CASE OF INSPECTOR FULLER.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1347, 26 January 1912, Page 5

CASE OF INSPECTOR FULLER.

NOT TO BE TRANSFERRED. CITY COUNCIL DECIDES AGAINST TRAHWAYIEN. SOME PLAIN SPEAKING.

Tho caso of Inspector FulleT, whoso dismissal from tho Wellington Tramway service was demanded by the Tramwaymen's Union some time ago, was before the City Council again last evening, when Councillor Shirtcliffe moved:— "That the resolution passed at' the ordinary meeting of tho Wellington City Council, held on December 19, 1911, be rescinded, viz.:—'That it be referred to the electrical engineer to transfer Inspector Fuller from his position' as inspector to some other position in the tramways service, on. account of the inspector's want of tact.'" . Concerning the Individual. . Speaking to his motion, Councillor Shirtcliffe briefly outlined the circumstances leading up to his resolution from the time when the Tramways Committee received a letter from the Tramways Union asking that Inspector Fuller should be transferred on account of his alleged objectionable methods. The council decided to transfer Fuller, the motion being carried on the casting vote of the Mayor. The speaker then gave notice of tho rescission motion which was before the council that evening. Councillor Shirtcliffe outlined the subsequent negotiations between the council and the union, and described the collapse of the inquiry into charges laid against Inspector Fuller by the union, owing to tho latter body declining to proceed if counsel were allowed to bo present. The council had then, very properly, allowed Inspector Fuller to make his statement in rehutjtal of the charges laid by the union.

I An inspector, Councillor Shirtcliffo continued, must fall foul occasionally of the members of the tramway'statf. It was au unpleasant job, and it was quite conceivable that the very best man as an inspector would at times have a very unpleasant duty to perform, and might give rise to an impression in the minds of those with whom he was dealing that he was pressing 100 hard on them. But, in this case, and taking the data available, he considered that tho worst that could be said about Inspector Fuller was that ho had tried to do his duty. Out of the long list of charges laid by the union, only two deserved to be considered. These were 1 and 2, White's case and Kiernander's case. From the straightforward statement, made by Inspector, Fuller in reference to these cases, it appeared that he could have followed no other course than he did. It would be a -monstrous injustice to Inspector Fuller either to dismiss him or lo injure him by transferring him to some other employment. The responsibility for bringing these cases before the Appeal, Board was not with Inspector Fuller. If anyono was to blame for bringing these cases before the Appeal Board, surely it was the manager of tho. tramways. It was not suggested by anyono that the electrical engineer hail been in fault in punishing Conductors White and Kiernandcr, which led to tho cases coming before the Appeal Board. Ho felt, confident that Mr. Richardson would be very careful in satisfying himself that the merits of the cases reported by Inspector Fuller justified the infliction of some punishment. Mr. Kicfiardson had stated emphatically (hat Inspector Fuller would have done Jess than his duty if he had not reported these cases. In face of this, how was it possible for the council to penalise J.^Pp c I t .°JT, ] ; ,ullcr? ,' To his (Councillor hlnrtclifle s) mind, no reflection was cast upon Inspector Fuller by the decision of the Court, either in White's caso or in Kiernander's case. In While's ease tho decision was simply that there was not'sufficient evidence to prove that an alteration in the waybill had been made. It was not an acquittal of AVhite. It was a case of "Not proven." In Kiernander's case there was a qualified judgment. Kiernandcr was given the benefit of the doubt in regard to flu actual theft of money, but ho was censured, and the speaker thought he was temporarily disrated. These were the principal' cases involved in the long list oi charges brought by the union. The other charge's were more or less trifling, and he was uof altogether surprised that the union had not come forward with an effort to substantiate them. "What of the Service?" "So much for my .view of the case as it affects the individual," continued Councillor Shirtcliffe. "With regard to the effect of the council's motion upon the tramway service, I think that if Die motion stands it will very seriously affect the welfare of the service." He was not himself opposed to the union. The union had a perfect right to negotiate with the council on matters affecting its interests, but he hoped that the day was far distant when any body of men could come to the council and dictate who should or should not be employed in the corporation service. What would become of the discipline of tho service? What would the position of the other inspectors be if the council sacrificed Fuller to such a demand. They would undoubtedly be made to feel that

:ey must not do anything which' would be offensive to the men. It was the clear duty of : the council to support its inspectors, not to weaken their authority. Tru*, the council could not pass over glaring indiscretions or grave errors of judgment, but such charges could not ho jiistiv laid against Inspector Fuller. The" whole case against Fuller was clouded over by a vague charge of "want nf tact." He found it impossible to dissociate White's case from the letter which was subsequently addressed to the council by the union with reference to the. inspector. That letter was tho outcome of the Court's decision in White's case. He hoped that the council would not take a step which would not only perpetrate a serious injustice upon an 'individual, but would be a grave menace to the authority of the tramway management. Councillor .1. Trevor said that the charges brought against Fuller were of the flimsiest nature. Possibly he might have had ,i nicer manner. Unfortunately he was not built that way. He presumed councillors would make up their 'minds. They had perused the evidence, and he would content himself with seconding the motion.

