Image TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage Tile
Image size: 7168x10240 Scale: 35% - PanoJS3
Page overview thumbnail

Article text

'BLACK' BUILDING.
UNIONISTS REFUSE WORK.
Court Orders Compensation.
ADELAIDE. Aug. IS. — For many
months a dispute has raged en connection
with the erection of the new State Bank
building in Adelaide. It arose about two
years ago when the unions declared the
contract black because the contractors
(Messrs. Mulle-r and Muller) refused to
dismiss two non-unionists. However, the
building has been continued with non
union labour, and the structure is now
n-eQring completion.
The most recent turn in the dispute is
the declaring black of the contractors for
the electrical) work, and two employees
of Unbe-haim and Johnstone, -Ltd., and
two of Ellis and Clark, Ltd., appeared at
the Police -Court ito-day. Albion* Stopp
and Percy Taylor Hainsworth were charg
ed by Unbehaun and Johnstone, Ltd., with
having refused to fulfil their contract with
informant, who claimed £50 compensa
tion for breach of contract. The charge
against Stopp was proceeded with, askl
the other three were adjourned.
It was stated that Stopp had -been en
gaged as a leading hand in electrical in
stallation work at the bank buiMing for
several months. On August 9 he did mot
appear on the job. Instead he informed
the foreman that at a meeting of the
Electrical Trades Employees' Union of
the previous night he had been told not
to 'proceed further with the job. Other
men who refused to work gave the fame
reason. The company was liable for non
completion of its part of the contract.
For the defence, Mr. Daly contended
that there was no substanitEal failure to
fulfil a contract. Defendant did not re
fuse to work at aH, but only on the State
Bank job. He could have .been give
other work.
Mr. Halcambe, SJd.. in ordering Stopp
to pay £2 &. lOd. comp'ensation. for wages
paid for days on which he did not work,
£2 10s. for. additional expense dme to his
failuce to work, £5 in general damages
for dislocation of business and liability
of the compairy for non-cpmpletion of
the contract, and £5 8s. costs, said he was
of opinion that if the matter had been
left to the -decision of defendant he' would
have been inclined to. go on wi|h the
work, but his union had decided other
wtse.' Defendant broke his contract, and
his employers were entitled to dismiss
him or continue paying him and claim
compensation.
$