TRAMWAYS BILL.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 970, 10 November 1910, Page 8

TRAMWAYS BILL.

AMENDMENTS BY THE LABOUR BILLS COMMITTEE.

EXAMINATION OF MOTORMEN,

NEW APPEAL BOARD PROVISIONS,

The Tramways Amendment Bill was reported to tho House of Representatives yesterday by the Labour Bills Committee, which recommended that the Bill bo allowed to proceed with amendments. The Committee took voluminous evidence on the Bill, and held twenty-four meetings in eighteen days, examining thirty-six witnesses in all during the sixty hours it sat.

The amendments include tbe extension of the time for granting certificates to motormen to December 31, 1911. Wcw clauses have been added providing that every application for examination as a niotonnan shall be accompanied by a certificate signed by the manager of some electric tramway that the applicant has served on an electric tramway in New Zealand for not less than a year, and has undergone training for the position of a mqtorman, and that ho is suitable for appointment. Another certificate is necessary from an approved doctor that the applicant is physically fit. Every electric tramway must give, such reasonable facilities to conductors to be trained as motormen as will enable at least twenty per cent, of them to be trained as motormen each year.- If in the opinion of the manager of any company a conductor is not suitable as a candidate for. the position of motorman, he may decline to allow him to be trained, but any conductor is to have the right o{ appeal to the appeal board. ■ Clause 6, providing that an appeal board be set up, has been deleted, and the following new clause substituted:—"An appeal board, consisting of three persons, shall be set up in each tramway district, and shall consist of one representative to be appointed by the employers, and one representative to bo appointed.by the employees of-the tramways within the tramway district, and fhe senior magistrate exercising jurisdiction in the district, who shall be chairman of the board/' An addition has been made to the clause, providing that a car report book shall be kept, malting it necessary to keep a book for each car.

Some of the Evidence. The evidence given on the Tramways Amendment Bill before the-.Labour Bills Committee of the House of Representatives , makes interesting reading. In answer to Mr. O'Shea, Mr. Stuart Richardson,, manager of the Wellington Corporation Tramways, referring to the supervision over the local tram system by the Government in the past, said it had been efficient and sufficient.... As to the present Bill he thought the proposed examination by the'.Government and the granting of certificates to motormen was likely to lead to complications," especially under the present award or agreement. The men should be appointed to senior positions through seniority and capability. The question of deciding whether a man. was capable ot not was taken from the hands of the tramway officials,' who had extended experience of the men, and, he took it, a man would have to be appointed if he, ( had the Government certificate. This certificate would be issued by a Government inspector, who would not have had the experience of the man's temperament and capabilities that the tramway officials would havo had. It •would be a very difficult thins; for the Government to carry out an efficient examination throughout New Zealand. A motorman who was, say, a good motorman on the Wellington servico, would certainly need a considorablo amount of practical knowledge .of the service in Christohurch before.he would be equally efficient thero. Tho. equipment of the cars was not the same.. In respect to the Appeal Board. Mr. Bichardson said that at : present all cases involving dismissal came beforo him. He dealt with the matter, and the man had on appeal to the Tramways Committee. This, ho thought, had always worked satisfactorily. The committee always gave the man a full hearing, and he was represented by the secretary of his union. The Appeal Board would take the authority from tho council, whTch would be disastrous to the working of the tramways, to tho management, and to the men. The present system in regard to the car report book was to have a report book with detachable leaves. When a leaf was filled up it was taken out and passed on to the man -who looked after the repairs.