Councillor 0. Frost said that all the parlies had blundered. The union had blundered in attempting to dictate to the council. A mistake bad been made by the Mavor in ever bringing the matter before the council. It should have been settled l:y Iho tramways management. He had a great deal of"sympathy for the men. inspector .Puller was a. tactless man, and the secretary of the union was ever more tactless. It'was time the whole thins was buried and done with. The, evidence, so far, was one-sided—Councillor Puller's. lie did not believe that four or live hundred men would come out ajain.-t a fellow man. The union had Hone about the business in the wrong way. He would like to see Iho whole matter taken out of the hands of the council and referred to the tramway management. A Labour M.P. Councillor A. U. Hindmarsh, M.P., said that, under their agreement the council had surrendered its right to employ whom it. liked. They had to employ unionists. The question was not whether the union had blundered or not; the question was what was to be done in the best interests of the service. The -Mayor had shown considerable backbone in handling the situation, ft might even be said that he was severe. Mr. Wilford, in his evidence, had instanced specific cases of want of tact on the part of Inspector Puller. He had frequently come to his ollice—— _ ' "No-No!" said fcvcrnl voices. Councillor Hindmarsh coptinued that the Major had spoken of Inspector Fu.l- ;

ler "sticking him up" in the street. Evidently, Fuller, had acted in such a way as to convince Mr. Wilford that he was unlit to have control of a large body of men.. Referring still to earlier proceedings, he said that ho had himself stated that Inspector Fuller had spoken to him about certain charges that he was going to bring against men. For instance, he had spoken about a charge of forgery, saying, "I have got a man for forgery," or' words to that effect. "1 suppose," said Councillor Hindmarsh, "that he referred to White's case." The charge against White, he continued, was one of forgery. Fuller, he understood, had been rebuked by the magistrate lor levity (before tho Appeal Board), and, in answer to a question that tho speaker put to him, Fuller had said that the Appeal Board had prejudged the case. Councillor Atkinson: "Look at the newspaper reports. You will see that they did, before any case had been led for tho council."i Councillor Hindmarsh said that, at auyratc, Dr. M'Artkur knew the value of expert evidence, and had evidently made up his mind. He (the speaker) had talked the other day to a conductor of many y~-\rs' service who had told him that he was positively certain that no forgery had been committed, and had supported this opinion with reasons that seemed to be conclusive. The culminating point was that Fuller had accused this man (White) oi forgery. It was all very well to throw tho responsibility on the engineer, but tho charge was worked out by I'uller, and councillors knew very well that the strenuonsness with which he urged his sid' j of the ease would influence the engineer. "The engineer brought tho ca c e" said Councillor Hindmarsh, "but I «av that it was Fuller that made him briii" the case, and that he cannot evade the responsibility. He charged this man with forgery. The union, knowing that one of their members was accused ol forgery, perhaps went a little too tnr. Perhaps they couched their letter in terms that were regrettable. But we can forget all that. The council lms to decide whether it is desirable that Iniller should lw retained in his present position. I maintain that it is not desirable, where a man is m charge oi a large bodv of -men and causes friction, to retain'him." A private employer, said the councillor, would remove a man under such circumstances. As employers —in order to prevent friction and get the best work out of these men-tho council should decline to sjiow weakness now Ingoing back on-the motion it had passed. .We.Should be Beaten, He did not know whether these men would strike, but it appeared that, m Brisbane, they were striking because they could not get permission to wear a badge. Men did not always consider the amount involved in money before they struck. If there was a strike on this occasion the council knew perfectly we that thev coiil 1 not get motormcu to nil tho places vacated. By Act of .Parliament thev must be trained men. All the council could do was to go to the motor; men and snv. "Will you come back:" Then it would be open to '.lie motormon to snv "No, unless all tho conductors are taken" back with »s." "J: there was a strike." said Councillor Hindmarsh, we should bo bea'en." Concluding, he slated that he inte.ided to vote as he had voted last time. Councillor Atkinson congratulate* Councillor Hindmarsh on the tone and temper of his argument, but said that lie dissented from much of this argument, and regretted that sonic of it had been introduced at all. He was more convinced than ever of the propriety of _ tho course t'.\k"n at a previous meeting tj,y « minority of the council. Councillor Hindmarsh iiad suggested that the Mayor had possibly insisted too strongly on the rights of the council. Since the Mayor was not present, the speaker did not: desire to pursue this argument, but he dissented from it. The ground taken by the union wn.s absolutely untenable. It would have been a gross injustice to force a man to face such charges without professional assistance., Even tho onesided iuouiry which had been held had thrown a good deal of light upon the position. The most serious charges, to his mind, -were those dealing with matters six years old. WHien it was known that those matters had been dealt with at the time, and that the officer had received his promotion since, it surely showed that the union had experienced considerably difficulty in assembling its charges. To advance charges of this nature, six years old, was only calculated to damage the case of tho man who brought them forward. Fatal to Efficiency. He complimented Councillor Hindmarsh on tho frankness with which he had stated his case. Councillor Hiiidmarsh had stated that Conductor White's case was the culminating point. At tho previous meeting of the council, speaker after speaker had evaded that point, and had agreed on tho general evidence of want of tact. Councillor Hindmarsh's statement had really brought the council back to the proper starting point for a fair and dispassionate review of the case. In White's case there was not a shadow of blamo to bo cast on Inspector Fuller. White had been accused of forgery—an ugly word. But by whom had the action been decided upon? It was a poor compliment to the city electrical engineer to say that Inspector Fuller made tho engineer take action. Having regard to all the circumstances connected with the reporting of White, would Fuller havo been justified in suppressing the facts? It was not tho function of an inspector to harass the large majority of tho men, but it was clearly his duty to detect wrongdoing on tho part of whoever might !*> defrauding the corporation. Men whose work was above suspicion had nothing to fear from the inspectors. Tho union had preferred charges against Inspector Fuller, but had brought no evidence. He could not see how the council could possibly act without evidence. It would bo fatal (o the discipline of the service, a mortal blow ar. the efficiency of the council's greatest enterprise. They might as well delegate that enterprise to" a private company as attempt to carrv on on under circumstances in which "they would inevitably be placed if they surrendered their authority at the dictation of the union.

