OTIRA TUNNEL STRIKE.

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16167, 22 March 1918, Page 7

OTIRA TUNNEL STRIKE.

-o —• DEPUTATION" TO THE MINISTER OF WORKS. 61R WIIrLIAM ERASER'S FIRM * STAND. (srnrtAi. Tv "the tkess.") "WELLINGTON. March 21. Tliere i= a strike of the workers oil the Otira Tunnel works, owing to tho dismissal of a boy named Fell, 10* rears of age. The union declared that there was not sufficient cause for tho dismissal, and the strike is the result. A deputation irom the union waited on tbo .Minister at Public Works (sir "William Frneer) to-day, in reterence to the matter. Mr R- Beban, president of the union, s aiU that tile deputation had boen appointed by the uuion to interview mo jlinister with tiio oujeet of gotting a Jcttieiuont. -l-tu muue a Jong statement of the casej irom the point or vioiv ut tiie union. The boy xell had been employed in the lamp room, t union his turn in souts witn two others, out a crippled muii, anu tho other u ooy ui Sitauer pnysique. ino rale or nuy was <s a u«y, 11 war bouus ot on per *oil asked t0 10 wolK tiring the boilers to drive tho electrical piant. 'I his was only occasional woiK, rendered necessary only wlu-n the water supply to driyo the plant failed in dry weather. It was -aid tout on tho hrst occasion i ell did the work, but that experience satisfied him that ho was not physically tit to „ 0 on with it. Ho informed the en"inecr ol this, it was said, and he was dismissed, or was given notice that ho would not bo rcquirod further. The union urged that Fell was not ingaged to do this work, and that ho iad done tho work for which ho had Seen engaged quito satisfactorily. For

one of the shifts a man was taken out tho tunnel, to fire the boilers, and ' ;hd union contended that a man should hare been taken* to lire on the shift that Fell was asked to take. The cost woujd have bcon only Is 9d per day more, and as the need for this work did not occur on moro than twenty days in the year, tho total annual cost would be only £1 los. Fell placed the case in tho hands of the . union. Another of tho points made by the union representatives was that in order to release this boy, the other two. lamp-room employees required to work twolvo-hour shifts. In reply to the Minister, Mr Beban admitted that these employees wero paid extra for this extra work. Tho Minister said he wished to know whether tho work that Fell was asked to'do was not something that he knew he would have to do when he was engaged. H» was informed that the boy was told exactly what ho would have to do when he was engaged, and further, that a brother of his onco held the samo position, and had had to do this work. Mr Beban, in reply, said tho brother who was*there before 'was two years older than this boy. . ' Tho Minister: That is not the point. "Was not tho work done in this way before ? Mr Beban: Yes. The Minister: I understand that it has been done in this way for about two years. Mr Vn. G. Kidd, another member of . the deputation, suid that the bov, who had a partially withered arm, was not engaged for this work, but simply to go in,the lamp-room, where the duties were •ngnt. The boy had done this work satisfactorily, and he was "sacked" becauso he was not able to do the steani plant work. = The Minister: Not willing to do it, you mean. Mr Kitld: Not able to do it; there is no doubt about that.The Minister: What work was the boy doing before lie was engaged for the tunnel works?

Mr Kidd: Just odd bits of work about the place.

' said that he was advised that I'cll had been working in a sawnull at arduous work. Mr A. Dinnie (District Engineer on the tunnel works): lam informed that ■ 8 was assistant yardman, and that he also working as "slabby." £he Minister ; What is more, the report of tho people with whom he had oeen formerly employed was not entirely favourable. They said that he : was a vorv lazy boy, ,Kidd said that tho boy's record Mould not be now brought against ~ im - He had done his work for which ae had beca engaged satisfactorily, and fie should not havo been dismissed. SIR WILLIAM FRAiSER'S REPLY. , The Minister said that, with the evidence before him, he could not como £ other conclusion than that tne 9°y thd not want to do this work, and Kir this reason ho was not satisfactory to the management in charge of the tunnel works. "¥ou must Understand," ho said, "that"at the tunnel and at any -work of this kind the authority njio is to tail the men what wtey have to do is the engineer, and not the union." In tho statement of tto facts of the case that Mr Furkert had supplied to him, it was set out that when the boy refused to do this work on the steam plant, he did not then raiso any question about his fitBess to do the work, and that the demand of the union was' 'ono man, ono job." /

_ Mr Beban: We positively deny that. The Minister: ,; I am very glad to near that you do not ask for that, because 1 could not stand that for a ffluuto." Ho went on to say that the work Fell was asked to do in the boiler house was classed by the inspector of machinery as only boys' work. Boys had Leen doing it for fully two years before. The work in the lamproom was very light work. For a great deal of the time they had not mug whatever to do. It was therefore nu\ giteat • hariisinp for the other v WO employees u> carry on twelve tout, tney were paid extra 1*" was. not eoirect that the "V was summarily dispensed witn; lie w 'iis kept on for soniu time after lie was given _ notice- 6uro*y the union w . 0s n °t going to contend that the engineer in charge should not have the nght to say wiietiier a person was a suitable peison to ba employed or not. if a boy was nut suitable surelv the engineer shtfuld be able to dispense jmh his sendees. lie could not lor a luomsnt mlow any claim to the contrary lie hopeu that tno union wouid not dispute tho right of tne management to dispense wuh a man ■who was not satisfactory, bccaute that was a point wnich he could not Uis uss further. Air Kidd repeated that the woik of tho bov in tne lamproom had b en satisfactory. 1 Tho Minister: Who is tho best judge of thatr—tjio un.'on <*r the engineer? Mr.Kidd: Wo say that we arc just as well able to say whether a man is doing his work properly as the en<n neer. The Minister: That is not the point. Alio question is, who is to decide whether an employee is suitable to tho management or men? Mr J. (Slover (another member of . the deputation): The ruon say this is a case or victimisation. The Minister: If thero was victimisation. I would be the last to sustain my officers. There is no evidence of victimisation here. This boy was engaged f?sr a particular job, and ho was fcjwt able to do it, and wc £ot rid of

