ARBITRATION COURT.
FREEZING WORKERS’ DISPUTE. FEDERATION TO BE A PARTY By Telegraph—Press Association. Wellington, • Oct. 31. The Wellington freezing workers’ dispute came before the Arbitration Court to-day. The Court reserved consideration of the claim to have the bacon companies exempted from the dispute. The first question was that of a Dominion, or at least a North Island award. The importance of this phase of the dispute was strongly emphasised by the representatives of the employers, who declared that the industry could not be carried on at the present rate of wages. Unless the works could be started the country was going to be. involved in the loss of hundreds of thousands of pounds. Mr. Niall, for the employees, claimed that the New Zealand Freezing Workers’ Federation had not been cited.
Mr. Justice Frazer said the federation did not appear in the list of parties cited. The federation, he understood, covered all the unions in the Dominion, and Mr. Lyall claimed that the present dispute was purely local. The federation had been left off the list through an omission on the part of the Clerk of Awards. Mr Niall said the federation had not taken part in these disputes. He himself had acted as assessor for various unions, and not for the federation, which dropped out at the first sittings..
The Court retired to discuss the legal point raised. On returning the Judge said the Court bed ample powers for the citing of parties. It was quite clear that the federation had been cited; it was equally clear that it had not been served with ths notice of citation. The Court had powers to meet such cases and to direct that the parties should be added by citation and to postpone the hearing of the dispute if necessary.
The Court declined to make any order striking out the federation as a party to the dispute.
IS THERE A DISPUTE? A TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY. THE MATTER OVERCOME. Wellington, Last Night. A further point submitted by Mr. Sill in the freezing dispute at the Arbitration Court was that the Court had no jurisdiction to make an award for the Auckland district, as no industrial dispute within the meaning of the Act was before the Court. He said the applicants were the Auckland Farmers’ Freezing Co. and the letter purporting to create the dispute was sent from the North Island and South Island Freezing Companies’ Association to the general secretary of the New Zealand Freezing Works’ and Related. Trades’ Employees’ Association. The North ahd South Island. Freezing Companies’ Association was an unregistered body and could not create a dispute, while the Freezing Workers’ Association similarly had no power to create a dispute, though it Was~ a registered body for two independent unions. After lengthy argument the Court retired.
Upon resuming, Mr. Justice Frazer said Mr. Justice Sim had laid down that the Court had no jurisdiction to hear an application for an award unless at the time the application was made a dispute was in existence within the meaning of the Act. The Court was satisfied that the Freezing Companies’ themselves, as individuals, had not taken part in the negotiations. The North and South Island Freezing Companies’ Association, being unregistered, was incapable of creating or being a party to a dispute, and therefore on September 1 a dispute was created between an unregistered and a registered body. The Court could not recognise such a dispute. Regarding the question as to whether the association was acting as agent for various freezing companies on authority the Court held letters which hardly bore out that construction. The Court was of opinion that there was no jurisdiction to deal with the case, because a dispute had not been shown to exist between the companies and the unions. The Court expressed regret that the proceedings should be held up on account of a technicality, because the time for commencing the season was nearly due. It was hoped the difficulties would oe overcome and it was suggested a conference should be held to endeavor to arrive at a settlement.
After further argument and another retirement the Court held that a dispute was in existence on September 1. The president said they were quite agreed the association must be treated as outside the jurisdiction of the Court, but in view of the fact that there was evidence of a dispute between the parties there was jurisdiction. The hearing of the application, therefore, could be proceeded with, and the Court will resume to-morrow.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19211101.2.44
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Taranaki Daily News, 1 November 1921, Page 5
Word count
Tapeke kupu
750ARBITRATION COURT. Taranaki Daily News, 1 November 1921, Page 5
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Taranaki Daily News. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.