"Thc.v have strikes in orivata companies,' pointed out Councillor M'Laren. "I don't say the council should deliberately contemplate such a step," said Councillor Atkinson, "but it is the logical conclusion when councillors indulge in-votc-eatching and the squandering "of the ratepayers' money." Councillor 'Jl'Larcn said that employees had a perfect right to object to any individual with whom they had decided they could not set on, even if their objection carried tliem the length of declining to continue in cniplovment whicli brought them into contact'with that individual. He combated the assertion that the whole I rouble arose from the case of Conductor White, which was, as Councillor Tlindmarsh had stated. the culminating incident in a series of acts by the inspector which in the acgrcgate were held by the union as affording evidence of want of tact. It was not a ground of that Fuller hail secured certain "convictions" nirainst certain men—other inspectors had reported four or five times as many cases as Fuller, and the men had been dealt with. The union's ground of complaint was that Inspector Fuller was wanting in lact, and they were satisfied with the evidence tliev on that point. The Mayor had strongly recommended the transfer of Fuller to another position, and so had the electrical engineer. Reversing a Vote, , Councillor Barber said that he wan placed iu too position of having Uj ro-

verso n voto which ho had given on a previous occasion. On tho ground that Inspector I'uiler had shown u luck of tact, he had voted to transfer that ofliccr, believing that no hardship would bo iullicted on anybody. But tho whole aspect of tho case had now changed, l'ho council was asked to endorse its motion to translor Inspector Fuller in face ol a series of charges which wero not sustained by a single item of evidence. Councillor H\Lareu; Wo have not heard the evidence.

