Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

COMPANY’S APPEAL

AGAINST REINSTATEMENT OF EMPLOYEE. SEQUEL TO FREEZING WORKERS’ STRIKE. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) AUCKLAND, May 15. A sequel to the strike at the Westfield Freezing Company’s works in March was heard at a sitting of the Industrial Manpower Committee. The company appealed against the decision of the district manpower officer that an employee, C. Melrose, who had been dismissed, must be reinstated. Mr Bryant, manager of the company, said it was a condition of the settlement of the strike that those who continued working be allowed to remain in their jobs if they wished to do so and that the other workers would work smoothly with them. On April 8 he met an employee, Simon Morgan, leaving the works with his eye bandaged. He questioned Morgan, who said he had worked through the strike but since then he and others had been persecuted by other workers. He had been struck in the eye by a piece of meat and was unwilling to stop longer. He identified two men, one of whom he alleged was Melrose, as responsible for the meat throwing. The company notified the manpower officer that the men had been dismissed for misconduct. The other man admitted that he threw meat but Melrose denied it, though he admitted to the police that he joined in prominently in jeering and laughing -at volunteer workers when they were struck by meat. The manpower officer upheld the dismissal of the other employee but ordered the reinstatement of Melrose. Shortly afterward Melrose was called to the Army. The company was now appealing on the question of principle. The district manpower officer, Mr T. G. Fielder, said that the grounds for Melrose’s dismissal were not substantiated. The committee reserved its decision.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAITA19420516.2.36

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Wairarapa Times-Age, 16 May 1942, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
289

COMPANY’S APPEAL Wairarapa Times-Age, 16 May 1942, Page 3

COMPANY’S APPEAL Wairarapa Times-Age, 16 May 1942, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert