiler room. A Long Devious Route "It seems to me that there is a long, long trail, winding by devious routes from the pasting room and the packing departments up to the power house," said Mr Barry in liis representations on behalf of the appelant. He maintained that, att the facts pointed once again to the victimisation of. Whitehead who was to be penalised because he did not hold a ticket, when by law lie Was not •compelled to have one to carry ■out his work. Counsel maintained that the secretary in his evidence had •collapsed his own case,, by admitting that the man who was to re'

place Bock in the paaking room was still carrying out his old job on the tiering-wagon. This showed that there was no necessity for the transfer, and even if there were why should Bock be selected from 2(5 other workers. The only reason appeared to be that the management saw in it another chance to get rid of Whitehead, in other words another prospect of obtaining the same end which failed before.

Worker's Evidence

C. E. A. Wallace t Secretary of the Paper Mills Workers Union, who is employed in the packing de-< partment then gave evidence as to the methods utilised in the department adding that the men worked in pairs. To Mr Otley he agreed that there had been an obvious diminution of output and that it was only logical to reduce staff.

One of the shift engineers, J. B. Reid,, gave evidence as to the type of work in the power house. The work of a greaser he maintained could be just as easily carried out by a trained unticketed man as by one. who was qualified. It was definitely a young man's job and he had found Whitehead completely satisfactory and very efficient. It would take any man ticketed or otherwise some time, to settle down to the work.

The Chairman: Would a man with a ticket be more efficient.

Witness:' No- not necessarily on this particular job.

The question of interpretation of the regulation covering the need for ticketed men being in attendance in the power house was introduced by Mr Otley, and debated for a short time, after which the Committee concluded the hearing and intimated that the decision would be reserved.