Councillor Barber replied that the council could only act on tho evidence before it. He believed that the tramway servants were a fine body of men, and he would be only too glad if he could conscientiously repeat his previous vote. But the union in attempting to deprive Inspector Fuller of the services of counsel, had asked the council to do too much. Tho aspect was quite different to-night. If he wero asked to vote to transfer inspector Fuller on the ground of lack of tact he would vote as he had volcd before, but to do so now would be to cast an unjust and unfair reflection on Inspector Fuller. A Dissertation on Tact. Councillor M'Kenzie declared that this whole matter had been ventilated owing to a lack of tact on the part of the Tramways Committee, and because tho council as a whole, the Tramways Committee in particular, had not put sufficient reliance in the head of their department. It had not been proved that inspector Fuller was devoid of tact. All that tho council had to go upon were statements by Councillor Hindmarsh and the Mayor. If Inspector Fuller had shown a want of tact in visiting the Mayor it equally showed a lack of tact for a member of the council to attend a private meeting of the Tramways Union. Councillor Hindmarsh: Two blacks don't make a white. Councillor M'Laren.-.Wc shall have to transfer that man! Councillor M'Kenzie declined to name the councillor to whom he had referred. He regretted that this trouble had arisen. It would have been avoided if the committee had referred the matter back to the heads of the department to deal with. Councillor Fitzgerald stated that he was astounded at the views expressed by Councillor Frost. On the Tramways Committee Councillor Frost had voted to remove "this man" to another sphere of usefulness. Now he deprecated what the committee had done. Continuing, Councillor Fitzgerald regretted very much that this matter had been mud? public. Reading from the minutes of the Tramways Committee, Councillor Fitzgerald stated that on December IS, 1911- its meetins; was attended by the Mayor (Mr. Wilford), and Councillors Frost. Fitteraid, Fletcher, Hindmarsh, and ] hhirtcliii'e. A deputation from, the Tramway Cniou waintcd on the committee and asked that Inspector Fuller should be removed from his position as inspector. Afte rdiscussion. it was decided to recommend the council—Councillor Shirtc'.itfe dissenting—that Inspector Fuller lie iisked to tender his resignation, but on other grounds from those stated by the union. . From this. Councillor Fitzgerald claimed, it could lie seen that the committee »ms not influenced in any way by tho expressions used by the tramwaymen. Councillor Godber: You wanted to save vour face.

It might be taken, Councillor Fitzgerald rmuarked, that the men would not be satisfied if the council reversed the decision which it had conie to some time ago. If the motion were reversed, ho hoped that nothing would take place, but thev had no guarantee, of this. He hoped that the views of the tramwaymeii, wjiom they all agreed to be good mon, would be given some consideration. Regrettable Publicity, Councillor Fletcher said that there had been a general expression of regret that this matter had been made public- In this he concurred. The mutter could easily have been settled privately by the committee, and the. tramway managers. It was evident that, the men were up in arms against an officer whom (hey considered, overbearing and lackiug in tact. Councillor Harbor had been profuse in explanations about reversing his vole. As a matter of fact the Mayor had been authorised by the Tramways Committee to severely reprimand Inspector puller for want of iacl. Councillor Barber: "You arc off the track. I said that I would vote as before on the ground of want of tact." Councillor Fletcher said that there were inspectors employed on the tramways who had brought many more cases than Inspector Fuller and yet had not aroused any ill-feeling on the part of the men. for the sake of the tramway undertaking the council .would, be <|uite justified. in adhering to its resolution to transfer Inspector Fuller. Councillor Fletcher declared that n verbal statement niado by Mr. Richardson, when the council was iu committee, absolutely, contradicted the statement in, his report that the ticketinspecting stall' might as well bo eliminated if inspector Fuller were removed. How was the council or tho committee to be guided if a responsible officer made contradictory statements of this nature? It had to be recognised that the service was in turmoil. In transferring'this man from a position which he was absolutely unqualified to fill the council would do him no injustice and it was necessary, for tho good of the service, that he should be transferred. Councillor Cameron opined that one of tho principal factors leading to the present trouble was the legislation of this country. It was curious that the trouble had arisen eoineidently with the coming into effect of the legislation which entailed the licensing of motormen. They had been told that this matter should not have been made public, and yet the chairman of the Tramways Committee had come to the council with a recommendation on the subject.. Personally he thought ..that the whole thing should have been left to Mr. Richardson. Before Hie motion was put, the ActingMayor slated that he had not come into this matter until it had been laid before tho council. THE DIVISION LIST. Councillor Shirtcliffc, having briefly replied, tho motion was put to the vote, and, upon a division, was carried by 10 votes to i. Following is the division list: — Ayes i Councillors Smith (ActingMayor), Atkinson, Barber, Cameron, Cohen, Frost, Godber, M'Kenzic, Shirtcliffc, Trcvor-10. Noes: Councillors Fletcher, Fitzgerald, Hindmarsh, M'Larcn—4.