DRIVERS' UNION AND EMPLOYERS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 60, 28 September 1907, Page 5

DRIVERS' UNION AND EMPLOYERS.

To the Editor. Sir, —With your permission, I should like to put the case of the Drivers' stud Grooms' Union v. Employers before your readers, as the account of Thursday night's mcoting as publUln-d by you does not present a fair view of the position. Under date September Hi, the following letter was sent to certain employers of the town:—"We, the New Ply mom h Drivers' and brooms' Industrial Union of Workers, hereby enclose our future claims and demands to bo enforced from the 26th September, 1007. [The demands were published in our issue of the 10th.] Delegates are prepared to meet employers. Notice as to date and place of meeting must be given in writing not later than the 24th inst., to be addressed—'Hon. Secretary, Drivers' and Grooms' Union, carc Coffee Palace. New Plymouth.'"

1 immediately arranged a meeting for the 23rd inst. of all persons cited in their demands. At that meeting a resolution was passed, and communicated to their secretary notifying thcin that they would be met in conference at a date to be mutually arranged. To this the following very ambiguous reply was received:—"24th "September, l!lt)7.—The secretary Employers' Association.—DealSir,—Yours of this day to hand. Our Association cannot sec its way clear to alter former notices (re claims, etc.) received by you, as we think you have had .-ullicieiit.notice to arrange a meeting.—Faithfully vours, .1. Jillelt, lion. secretary."

A further letter enquiring whether the above meant tliiit Uicir I'iiioji de-. dined to meet employers elicited no reply. I til Ice it tlic reports of Thursday night's meeting is to be regarded as sufficient. .Now. Sir, tin l employers interested are prepared to place their claims before the Arbitration Court. They were, as proved by above correspondence, prepared to discuss proposals with the Union, and, if possible, arrange an amicable basis to work upon, but it would seem thaffhc workers are afraid of such a conference. This explanation is warranted, so that the public may judge whether the I'nion and its proposal have been ignored or not. II is to be regretted that the oilieials of the Drivers' I'nion are not prepared to meet the employers in a conciliatory spirit, so I am persuaded that the employers were quite prepared to meet any fair and just proposals 1 would like .Mr. -lillelt. their lmn. secretary, to inform your readers of the strength of their Union, and, further, to state whether its membership does not mainly consist of comparatively newcomers to the town. Also, why, in 'justice to everyone who is likely to lie, affected by their demands, a notice was not serv.nl to all. A little enlightenment on these matters would Iw interesting.—l am, etc.,

J. WHITAKER, Sec. Employers' Association. MORE ABOUT A COMPLAINT. To the Editor. Mr,—The letter written by ''Oiie Who Was Present" should. 1 fancy, have been signed '•Three Who Were Present." it is regrettable that "One Who Was Present" should know so little as to consider her conduct quite in place. 1 would al-o point out that "no one is a jiehy of her (or their for the matter of tha';) own actions." 1 think if one of the. others present were asked for an opinion it would agree with mine. 1 trust that if I should again patronise tearooms in New Plymouth I will henNew Plymouth's young people's merry laughter, but not their unbecoming shrieking.—l am, etc., A VISITOR.

To the Editor. Sir.—ln your issue of Wednesday last I noticed ii letter written by "A visitor," which I read with keen interest. I ;iN,, read the loiter in reply liy -One who was present." 1 had intended to write about it myself, but nut being nnieli of n letter-writer, I let the nuttier drop. and was very pleased indeed when 1 saw that "A Visitor'' had taken it up. Although "One Who Was Present" seems to have travelled a great deal— to Sydney, for instance—J am sure that during that person's travels she never saw anybody Indiare iu public tea-rooms in tieway she and her two friends did. I certainly do not consider "A Visitor's" taste "peculiar," and was surprised that the management, did not speak to them about such unseemly behaviour. Hut 1 suppose the management thought they were old enough to know better.—l am. etc..

ANOTHER WHO WAS PRESENT.