Watersiders Must Resume Normal Work

Chronicle (Levin), 18 July 1949, Page 5

Watersiders Must Resume Normal Work

- qp> . — Press Association)

(Per

. , _ . W,ELLIXGTDX,Muly JL6, Abandonment of the present dis* obedience of • the Waterfront Industrj Commission 's .'deqisipfi;- and the imrhe diate re'sumptiou of ' normal work ari required before Commission control wil be restored at the' Port of Auckland. When the disobedience is abandonet and normal work is resumed, the Government will be prepared to give con siueration to the Waterside Union re quest for reintroduction of Compassion control at Auckland and the IJenefitf that go with that Control. This has been stated by Ihe Ministe, of Labour (Mr. McLagan.) in a lette: to. the New Zeaiand Waterside Work ers' Union national seeretary (Mr. T Hill). The Minister in his letter acknow ledged receipt of one from Mr. Hil advising that the union 's poliey wa' for a continuance of the gystem 0'. waterfront' contrbf T»y" the'":Wa'terfron Indusfry Commission. and port com mitteds. 'Mr, Hill 's letter said that ttu . council' of .Ihe union felt thjat thi; system of control could not be suecessfullv continued until, first, these bodie again covered the port of Auckland and, secoudly, the Waterfront Industr Emergencv Regulations, 1946 (amenu meut No. 1) were repealed.

Policy and Pledge The Minister 's letter stated: "Your statement implies your union 's aceeptance of all the general and local orders of the Waterfront Industry Commissioi and all the decisions of the Waterfron Industry Authority. In fact, you union hae pledged itself to accept tliesi as a condition of the establishment o: the Waterfront Authoritjn This, how' ever, is not the policy which has beei carried out by your union as the Com mission 's main order in regard to hours of work is at present being disobeyei. by your Auckland branch and other decisions of fhe Waterfront Authorit; and of a port committee have been dis obeyed. " .. ' " The Minister said. that the Govern ment's decision to 'suspend the power, of the Comnlissi^m, and the Authorit; at Auckland was due entirely to. tn« deliborate action of t'he Aucklan* branch of the union in its eoncertec. breach of the Coniniission's main ordeby refusing ",to 'yvork overtime. Tht action of the Auckland branch was noi ■ only ar Jireach, ,oL , the uni'on's pledge that tliero would.' f)e , no unauthoriseo stoppages or limitations of work. L attacked the very basis on which Com mission control was founded. Commission control could be. inter; preted only as meauing the aeceptancf of all decisions of th'e body responsibic for carrving on such'i control, and tnt present action of the Auckland bfancJ did not- strengthen the tinion's requesi for 'the restoration of Commission con trol at Auckland. The only purpose oi the regulations the union desired tc have repealed was to enable the Gov ernment to take appropriate action i when there was a deliberate coneeriee refusal to carry out normal worlc in accordance with the decisions of the Waterfront Industry Authority and tne Waterfront Industry Commission.