IF TROUBLE ARISES

Evening Post, Volume CXXVIII, Issue 1, 1 July 1939, Page 10

IF TROUBLE ARISES

*EMPM>YERS' FAULT"

MR. PARLANE'S STATEMENT

•..-.. .to j.a. statement made today in his >; capacity as president of the New Zea- . |arid "Drivers' Federation, Mr. Parlane said/that if through the attitude adopted by the employers yesterday trouble y arose the employers would be respon- -; sible. He outlined what had led to the meeting. ' "On receipt of word that there was trouble in Auckland and on receiving : the details^" said Mr. Parlane, "I got in touch with Mr. T. O. Bishop^ secre- . tary of the New Zealand Employers' . federation, with the object of seeing whether the points of difference could be referred to a disputes committee. '■*■■■ He( was favourable to this course, and :-I: communicated with the officials of the Auckland Union accordingly. The secretary and assistant secretary of the ■•: Auckland Union came to Wellington .with the object of having the matters v in dispute dealt with by a disputes committee, as provided for in the Mgtor '■'■'■■'and' Horse Drivers' Award. We met the employers yesterday morning, but we found it was not a committee meeting, - but merely a conference with the employers. ; '"After hearing our arguments, the said that if there were any matters which in their opinion should be-referred to a disputes committee, they would agree to that course being followed. After discussing the matter until ■. the luncheon adjournment, we retired and met them again in the • afternoon at 3.30. The employers then gave us their decision, which, was a refusal to refer the matters in dispute, to a disputes committee provided for in ; the-award. MATTERS IN DISPUTE. ;"The principal matters in dispute were: (1) The interpretation of the country work -clause, and (2) a position that had arisen through a driver .leaving, his employer after he had put ihV a considerable^ number of» weeks of 52 hours!' which were not equalised by a •corresponding- number of weeks of 36 hours. The award in this respect provides that drivers employed in all sea- ; sonal trades, such as fat-lamb, grain, wool, dairy-produce carting, etc., may be worked 52 hours a week during the currency of the particular season, and 36 hours a week for an equal period • in the remainder of the year. There :is a proviso that a driver whose hours ,; of .work under this clause have ex- • ceeded 88 fortnightly, if he is discharged . (except for serious miscon- ■ duct) before he has completed an equivalent number of fortnights of a - .sufficient number of reduced hours to -equalise his time, shall be entitled to be.paid at overtime rates for each fort- . liight not thus equalised in which bis Hours have exceeded 88. There is no ; provision in the award to meet the caseof a worker leaving voluntarily. In the particular case under review the driver left voluntarily after he had worked a considerable period of the longer weeks, and he really should have received overtime amounting to approximately £11. The employer, however, fefused to pay this, taking advantage of the omission in the award to meet the case of a driver leaving on his own accord.

.'The award provides for a disputes committee, the clause reading as follows:—'The .essence of this award being that tha work of the employer

shall not on any account whatsoever be impeded, but shall always proceed as if no dispute had arisen, it is pro-j vided that if any dispute or difference shall arise between the parties bound by this award, or any of them, as to any matter whatsoever arising out of or connected therewith, every such dispute or difference shall be referred to a committee to be composed of two representatives of each side together with an independent chairman, to be mutually agreed upon, or, in default of agreement, to be appointed by the Conciliation Commissioner for the district. Either side shall have the right of appeal to the Court against a decision of any such committee upon giving the other side written notice of such appeal within fourteen days after such decision has been made known to the party desirous of appealing.' EMPLOYERS' ATTITUDE. "Although," continued Mr. Parlane, "the employers refused to have this particular matter referred ""to a disputes committee, they said that should any similar matter arise in the future they would agree to it going to a disputes committee. It seems hard to understand the employers' attitude in this connection. Surely, if a similar case to the.one quoted would be a proper matter to refer to a disputes committee, why is not this particular case a proper one to refer to a disputes committee? "The third matter which was causing trouble and dissatisfaction was the delay by the Court of Arbitration in hearing two cases which had been submitted to it on appeal. In respect to these two cases the employers joined with the representatives of the union in* a request to the Minister of Labour that he do all he could to expedite the hearing of the cases. The Minister promised to do this, and I have no doubt that this particular matter will be attended to at the earliest possible moment.

"However, the position with regard to the other matters is far from satisfactory, and, if trouble results, the employers, by their refusal to have the matters dealt with by a .disputes committee, must shoulder the responsibility."