DANGERS OF SHUNTING.

Shannon News, 18 August 1925, Page 4

DANGERS OF SHUNTING.

HARASSING METHODS ALLEGED. CORONER ASKS FOR PL BUG ENQUIRY. The inquest WU\ place at Paimerston on Wednesday into the death of Thomas Cariuieh Sol, a shunter who 1 was fatally injured l>y a tail rope at--inched to sonie waggons gciung entangled in the [.oiiits and crushing hini against the trucks. Ernest Lepper, a brakesman work iug with deceased, described tiuw trie accident happened. To the Coroner, witness said deceased was experienced but not capable. If he had, had moje experience lie would have : ; een that the points were likely to l'uid the rope. Witness was a porter as well us brakesman and had had the years in Hie Palmerslon North yard. He was learn itig to become a shunter, hut there was nobody to teach iliin. Jle would be quite willing !o go to classes in shunting. There were, examinations in ticket 'jmnching, but a man could apparently become second simmer without any experience at' all. There were two foremen in the yard, but neither was a competent shunter, they not having ; een shunters themselves. These loremen were nut- capable of instructing shunters. Does the incompetency of those foremen make the work jii the yard worse?—lt makes it twice as ham.

Have you had experience under competent foremen—Yes, we have one litis week. What is the difference in working conditions?—The difference between a picnic and a riot. The work is done quicker and with less danger. HARASSING METHODS. If deceased was left alone to do his work he would have done it alright?—Yes. Was deceased excitable?—Yes, very. Was Jte harassed by the foremen at all?—Yes, he was, and then he would work regardless of risk. An accident under these foremen was not unexpecied in the yard?--That is so. A few days before one foreman, De Rosa, was told to leave deceased alone or he would be killed.--Yes, he was. The Coroner; Tilts particular foreman had harassed deceased?—Yes. What attitude did the foreman adopt?—He was like a dog training a cat. Do these two foremen insist on shunters taking unnecessary risks?— They do. ' Are men threatened with dismissal if they do not do work full of risks?— Yes. A man was threatened because he would not get through a train going at 20 miles an hour. This operation meant jumping between the moving carriages. For the last two and a-half years the shunters have been trying to get a public enquiry into shunting conditions in the local yards, but, would not give evidence behind closed 'doors. To the Coroner, witness stated that the method adopted by the foremen to deceased applied to. other shunters as. well. They were continually 'bully ragging' and were not fit to control men. What treatment do you expect to get after the evidence you have given to-day?—l don't know. 1 am ready to put up with the consequences in or lor ihat the truth may be told. Why has an inquiry "into the shunting conditions been neglected?—! can give no reason at all. To Mr Ongley: The whole of the men of the Palmerstbn North yards endorsed his 'Opinion about the actions of the foremen. He was not singular in his complaints. There had been no refusal to work under the foremen, but complaints had been made to' the stationmaster without result.

Evidence was given that considerable delay look place after the accident in obtaining medical aid and getting a stretcher to tit the ambulance. During this time the injured man lay in the ticket lobby, and the medical evidence, was that had the bleeding been immediately stopped he would have had a better chance of recovery. W. W. Roberts, a shunter, who was operating the points, said he had been a shunter for two months only, and since the accident bad asked to be transferred to : a porter's position as he did not consider the yard safe to work in. He objected, as well, ;o the whole atmosphere of the yard. There was a distinct undercurrent of .feeling against the foremen from one end of the yard to the other. He had not that conlidence in those two men that, should be necessary, and he had found thorn more of a hindrance than a help. The first tliLugon going on duty, one would be met with the query, "'Have you had a row With So-and-So?" and on going off the question was "How have you got on to-day?" That was no atmosphere for proper work. The coaching foreman denied that there was delay in sending for tha doctor. ENGINE DRIVER'S WARNING. M. J. Firth, engine driver, stated lie was in charge of the engine shunting at the time of the accident. He did not consider Carmichael a capable shunter, but he appeared to do his work better when there was no foreman on. It appeared to him that deceased' was harassed too much by de Rosa and witness warned the foreman to leave deceased alone, ue Rosa followed Carmichael around all day, and on several occasions he had to stop the engine to avoid an accident. When de Rosa was present, Carmichael. became excited and didn't seem to know what he was doing. It wa.s witness who suggested a porter accompanying deceased to the hospital, but Foreman Robertson replied that there was no need- for anyone to go as there was no Departmental property going away with the ambulance. PINPRICKING DENIED. Joseph de Rosa, goods foreman, called by Mr Voltz, stated that the shunters in the yard came under his jurisdiction. In the course of hte duties he had found it necessary to keep in. direct contact with the men. and if he didn't speak, it would

mean that they would just please themselves in what they did. He had to walk round the yard and see that things were going on properly, hut he never asked shunters to take unnecessary risks. The engine driver had' asked him why he didn't keep out of the road, remarking further that every time witness appeared, Carmichaei got excited. Deceased was a very conscientious worker. Witness had been in charge for the last S| years, and had been a shunter for y years. As a guard, lie had also had' to do shunting. He had had occasion to take Lepper to task and thought that perhaps his attitude to him was a result of that. Mr Ongley: You think Lepper had an axe to grind here this morning? Can you find me one man in the yard who will say you u:e a competent shunter? Witness: If they have any complaint they can make it to the proper quarters, but they seem to resent jri'v interfering in their routine. iYIr Ongley: Has Driver Firth an axe to grind?—He has his opinion 1 suppose, and is entitled to it. This concluded the evidence. CORONER'S VERDICT. The Coroner returned a verdict ofaccidental death and stated that he did not propose to comment at length upon the evidence, except to say that in view of the evidence given by Lepper and corroborated by other witnesses whose sincerity and truthfulness he had no reason to doubt, it was not to be wondered at that lhere was a state of unrest existing among the men of the railway service. The number of accidents that had happened to shunters in various parts of lite Dominion was noit entirely due to the fault of the men, but indicated that there was something radically wrong wit.li the system. Whether it was due to the incompetency of the shunters themselves or the foremen in charge, he was not prepared to say as it was a matter entirely for the Department. The evidence showed that they lacked training and that incompetent shunters were engaged in extremely dangerous work. He felt that the 1 relations existing between the shunters and two of the foremen were not conducive to the welfare of the men. He was strongly of the opinion that in the interests of the Railway Department, and the men of the service, a public inquiry should be instituted into the work oi shunters, more particularly with reference to the working of the Palmerston Norih yards. The delay in telephoning ior the doctor was regrettable, and Uie lack of first aid knowledge on the part 6f the railway staff was deplorable. He thought the intentions of Foreman Robertson were of the best, fruit he considered he showed a little lack of sympathetic consideration ior the injured man. The stretchers too, should be >oif such a uniform pattern that they would fit the ambulance as well as the railway vans.