AN AUCKLAND STRIKE

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 154, 25 March 1920, Page 5

AN AUCKLAND STRIKE

UNIONS SUED FOR. PENALTIES. By Telegraph—Press. Association Auckland, March_ 24. ■ Several cases camo before Mr. Wilson, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court this morning, in which'the Inspector of .Awards sought to recover penalties of .£2OO in each ease from three unions and ■three secretaries in connection »-;th I lie recent strike in the iron trade. • The claim in each case was to.recover ,£2OO as a penalty for an offence under section C of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration .Act, 1908, viz., "that the defendant union during September, 1919, al Auckland, did incite or instigate certain workers of (lie said union employed by Hie United Repairing Company Limited and certain workers of Clare and Warner to become parties to an unlawful strike." Similar .penalties were asked for against . the Auckland District Boilermakers, Ironship Workers and Bridge Builders' Union of Workers, also against Adam Hood Phillips, secretary to the said union, and A. IL'Phillips, fecreiary to the Auckland lion and Brass Moulders' Union, and R. F. Barter, secretary to the Auckland Branch of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, likewise against the Auckland' Branch of the Amalgamated.Soc'ety of Engineers. Mr. Mays said he was compelled to ask for an adjournment of all cases, on (he ground that the inspector, whose presence was essential, was at present at Waihi. -

Mr. Skelton, who represented tho three unions and secretaries;, said he must strongly oppose any adjournment being granted. There was a- great deal of unrest amongst .the members' of all three unions, and therefore it was cssontial that tin? cases should be decided as soon as possible. The real crux of the case ivas whether employers under an award cnitld compel employees to work overtime on any day whereon the men had already put in eight hours.- That point required settling first, for if they could not bo «» comnelled then there had not been any strike.

Mr. Wilson suggested that a case should ha stated for the Arbitration Court to b»"° n ruling. Mr. Rkelton said they must first havo His Worship's ruling, as tile cases had Wn laid before him; If it was ndverso to the unions th°n they could appeal to tli" Arbitration Court.

After further discussion ■an adjournment was granted. *