Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CAN DISPUTE BE WITHDRAWN?

INTERESTING ARBITRATION POINT [Pe* United Psess Association.! WELLINGTON, September 29. The contention that arbitration was compulsory once a dispute had been referred to the court was made in the' Arbitration Court to-day by the employers when the workers sought to withdraw the bakers and pastrycooks’ dispute from the court. The employers argued that the dispute could not be. withdrawn under the law _ as it now; stood, an alternative submission being that if that were possible tho law; should be amended. . . The dispute was before three sittings of the Conciliation Council, and both parties waited separately on the Minister of Labour (Mr Armstrong) and the Minister of Industries and Commerce (Mr Sullivan). The Minister of Industries and Commerce also attended a conference of both parties. The Conciliation Council having failed to reach a settlement, the dispute came before the court to-day. The daily hours of work on which there had been a misunderstanding were also discussed. Mr E. J. Watson, secretary of the New Zealand Federated Bakers’ Association of Workers, who asked leave ta withdraw the case, said that cases had been withdrawn from the court by both parties, and one had been withdrawn in Auckland recently. Section 80 of the Act gave the court unlimited power and, consequently, he contended that the court had power to grant an application for withdrawal. Mr T. 0. Bishop, secretary of th» New Zealand Employers’ Federation, who appeared for tho master bakers, opposed the withdrawal, and argued that when claims were referred to the court they were before tho court, and neither party had power to withdraw from arbitration, which was compulsory. If the court did not uphold this contention, he suggested that the court .should state a ease for the opinion of the Court of Appeal, no that the matter could be finally decided. The court adjourned till to-morrow morning to allow the employers to decide whether the hours questions onl* should be considered by the court. Mr Justice Pago said that if the employers were unable to come to that decision the court would have to consider Mr Watson’s application for withdrawal, which was a legal question not without difficulties, and the court would not be able to give a decision immediately.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19360930.2.137

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Evening Star, Issue 22457, 30 September 1936, Page 13

Word count
Tapeke kupu
374

CAN DISPUTE BE WITHDRAWN? Evening Star, Issue 22457, 30 September 1936, Page 13

CAN DISPUTE BE WITHDRAWN? Evening Star, Issue 22457, 30 September 1936, Page 13

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert