RAILWAY APPEALS

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2916, 31 October 1916, Page 9

RAILWAY APPEALS

NORTH ISLAND BOARD'S SITTINGS

YESTERDAY'S BUSINESS

Tho North Island Railway Appeal Board, which has beon sitting in Wellington since Friday last, continued its deliberations yesterday. Mr. W. R. Haseldon, S.M., presided, and his associates wore Mr. A. W. Hutehins (First Division) and Mr. D. Dwyer (Second Division). Mr. J. Mao Donald represented the Department, while Mr. Stanley, of Palmerston North, appeared for the appellants. The questions which.tho Court had to decide were appeals made by two technical clerks in the Loco. Engineer's office at Petone, Leslie Gordon- Armstrong and Norman Edward White, wlio complained- that they had been superseded by another technical clerk, Albert George Steffensen. In. opening the case Mr. Mac Donald said that Armstrong joined the service in 1901, and White in 1902. Both men had risen satisfactorily, and received the maximum salary—£22o—in Grado 9. No fault had been found with them, and they both had perfectly clean records. If suitable vacanoies occurred, they would receive every consideration, but further than being good clerks they had no special qualifications. It was different in Steffensen's case. In 1901 ho joined tho service a« apprentice, at tho rate of Is. per day. He was studious, and three years later passed the Junior Civil Service examination, with the 'highest marks for drawing. He continued his studies, and by degrees became expert, which made his services more valuable. Accordingly ho was granted an increase of £10 per year, and was automatically promoted to Grade 8.

It' was submitted by Mr. Stanley that Steffensen's promotion was mado under tho pretence that a speciallyqualified man was required. He further submitted that the woTk could be douo by any competent clerk. ' Evidence was given 'on' behalf of the Department by Sydney Percy Edwards, loco, engineer at Petone, and Daniel D. Weir, acting chief clerk in tho loco, engineer's office. The evidence of these two witnesses was practically the. same, with the exception-that Mr. Weir explained the duties performed by Armstrong and White, and he also stated that he considered their present remuneration was adequate for tho work performed by tho appellants. In regard to Steffensen, however, it was his duty to deal with now work in tho absence of the loco, engineer, Steffensen's work was well worth the next grade, as 50 per cent, of his work was of a- technical nature. In Mr. Weir's opinion, Armstrong and White could not perform tho technical -Work, performed by Stoffenson. On tho othor hand the latter could not do the work of the appellants, because he did not possess the clerical knowledge'.

In answer to Mr. Stanley, Mr. Weir said that he would- not like to state what pnrt of a technical clerk's work passed through the hands of a record clerk such as Armstrong and White were. x . Norman Edward White said that lie bad been in the service for about 15 years. He spent about ifivo years' in the Newmarket loco, engineer's office before he -was transferred to Petone. When' ho was at Newmarket no technical clerk was appointed, and ho did practically all the work. . As soon as ho left, however, 'one Was appointed. Witness considered 1 that ho could do the technical clerk's work at Petone because he had moro cxperieneo than any other clerk in his grade in loco. work. He had not received any notification that he had not been recommended for promotion. When he founcl that he had been superseded oh D 3 list lie wrote to the General Manager asking the reasons why, and had received a reply to tho effect that a. technical' clerk had been appointed for- special duties which, it was stated, -witness could not perform.

. Leslie Gordon Armstrong,, tho other appollant, said that he considered that he had a good general .knowledge of loco, engineer's- work. He had! had every opportunity of observing the iwork done by technical clerks, and would have no hesitation in undertaking* tho duties. Witness gave specific instances in which ho' had been doing relieving work in tho grade above him. John Roberts Robertson, Bth grade clerk in the loco, engineer's office, Petone, and Edward Wilson Laws, a clerk in tho samo grade, gave evidence to tho effect that technical clork's work was not beyond the range of an Bth grade clerk. Albert George Stcffcnsen gavo evidence of -what lie considered to be a technical clerk's duties.

Mr. Stanley, in addressing the Court, said that he wished to point out that ho did not know of another case in ■which promotion had not boon referred to the district officer. This had not been done in Steffen3en's case, and although he had received the appointment he had not reoeived bis salary, for the position. Mr. Stanley also pointed put that it seemed strange that technical clerks wero only known in tbo North Island and not in the South. He submitted that on the Department's own cvidenco there was little work of a technical nature required for the position. In reply, Mr. Mac-Donald dealt with tbo alleged irregularity of tho promotion in this caso, and said that whon 15,000 men had to bo considered' a slip might occur, and the Department could not help that sort of thing happening occasionally. Further ho stated that' the Department had ample opportunity of finding out the qualifications of .men who appliod for positions without referring to district officers. At 5.15 p.m. the Court rose till 10.30 a.m. to-day, when reserved judgments will be givon and another appeal heard.