A Freezing Dispute.

Hokitika Guardian, 1 November 1921, Page 3

A Freezing Dispute.

| |„v TEUCO IiAVII -veil I* mess association] I WELLINGTON, Oet. 31. ! i A further point submitted by Mr f sill before the freezing dispute at tile I Arbitration Court was that the Court' ! had no jurisdiction to make tm award for llie Auckland district, as no industrial dispute within the meaning of.the. Act was before the Court. Me said the applicants were the Auckland Farmers’ Freezing Co. A letter. lie said. purporting to create a dispute,

was sent from the North and South Island Freezing Companies Assoctatioi , t<> the general secretary of the Not Zealand Freezing Workers, and Related Trades Employees’ Assoc,a , O.u As the North and South Tslaiul Freezing Companies’ Assoc.atmii was an unregistered body, it ,0 " < " le -i dispute, and the I'uezing Workers'’ Assoeiatjon similarly hail no power to create a dispute, though it was a, registered body, for two reifiondent union*. After a lengthy argument #te Uouit U Upon resuming, Mr Jnslu-e Frazer said that. Mr Justice Sim ItAd laid it down that the Court hud no l»nsd,ctfon to hear an application for award unless at the time the appluation was made a dispute was in exist cnee within the meaning of the Act. The Court was satisfied that- the fieezi„c companies themselves, as imlivnlfuds had not taken part-in the negotiations’ The North and South Island Freezing Companies’ Association not being registered, was incapable of creating, or of being a party to a dispute. Therefore, in September a dispute was created between an unregistered and a registered body. 'The Court could not recognise such a dispute.. Regarding the question as to whether the Association was acting as the agent for various freezing eoinpan jes. on their authority, the Court held that the letters hardly bore out that construction. He was of opinion that there was no jurisdiction to deal with tlie ease, because a dispute had nutbeen shown to exist between the companies and the unions. The Court expressed its regret, that the proceedings should he held up on account of a technicality, because the time for commencing the season was nearly due. He hoped the difficulties would he overcome, and suggested that a conference be held and an endeavour made to arrive <lt a settlement.

After a further adjournment, and nnoftier retirement, the Court held I hat a dispute was in existence in September.

The President, said they were quite agi-i •{•<! that the Association must lie treated as Outside jurisdiction of the Court, hut in view Of the fact that there was evidence of a dispute between the parties, there was jurisdiction, aftd til hearing of the application could ho priiot'i-dod with. The Court will resume to-morrow.