BOROUGH EMPLOYEES' GRIEVANCES.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2638, 21 October 1909, Page 7

BOROUGH EMPLOYEES' GRIEVANCES.

THE REGENT DISMISSALS

1 At last night’s meeting of the 80-1 1 rough Council, > the following reports 1 were received in connection with the 1 recent disagreement with, and subse--1 quent dismissal of, some of the Coun--1 cil’s employees. The Sanitary Inspector (Mr. J. E. Little) reported as follows:- —“Regarding the new sealed pan system of removal, I have to' state that ,on the night of the 7tli inst. I was informed by the' foreman that the men had struck for higher,wages, and were not going out that night, the service, being at that time a night behind. I rung up the Town Clerk, and discussed the matter, when it was agreed that, instead of increasing the pay, that an advertisement for other men to do the work be inserted in the morning paper. This was done, and three suitable men secured. Of course, this step caused a lot of inconvenience, as both Ferris and myself had to go out with the waggons for a week to show the men. the rounds. The service being so far be-

hind, I d&emed it advisable to nin out the three old carts on the Friday and Saturday nights. This brought the service again up to date, and on Sunday night the waggons were again reverted to, and although the men were new to. the work I am thankful to say . that by Saturday , the whole of -.the Borough had been attended to, and the men did not work, for more, than the nine hours per night, therefore. I can ,only._assume that the last lot of men were notarising tlieir Best, efforts., Of [Course it is not a nice thing to have to engage fresh men, but when the circumstances are taken into account your Council will see that there was no other alternative, and therefore I trust that your officers will he supported by the Council whilst they are endeavoring to carry out their duties in the public interest. Attached please find foreman’s I report of what transpired.” The report of the foreman in charge (Mr G. Connor) was as follows: —“Confirming mv verbdl statement to Mr.

Little on the night of the 7th October, 1909, regarding the sanitary service, I now make the following report: Upon the night in question, at the hour of eight o’clock I was in bed, and Bugden came in and stated that lie wanted more wages, and that he and his mate were not going out unless thev got'a rise. I got up and proceeded to the stable, and there met Bugden and Mooney, who jvere discussing the matter, their horses being harnessed up. Samper then appeared on the scene, and Bugden explained matters to him, and lie agreed not to go out. It was then arranged that they should not go out unless they received 11s or 12s per night or overtime. I then suggested that they should go out and do one load with the. waggons, but they said it would spoil everything, therefore they had better stick out and have

done with it, as the Council could not get men who knew tho roundsCto do

the work. Bugden and Mooney took the harness off their horses, and let them go, and left the stables, Sampey and I remained behind, and I asked him if lie would go out, and lie said that as he had agreed not to he would stick to his word, as the job Was no good to him. I then proceeded to Mr. Little’s, Sampey accompanying me as far as the gate. '"When Mr. Little came out I stated that the men would not go out unless they got 11s or 12s per night. He then asked if I would go out, and I said the horses

had been let out and the harness, etc., would have to be altered from the waggone to the old cart, therefore it would hardly he worth while. I then left Mr. Little, and told Sampey that he would not agree to them getting increased wages.”

A deputation from the men waited on the Council, being introduced by Cr. Darton. Bach of the men spoke, to the effect that they had not refused

to go to work, but that they had merely decided not to go out on the Thursday night but to substitute the Saturday night—their usual holiday. They held that the work was well in hand, and that they had been unfairly dismissed, especially as Connor, the foreman, had, at the. time, expressed his satisfaction at the course the men proposed to adopt, and also on the next day had told several Councillors that the men had \ not struck for higher wages, nor in fact struck at all. After the deputation had explained their side of the question they withdrew. Cr. Smith said they should have faith in their officers, and moved that the reports be adopted. Or. Harris seconded the motion. Cr. Collins moved as an amendment that a full; inquiry be held into the ; matter. He had no doubt that the inspector had acted’in the best interests of the Borough according to the report he received' from the foreman. There was no question but that the men had been dismissed before either the Mayor or the Councillors had been made aware of it. Ho held that this was distinctly wrong to allow them to be dismissed, especially when the foreman who had played his mates false had been retained. Cr Clayton seconded the amendment, remar'king that he thought,the Council’s officers had acted in the best interests of the borough, but perhaps rather hastily and without hearing the men’s side of the question. Four of the men, including Connor, m his office had distinctly said that there had been no strike. He did not blame the Town Clerk or the Inspector, but held that the foreman had not acted fairly to his mates. ■ . \ - ■ . * ' ' i Cr. Darton supported the amendment. Cr. .Pettio held that the holding of any enquiry would be a mistake. A principle was involved, and the Council should support its officers., Tile important nature of the service must also he considered, and the men had been treated handsomely by the Council. He could see . nothing wrong in the whole transaction from beginning to end. ■ ' . , ■ - Or. Maynard also supported the motion, which upon being put to the meeting was carried by five, votes to. three/'. '