The Daily News FRIDAY, JUNE 21. POST AND TELEGRAPH DEPARTMENT APPEAL BOARD.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 60, 21 June 1907, Page 2

The Daily News FRIDAY, JUNE 21. POST AND TELEGRAPH DEPARTMENT APPEAL BOARD.

Complaints as to the treatment of olli- ] cors of tlie Postal and sor- ' vice in New Zealand— under which also ' is ine.uileci Government Savings liank and Money-order offices—have been so ', general that the whole service is getting ' many unite undeserved aspersions east on it, even in Australia. Tiie many dis- , advantages under which tile civil servant whose lite is spent in the employ 01 the Postal or Telegraph Departments labors have often been spoken of and written about, but there is nothing, in the administration of tin- Department that is such an absurdity as the Appeal Hoard, which sits every year to settle matters on appeal by postal and telegraph servants. In the lirst place tlie Appeal lioard distinctly does not settle anything. Tin; Board consists of four members. due is a high ollicer in the Department. Another is an exalted oilicer of another Department, unconnected with the business on which he sils, and the other two members are ordinary clerks, one from the postal branch and the other from tlie telegraph branch. These hist two ollicers are elected by their comrades of the joint services, who, by the way, are not in the least concerned whom they send to the Appeal Board, merely because the Appeal Board lias never settled anything since it was constituted. To be plain, the Appeal Board is an out-and-out farce. No officer of either service is denied an appeal on any matter he believes lie has a right to a hearing on. But lie is denied the right to speak before tlie Appeal Board, and is also denied the right of being represented either by a friend skilled as a pleader or in any other matter. The appellant must send !us appeal to the Board in writing. It is presumably dealt with by the Board who may write a minute of recommendation on it to be forwarded to tlie Post-master-General, which for all purposes mean the Secretary of the Post Office—the head working oflicial in New-Zealand. The famous and absolutely unnecessary character of the Appeal Board may lie gauged by the fact that the PostmasterGeneral—that is to say, the Secretary of the Post Office—lias the right of veto over any recommedations the Board may make. That the right is exercised there is no doubt. Having the right of veto the Board is powerless and useless. The two senior members of the Board have such high ofliical standing that they carry immense weight. Also, though' nominally .the juniors have equal power hy virtue of their vote, it is feasible Unit they do not dare io exercise it. If llu-y exercise it and combine with their more important colleagues to make recommendations in any case, the general recommendation can be, and often is, ignored by the only court of appeal—tlie Secretary of the Post Office. The point is that the appeals might as well be sent direct to the Secretary, without any reference whatever to the Board, which has no judicial power whatever. To cite an instance of the uselessness of the Board. 1 Officers of the service have been known to bring legitimate grievances before the m Board year after year for as many as ten years. It is to deal with 'such grievances and matters that need not necessarily be grievances that the Board exists. The Board in pursuance of its duties his made recommendations in (he same eases year after year. Thev hive been absolutely ignored. The 'Board having done its useless duly can do no more. Tt rests wilh the' Secretary to do what he wants to do, whether ' the 80-.vrd exists or does not exist, whether g it makes a favorable or unfavorable recommendation. Why Hie Department should suffer this indignity in face of the fuels (hat tlie Appeal Board of the Railways Department is difficult to understand, especially in view of the great importance of the Post Office and all connected with it. The Railway Board of Appeal is eswntlii.lV a judicial body. It is fairly constituted. Appellants mav appeal in person la-fore tin- Board, and (he Slur Chamber methods in vogue in the sister service ere unknown here. The Railway Appeal lioard makes not only a_ recommendation, but comes to a decision. Tts decision is law as far as the appellants are concerned. It is not a spineless institution, fearful of expressing its views, nor is it dominated by senior officers. Tlie lower rank members of the Postal Appeal Board hate to sit on the Board, merely because they reiv cognise that, as far as power is concerned, they might be lings of hay. There are t) "new brooms" in the service,'and it is at this particular juncture that the said new brooms should sweep out many evils that ' are a disgrace to the over-worked service. The Appeal Board is urgently needed, but not as at present constituted. If it is competent to make recommendations in any matter brought bc- ■ fore it, it is competent to arrive at decisions with power to enforce them, Why call it an "Appeal" Board, anyhow? , t An Appeal Court as usually understood 5 is the last straw between a defendant ~ umUiis alleged rights. Imagine the Appeal Court of New Zealand making a "recommendation" instead of a decision! And imagine the Minister of Justice or his senior officer having power to ignore the finding of tne Court! It cannot be imagined. It is too absurd. It is as absurd as the Appeal Board of.the Post and 'telegraph service. There is more bureaucracy in the New Zealand Post Office than in any branch of the public service. It is impossible to understand why such extreme stringency should be issued in dealing wilh a class of workers who have, never shown any violently mutinous spirit except when'they have entirely withdrawn from a service that treats them as so many animate but soulless pawns in the Government game of chess. In the humblest positions in life the worker—soldier, sailor, tinker, tailor—has right of appeal and redress! II! the postal service of New Zealand the servant has a right to make an appeal a lioard has no power to decide, and which serves no purpose whatever except as an irritant to an already highly irriI tated body of workers. It must be re- , niemliered that all public departments in New Zealand are cut olf from the benefits of the Arbitration Court, and that—especially in the Post Oiliee—advantages are tardily conceded. Also that the ollicer of Iho post Office who is known to be working lor tin- advantage of lfis fellows is a "marked man." ft is only by publicly exposing matters in connection with the iiiiil-iiilminislraiion of the Post Office that matters in the past I'ave 1 n rectified, apparently against the grain of higher officialdom. Onlv recently (he Department granted their officers overtime pay for (wo statutory holidays of the year. There is absolutely no reason why the Government as well ns the private employer should

not treat civil servants witli ordinary justice. The matters in connection with the Post Office are kept so secret that it is impossible to hear of the abuses except by chance. The chance is usually an ex-ollicer of the service, who, relieved of the incubus imposed on him is able to ' give information that opens the eyes of : (he public to the position. The miestion ' of reform lies outside tin- rank and tile ' of the service. It is only the public and < the Press that dare speak to the higher 1 officers of the service as thev should he t speken to, and it is through (he medium i of the Press that sooner or Inter (lie c farcical, unjust and utterly useless Ap- n peal Board as now constituted must. „ make way for a Boarfl will, fudic-ijil t power it need have no hesitation or fear in wielding. P