DEFIANT TRAMWAYMEN

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 710, 9 July 1929, Page 1

DEFIANT TRAMWAYMEN

Trouble with Transport Board

MR. MORTON STRONGLY ATTACKED

STILL defying the Transport Board, the Tramways and Bus Employees’ Union refused this morning to expunge a certain resolution from its books and to conform with the demands of the board. The union objected to “interference in its domestic affairs,” stating that the resolution in question was in accordance with law. ‘ During an animated discussion in which there was talk of “rampant discontent” in the service, Mr. M. J. Coyle strongly attacked Mr. F. S. Morton, a fellow member of the board, about “wild and unreliable statements.”

The trouble arose in the first inktance over the following resolution, mised last month by the union: 1 Th ia meeting of the union views n-ith strong disapproval and apprehension the action of members in lending their assistance to the management in cases taken up by the union on behalf of its members, and especially in the case of six members, namely, Messrs. C Walker, F. Pace, J. Chadderton, H Ward and permanent-way repairers J. Miller and E. Bartlett, who appeared at the court to act as witnesses for the management and against the union in Massick’s appeal case, recently taken before the Tramways Appeal Board as the result of a resolution of a general meeting of the union. The Transport Board met this by the following decision: The board calls upon the union to expunge the resolution in question from its minutes and pass a resolution to the effect that every member of the union is free to give such evidence as his conscience dictates in connection with proceedings in the courts, before the Appeal Board or before the board’s officers in relation to the board’s employees. The union met on June 30 and lesolved: — That this mass meeting of the Auckland Tramways and Municipal Omnibus Employees’ Union of Workers (1) endorses the action of the executive of the union at its meeting with the Transport Board; (2) that we resent the action of the Transport Board in interfering with the domestic affairs of this union; (3) that we reiterate, that the resolution, the subject of the discussion between this union and the Transport Board, is in accordance with law and within the scope of our authority, dealing as it does with a past transaction. ARBITRATION BEFORE BREAK This morning the chairman, Mr. J. A. C. Allum moved to the effect that in view of the negotiations with the union the board could not continue dealing with the union, but before relations were definitely broken off arbitration should be resorted to. In proposing his motion Mr. Allum said the points at issue had a very serious effect on the conduct of the board’s affairs. Its duty was to see that the public had the best possible service under all conditions, and, in order to give those services, t he management was called upon to hold many inquiries into complaints. Unless there was absolute freedom of notion it would be impossible for the board to conduct its operations in a proper and just manner. The question had arisen in regard to the men's tffairs and it appeared that no agreement existed between the board and the union. Therefore, it seemed to him that in regard to tiie question of having any further dealings with the union, every endeavour should be made to settle all differences before a break t ag decided upon. "It seems that unwi3e counsels have put the men in this unfortunate position,’’ Mr. Allum said. ‘’They should be sufficiently wise in their judgment to submit to the court, by whose authority all should be bound. It Is the board's duty to see that nothing shall be done which will prevent justice to the men and jeopardise the working of the board's authority.” Mr. E. H. Potter moved the amendment that the letter be received and that no further action be taken. At the present time there was no agreement between the men and the board. The union’s resolution had to do with matters about which there was a difference of opinion and considerable feeling existed. “We should allow bygones to be bygones, because we are considering a new agreement,” Mr. rotter suggested. “It is not in the best interests of the men or of ourselves to bring the matter before the “•rt" He believed negotiations should be continued and all feeling should be dropped. DISCONTENT RAMPANT .Mr P. S. Morton, who seconded, felt *h*t Mr. Allum’s motion was out of "her, in view of the fact that there *as a resolution on the union’s books *hich had for its object the formuia°a of a new agreement between the board and itself. It would be un,!s® * or board to move as the ihairman proposed. The tramwaymen ere uneasy at the present time. * ws union meetings had been held and hasty action by the board might “ n ng about conditions detrimental to “e travelling public. ! know discontent is rampant 'broughout the service,” Mr. Morton eclared. “I have investigated and know. The only part of the chairaus motion which should be ■ opted is that proposiug an impartial miry. Have we the right to deand that the union should expunge * ®inute? I have heard threats made in this ~? ni that the men are liable to imprisonment—” Y M - J. Coyle: Whom by? Morton: The board’s solicitor, of' u’ Mr. Stanton did nothing * sort. Neither he nor I have u that. My solicitor only quoted Clause ont of the Act. tiie r Morton: It was pointed out to . P*® ll that they were liable to inT? 1 dismissal. Is not that a threat? 0 Mr. Coyle the solicitor said that

a magistrate would certainly condemn any refusal of union members to give evidence against fellow unionists. He would regard it as an invasion of a litigant’s rights. What action he would take must depend on facts. The union’s resolution said that any member giving evidence against it would incur its strong disapproval. He did so at his own peril. MR. MORTON ATTACKED “Personally I have never taken Mr. Morton seriously," said Mr. Coyle in a general attack on that member’s attitude to the board. “He very often makes statements which are not borne out by facts. Today he makes it out that there is serious discontent in the service. That is not true. “He made certain promises some time ago and he has not carried ghem out. (The reference was to Mr. Morton's overdue resignation). I suppose his wild statements will continue as long as he is a member of the board.” Mr. Morton: Leave Mr. Morton alone. Continuing, Mr. Coyle stated Mr. Morton had not been helpful -to the board. Mr. Morton: You do not compreheud, that is all. “The time has gone when members should take up this undignified attitude," Mr. Coyle proceeded. “It is time Mr. Morton turned round. Meeting after meeting we are up against this same attitude —breaking down instead of assisting.” Mr. Coyle was sorry if the men had been led astray by bad leaders. The board had been told that mass meetings had been got together. How many men attended? Mr. Morton: They have been held all right. Mr. Coyle: Y'ou know all about that, Mr. Morton. When Mr. Morton said that over a thousand men had attended, Mr. Coyle told him he was very glib with his tongue. Mr. Potter: That is a personality. Mr. Allum: I was about to stop Mr. Coyle. Mr. G. G. Ashley: Mr. Coyle should not be upset. We know Mr. Morton has a very vivid Imagination, and I think that is understood by us all and the general public. WRONG TO BREAK OFF Discussion returned to the point when Mr. A. J. Entrican gave the opinion that the trouble between board and union was nothing more than a deadlock. It would be wrong to break off all relations with the men. The member suggested Mr. Allum’s motion should be amended to read as follows: — That the board feels thajt in view of the attitude of the union as expressed in its recent resolutions and correspondence a deadlock has arisen, and in order to exhaust all possible methods of securing an amiable settlement of the points at issue, the board suggests that the union join w-itli it in submitting the whole matter to the acting president of the Arbitration Court, Mr. Justice Blair, both parties agreeing that they will abide by and carry out his decision in all respects. Should Mr. Justice Blaii be unable to act, then the matter he submitted to someone nominated by him. Mr. Allum suggested that the amendment was merely a softer way of expressing the idea behind his own motion. Mr. Potter's amendment was rejected and Mr. Entrican’s carried. “I am going to say now that we have a very tine body of officers, said Mr. Allum, “but it cannot be denied that there are some among them who do not measure up to the requirements of reasonable men. The boara fully realises that it will be something more than deplorable if wise counsels do not prevail.”