him. If this work •was some now tmn e put upon a boy for the first "Hie, you would have ground for objection, but it is not so. It has been Suing on for two years, and there has been no complaint about it. Mr Dinnie : The night the boy would nol go on to the steam plant, the words he used were that he would not Ho on; that. it was not his work, and he was not paid for it. He did not say that ho was a cripple. It was the next day that he said that ho was not able to do it. Mr Kidd: We say that because a wrong has gone on for two Years, that is not u reason why it should be continued. Wo say tho boy was engaged tor a ]ob which ho hlled satisfactorily, a lid ho should not have to do this other work. Mr Be ban said that this boy had protested against having to do this other work. lhc» Minister: Thero is no evidence of protest. Mr Beban said that ho protested strongly to the union. Mil Kidd said that the union challenged the Minister to get some independent, experienced man to settle the point of whether the boy Fell was capable of doing the work' Would the Minister do that? The Ministerj No, ccrtainly not. Mr JCidd: \ou won't give us justice. We aro not here, to get justice; this is the last place we •vvoukl come to to got justice. Here is n good, fair challenge, and you will not take it up. The Minister: "Certainly not, because that is not the point. The boy was dismissed because he was uot able, or said he waa not able, to do tho work we want to have done." Ho contended that if the management found that a man or boy was unsuitable for the work lio was required td do, the management had a perfect right to dismiss him and get another to do the work. The boy had not been victimised on account of anything ho had done. Tho boy had said that he could not do the work in tho same way as it had been done for two years by his predecessors, and the management "had simply said to tho boy that the job was not suitable for him, and that they must get someone else who could do it. Tho whole question was "who should bo tho best (judges of who should be employed on tho tunnel?" That "was what it all came to. If the management could not dismiss a man who -was not doing tho work ho was required to do, then it amounted to this: That the union wero to bo tho bosses on tho tunnel works. He had not wished for trouble. Ho wished to tell them that he had been abused in Auckland for keeping on the work at tho Otira tunnel. It could not be said that he had any hostility to the work. He had always endeavoured to meet tho men in such differences as had occurred, but there were certain questions on which he could not give way, and one of them was as to who should say who was to bo employed on tho tunnel. He was advised by Mr Dinnio that if the management had been aware of tho boy's disability in the first instance, ho would never have been employed at all. For theso reasons he could not give any different answer from that which ho had already given—that ho could not reinstate Fell. If he did. it would strike at the very root of all control and discipline in all Government works. Assuming that everything that tho union said was quite correct, the management had still the right to say that tho boy was unsuitable, and that they would get someone else to do the work. An appeal was made by the deputation to the Minister to rcconsider his decision.

' AN EMPHATIC STATEMENT. Sir William JYaser that the union had done wrong from the beginning. Instead of coining to him with the complaint they IjaJ held a pistol to his head by goiftg on strike with talk about eight hours a flay, and one-man-one-job, and of thing. iie "had noted had given to the Press something about the telegram he had sent to'the union, but only so much of it-as suited their purposes. The full text of the tplegram was as follows "I received a few days ago from Mr Furkert a telegraphic summary of his report, but as some parts were not quite clear, I determined to defer my final decision until T returned to Auckland to-day, when I should be in possession .of the full report. - I can find no justification ' for the stoppage of work. No harshness has been exercised towards Fell. Ho knew when he was engaged that he had to do occasional jobs in the power-house, and in refusing later on to do this work (doubtless because he was not paid extra 1 ) lie was given about a month's notico as being unsuitable for the job. which the Inspector of Machinery had declared was a boy's work. The other boys had not to work for 12 hours day continuously, but only during about twenty days in the year, and, moreover, received extra pay on account of such extra time. It cannot be seriously suggested that a boy should be specially engaged to do about twenty days' work in the year, and be idlo for nearly 300 dayS, yet receiving pay all the time. That is wnat the one-boy-one-job system in this instanco would mean. I cannot undertake to rc-employ Fell, whose conduct had not been satisfactory. I a better ■ opinion of "the men at Ott ,- a than to suppose that they desire to create trouble on such a pretext." The Minister promised in the end, after more talk, that if the deputation would come back at 2 p.m , lie would give his final answer, after haying in the meantime a talk with Mr Dinnic. At 2 o'clock the Minister gave his answer, which was the same as he had already given—that ho could not reinstate Fell. He said that ho l:ad given the matter very serious consideration, and if Otira were the 1 only wcrk he had in hand lie might have 'lealt with the matter differently, but whatever he did or said in regard to this case would be a guide as affecting other works. Jf he were to reinstate Fell it would be regarded throughout the Dominion as an admission that in the control of any work, the District Engineer must consult the engineer before he could dispense with the services of any man. Ho could not allow such an idea to go abroad. If the union considered that thero was a grievance, the proper cotirfc! to pursue was not to call the men out, but to refer the matter to him, when he could have investigated it, as he had investigated many other complaints. He could have no more to say about the matter than that." Mr Boban said that the position had not until then become very serious. He declared that the union had had no justice in this case.