RAILWAY APPEAL BOARD.

Taihape Daily Times, 19 May 1919, Page 4

RAILWAY APPEAL BOARD.

ACTION NOT UNDERSTOOD. STATEMENT BY ME MACK. WELLINGTON, May 17. Quite a stir has been caused in railway circles at the announcement that Mr Hemes, in exercising his powersof veto, had reversed the 'decision of the Railway Appeal Board in the case of Longton. Mr J. Mack, secretary of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants, Avho represented Longton before the Appeal Board, to-day made a statement in connection with the position which has arisen. "So far as I am concerned," stated Mr Mack. "I have received no official advice in the matter, and I am Inclined to believe that- there is some misapprehension connected with it, because I do not believe that the Minister would exercise his power of veto where the dethe Railway Appeal Board, was unanimous. If he has done so,v then the usefulness of the Board is abosolutely destroyed, and it will be necessary for organisations of railway men to take some definite steps to have the Minister's power of veto removed. "If the Department holds- any information which was not placed before the Board, then clearly it is the fault of the Department for not placing it that should go before the Board and putting the same before the Minister, the Department would be resorting to what could only be termed back-door methods. I hesitate to believe that the Department would do this, or that the Minister would accept it. If the Minister 1 did so. then the Appeal Board would be nothing more or less than a delusion and a snare. I could understand the Minister exercising his veto if there had been a majority decision only, but not in the case referred to, where the decision was unanimous."

This afternoon .Longton received the following official notification from the General Manager: "By direction of the Minister for Railways, I forward a copy of the finding of the North Island Railway Board of Appeal, in the matter of your appeal -against your having been .superseded on D 3 for 1918. After fully reviewing your case, the Minister regrets that, having regard to your insubordinate conduct, he is unable, in the interests of discipline, to confirm the finding of the Board, and your appeal has accordingly been disallowed." The Board's findings is in these terms: ,"In this case, while we are satisfied that on the occasions charged, the appellant's attitude towards bis superior officers was insubordinate, we think the circumstances disclosed that to deprive him of promotion would be to punish him excessively, especially as it is generally admitted that in all other respects he was a competent and efficient officer. We therefore think that his appeal should be allowed.''

The chairman of the oard was Mr L. G. Hewitt, S.M.