WAR SERVICE

Wairarapa Times-Age, 30 October 1941, Page 6

WAR SERVICE

POSITION OF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS NOT ENTITLED TO DICTATE. REGARDING THE RELEASE - OF EMPLOYEES. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) NAPIER, This Day. The question whether Government Departments have power to dictate to the Army authorities regarding the calling up of reservists was decided by the No. 4 Area ■ Manpower Committee at Napier this morning. An appeal against Territorial cadre service was lodged by the State Advances Corporation for Alexander Edwin Jensen, who was required by the 12th Field Regiment as a pay clerk. In evidence, Lieutenant F. W. Bradshaw, Adjutant, stated that Jensen was called to report for duty on October 28, in order to proceed to Wellington for a special course of instruction as a pay clerk prior to commencing duties with his cadre. Jensen failed to appear, however, being absent without leave. Inquiries made by the Army authorities had shown that the Wellington office of the State Advances Corporation had issued instructions that the employee was not to be released for military service. In his opinion no Government department had the necessary power to say whether or not its employees should enter camp. Jensen was a grade 2 reservist and was the only member of the regiment to come under that category. His employment as a pay clerk presented one, of the few opportunities the regiment had of employing a Grade 2 man in order to release other fit men for combatant duties. A similar case which had come to his notice was outlined to the committee by Lieutenant Bradshaw, who stated that the Railways Department had been in touch with him only this morning regarding an employee who had been called for service in the cadre. The man was due to parade tomorrow, but the information he had been given by a railway official was that the head office in Wellington had stated that the employee's services were not available. “The only people who can adjudicate in these matters are the Armed Forces appeal boards, or, as in this case, the man-power committee,” said the chairman, Mr G. A. Maddison. “The Government Departments cannot override the proper authorities in these matters.” Mr K. McLeay (a member of the board): “They are no different to private individuals.” Mi’ Maddison added that the Army was entitled to protest. In the case of the railway employee, ample notice had been given and the fact that it was a Wellington decision had been communicated to the Army at a late stage. He had observed instances in which it had been required to inquire in Wellington with regard to appeals which it was understood were pending. Mr Maddison said the committee’s function was to sit and hear evidence, not to be required to inquire into cases before they came up for consideration. Unless ’an appeal was lodged with either the committee or .the Armed Forces Appeal Board, the men were in the hands of the military authorities. The appeal was dismissed, the reservist being released for military duties forthwith.-