On This Day, 28 April 1917

Birmingham Mail

Saturday 28 April 1917

TROUBLE AT A MUNITION FACTORY

WORKMEN’S CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION IN BIRMINGHAM

SEQUEL TO POLICE COURT CHARGE.

Claims were made at the Birmingham Munitions Tribunal this morning, Professor Tillyard presiding, by 29 hand-tappers of shells, for compensation in lieu of notice. They had been dismissed by the management of a munitions factory without notice, the defence being that the men had been guilty of misconduct by going on strike. The case had been adjourned Good Friday last, until charges against four of the complainants of restricting the production of war material had been heard in the Police Court. This charge failed.

A foreman the department in which the men were engaged now said that when he went down to the shop early in the afternoon he saw the men in groups idle. Eventually he asked one of the complainants what the trouble was, and the reply was that the men had struck work because they were dissatisfied. Their grievance was that they could not get an answer to a letter sent either to the Ministry of Munitions or the Board of Trade (he did not know which) and wanted know what the firm was going to do with regard to the raising of prices. His reply was that the firm, so far as he knew, would not do anything until the letter had been answered. The letter, he understood, had been despatched 21 days before, and his attention was called to the fact that under the Act the right of strike was restored after this period had elapsed. The men were warned that if they did not go on with their work they would be passed out as refusing to work. They refused to work, however, and twenty-two men were dismissed.

A representative of the firm said they were always prepared to consider grievances, but in this case they wished to wait until a reply had been received from a Government department. The grievance was connected with a rise in wages, 5s. for 100 cases being wanted instead of 3s. 6d. The rise had been refused by the firm, and the men had, therefore written to the authorities in London. The men told him that the 21 days were up, and they could not wait any longer.

Mr. J. Beard said the men had received 5s. a 100 for a previous job, which the men contended was similar to the one upon which they were engaged when the trouble arose, and they therefore had had a reduction in wages.

At this stage the Court retired for a few minutes, and on returning Professor Tillyard said that they were not satisfied that the misconduct was such as justified the dismissal of the complainants without a week’s notice; but evidence had been given that the men had definitely stopped work, and in sense a strike had begun. The Court did not see how they could give compensation to men who were not ready and willing to continue their work. Did Mr. Beard consider that the men had struck?

Mr. Beard replied that the men had not stopped work, and one of the men who interviewed the foreman said he advised the men to return to work, and personally was quite ready and willing to do so. He thought the passes were made out because of the shortage of work, of which there was not sufficient in the shop to last for half an hour. Another complainant said he heard nothing about a strike, nor had he seen anything to indicate one. Another complainant denied that he had been appealed to go back to work, that he was told that the men were like a flock of sheep, and would go back if he could. Evidence of a confirmative character was given by the other complainants. One or two said they knew nothing of the deputation to the foreman, others were ignorant of the reason why they were given pass-outs, and all denied any intention striking or that they were on strike.

The Court found that in the great majority the cases the men had not been guilty of such misconduct as to justify their dismissal without a week’s notice, and to each of these men £2 was awarded. A man who had only been out of work for four days was granted 30s. The claim of leader of the deputation was dismissed. Some of the men had joined the army, and the hearing of their cases was adjourned sine die.