AGRIMONY!

Evening Star, Issue 23680, 13 September 1940, Page 10

AGRIMONY!

THE WATERSIDE WORK CONTRACT WELLINGTON'S PROTEST [Per United Press Association.] AUCKLAND, September 12. Replying to the Wellington waterside workers’ resolution protesting against the imposition of the “ socalled ” co-operative contract system. Mr R. E. Price said yesterday : “ The Waterfront Control Commission has been negotiating a separate agreement with the Wellington Harbour Board to cover those men employed by it on the wharf to work with the men on the ship.” The difficulties which delayed the completion of this contract have been, overcome, and it is expected that the contract will be completed before the end of this month. “ Regarding union complaints about a lack of knowledge of the contract,” Mr 1 rice added, “ a complete copy was posted to the executive last week in time for the stop-work meeting at which the protest was made yesterday.” BASIS OF PROTEST PRINCIPALS SHOULD HAVE NEGOTIATED CONTRACT WELLINGTON, September 12. Mr T. N. Warren, on behalf of the Wellington branch of the New Zealand Waterside Workers’ Federation, made the following statement in reply : “ The Wellington branch was in receipt of and gave full discussion to the contents of the copy of the contract arrived at by the commission with the employers, and decided that as a party to the contract they should have been consulted before its acceptance. The negotiating of a separate contract with the Wellington Harbour Board comes under the same stricture. The principals in the contract are the only ones who should negotiate its terms. The union claims that if a contract must be entered into it, as a party to the contract, is the only one as a legallyconstituted corporate body which has

the right to its acceptance or otherwise. and does not agree with the arbitrary acceptance of conditions and payment arrived at by the commission. As pioneers of the co-operative labour movement in New Zealand, the union feels that the Minister of Labour (Mr Webb) and Mr J. O’Brien, M.P., would fully understand and appreciate its protest.” Mr Warren is the Harbour Board employees’ representative on the Board of Control. COMMISSIONER'S ACID REJOINDER A further statement on the motion moved by Mr Warren and carried at the stop-work meeting of members of the Wellington branch of the New Zealand Waterside Workers’ Federation yesterday was made by the chairman of the Waterfront Control Commission (Mr R E. Price) to-night. “ The full text of the resolution moved by Mr Warren was placed before me to-day,” Mr Price said, “ and 1 note it expresses a complaint because the contract system is operating, while at the same time complaining because it does not apply to all the waterside workers. Surely this is inconsistency of the highest order. “The resolution goes on to complain that nothing is known of the'terms of the contract, and the mover (Mr Warren) emphasises this in speaking to the motion. Yet he concludes by foretelling the ultimate effect of a contract lie”claims to know nothing about. Apparently mental acrobatics are not enough for Mr Warren, for be lias coupled with them a disregard for fact. In bis answer to my reply bo admits tliat the terms of the contract were fully discussed at the stop-work meeting’at which the resolution was passed. A "person so careless of accuracy and unbalanced of judgment deserves no further consideration, but for his own good he should accept-advice and not again attempt it.”