CAB129-35 — Page 355

Page 355

Page 355

Page 355

201

usuallagh 356f366 any employment that order38359af366 beyed,

and the Dock Labour Scheme is not peculiar in this. On the other hand strikes often have taken place because the orders given create conditions of work which are unacceptable to the workmen and not infrequently such strikes involve breaches of contract. Legally there is no distinction under the Scheme between a refusal to work a particular cargo because, e. g. it is dangerous, and a refusal to work it because it is con- sidered "black". The only remedy in either case is to rely on the disciplinary provisions of the Scheme or to claim damages for breach of contract.

9.

I expressed a view on Thursday as to the extent to which the present stoppage is to be considered a lockout rather than a strike. The information on which that view was based now appears to have been inaccurate. As I am now advised the sequence of events has been as follows:-

(a)

(b)

(c)

(a)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

In April and May the seamen on two Canadian ships,

berthing respectively in the Surrey and Royal Groups of Docks, struck work, they believing, rightly or wrongly, that on their return to Canada they would not be re-engaged unless they joined the Seamen's International Union instead of the Canadian Seamen's Union. This action may have been illegal and/or a breach of contract. It was none the less a strike constituting a trade dispute.

Thereupon stevedores alleging that this was a right

which had always been recognised refused to work the two ships involved, treating them as in dispute. Incidentally they appear then to have been and now to remain wholly misinformed as to the status of the two competing Unions, believing that almost all Canadian seamen belong to the Canadian Seamen's Union.

The stevedores' action no doubt constituted a strike,

but the Port employers and the Labour Board acquiesced in the position until 27th June.

On 27th June the Port employers announced that, while

work would continue on ships then in course of loading or unloading, no labour would be requisitioned in respect of ships on which work had not begun.

This amounted in effect to an announcement of a lock- out in respect of future ships.

Neither employers nor workers gave notice under the

Conditions of Employment and Arbitration Order (1305).

On the same day that a lockout was announced the

stevedores withdrew from ships in the course of working.

Subsequently a certain number of stevedores in other

docks struck work in sympathy.

It follows that there is a strike in relation to

certain of the ships and a lockout in relation to others. It is therefore not possible in law to give unqualified support to the view that the present stoppage is a strike, but the legal right to Page 3560366se emergency powers does Page 356 of 366,

depend on this consideration.

-3-

308