Necessity for Speed Indicators. To the Hon. R. M'Kenzie: The- conductors on the cars had strict instructions that no passengers were to lie allowed to stand' on' the footboards. He had known cases where passengers bad been standing on the footboard and had been ordered off. He did not think it was necessary that speed indicators should be fitted to the cars. The Hon. Mr. M'Konzio: "Take one of your cars coming from Brooklyn. Suppose ono of the brakes missed, and the car started to get an excessive speed up, ivould not the excessive speed be shown

'by Hie indicator, and show the motormaa what action he ought to take? Sir. Bichordson: "No. Hβ would knowvery well if his car was going, too fast without- a speed indicator." In reply to Mr. Bollard, Mr. Eichardson said he did not think that under the examination conducted by the Government the examiners would be in as good a position as the municipality to imd out whether men would make efficient motornien or not. The examinations were better conducted by the municipality. Mr. Luke: Have you any objection-to the Appeal Board being set up by the council, and to the men being represented on tho board. Jlr. Richardson: So long as the council manage the business themselves I see no objection to any appeal noard they should set up, but I do not think the Government should set up an appeal board for the corporation." To Mr. M'Laren: His general objection to the Bill was that he considered it was interfering -with the powers of the municipalities. In answer to a question by Jfr. Taylor, Mr. Richardson said that every application he had ever made to the council for improved appliances had been granted. Tho Bill Unnecessary. slr. Matthew Cable, assistant engineer to the Wellington Tramways, said that fromf what he knew of the Wellington, Auckland, Christchurch, and Dunedin tramways, he saw no necessity for the Bill. The Government certificate for m'otormen was not necessary as far as Wellington was concerned. It would militate against discipline in the service, and would not tend to the same degree of safety to the public. He did not see any necessity for an Appeal Board in Wellington.

The Hon. E. JlTvenzie: Have you ever known clerks to bo taken but of the corporation. office to act as . motormen. Mr. .Cable: At the time I came here there were a number of men trained ,as emergency men. • They were thoroughly trained and examined, but that is done away with. The Hon. It. JFKenzie: Do you think your magnetic brakes are effective under a three-mile limit?

Witness: Not at dead-low speeds. The Hon. E. JfKenzie: Do you consider there is a perfect]}' safe margin at over twenty miles on hour? Mr, Cable: Not .at. present. There mil be. though, very shortly. Mr. Luke: Assuming that the Government got all they aslced for in this Bill, do you think it -would be right for them to call upon.the City Council fo convert all the cross-seated cars into central passage cars?

Mr. Cable: You would practically have to scrap the lot if they did. There were ■10 palace cars, which cost ,£I2OO each. Some .Views of the Men. Robert Faire, raotorman, Wellington, did not think it was necessary that motormen who had been driving for five or six years should bo required to undergo an examination. He thought it was necessary where tho public safety was concerned that some person independent of the City Council should have control over the licensing of the men, and over the cars, etc. He did not believo the Appeal Board proposed would have any effect on discipline. He believed it would he better for both parties. The Bill would undoubtedly have a useful application on every tramway system if it were passed. Walter Whyte, motorman, Wellington, gave as his reason for supporting the Government certificates, firstly, the safety of the public. He would'not say for a moment that the motormen in Wellington that he knew were incompetent, but there was no guarantee that men sometimes would get on who were incompetent. Such a man might be able to drive a car down the. street', but if he got into a , corner, or something went wrong with his hand brake or controller, he would not know what to do. That was tho reason there should bo an examination. Government examination before a . board of examiners would remove any suspicion of favouritism. The proposed appeal board would remove any possibility of favouritism in the matter of promotion. Overcrowding always existed, and at busy hours it could hardly -be helped at present. In reply to. another question, witness said there was favouritism under tho present so-called appeals. W. H. Morton, city engineer, m reply to Mr. O'Shea, said he was very much afraid that the Bill would have the effect of introducing the tramway system into the domain of party politics. It was on account of that fear that he held strong objections to the Bill.. There were undoubtedly some things in connection with the Wellington tramways that could be improved, but taken all round they were exceedingly well rnn and well managed. The council did nothing in the .way of heaping up profits. J. H. Timms, conductor, Wellington, thought every motorman should undergo an examination unless he had been driving for twelve: months.

Sir. O'Shea, city solicitor, in his address to the committee stressed the point that Jlr. Morton, who was described as one of the best engineers south of the line, said he would be unable to carry on tha work of his departments sufficiently if the control of these were in the hands of the Minister. Mr. Morton, who was. a man. of: great judgment and experience, had backed up the statements of all the other managers that the present system is sufficient.