Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CASE CHARGE DISPUTE

DEADLOCK REMAINS FIVE-YEAR GUARANTEE ' . REJECTED ■Fruit and vegetable growers and retailers’ representatives met jd Christchurcft yesterday in an endeavour to settle the container charge dispute, but proposals made by the growers were rejected by the retailers and a deadlock remains. The growers have, however, agreed to refrain from selling direct to the public until all retailers have had an opportunity to discuss the offer at a meeting they have called for next Monday. This was reported to a meeting or growers last evening, which received a letter from the Canterbury Fruiterers’ Association stating: “As a gesture that the growers sincerely wish to see the present case charge dispute settled amicably, fairly, and satisfactorily to both sides, may we suggest that you cease street sales, while we are meeting in conciliation in an endeavour to settle this matter.” The offer made to the retailers, as reported to last evening’s meeting of growers, was that the growers were prepared to enter into a five-year agreement to take back all containers. Tne case charges offered for reclama, tion were 5d for apples and 4d for pears and lemons. It was emphasised that the charges on these of 6d and sd. respectively, were made by the Internal Marketing Division, but that the growers would be prepared to take the cases at the price mentioned. A full refund on other containers was agreed on as follows: "seven by seven stone fruit and tomato cases, banana, orange, and pineapple cases, 4d; sec-ond-grade apple cases, suitable for vegetables, 3d; fruit trays, 2d; sacks, 6d; sugar-bags. 3d; 121 b tomato cases, 2d On the last it was agreed that the original charge should be waived if a glut occurred on the market and the growers did not wish to recover their cases. . ... The meeting * asked that it be made clear that it was not desired that the Fruit Federation depot should dominate the distribution of empty cases, but that retailers should be able to make arrangements direct with growers on the basis mentioned.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19460613.2.28

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24900, 13 June 1946, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
338

CASE CHARGE DISPUTE Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24900, 13 June 1946, Page 3

CASE CHARGE DISPUTE Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24900, 13 June 1946, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert