Court's ruling nails wharfies

By DITA DE BONI

The Waterfront Workers Union will be in contempt of court if it tries to disrupt the loading of Carter Holt Harvey logs, a court has ruled.

Last night, the High Court at Wellington granted an injunction against the union, judging that its right to freedom of expression had gone too far against the right of Carter Holt to "pursue their legitimate business."

The court's orders allow peaceful picketing, but dictate that WWU members "refrain from directing, encouraging or inducing, conspiring in, or being party to any trespasses, assaults, intimidation or other conduct which has effect or intended effect of preventing or hindering the performance of contracts to which [Mainland Stevedoring and Carter Holt Harvey] are party."

The WWU has also been ordered to instruct its members to refrain from any behaviour which hinders or prevents Carter Holt and Mainland from carrying out their business.

Carter Holt sought the injunction last week following a rancorous four-month long dispute with the Union over Carter Holt's use of Mainland Stevedoring to load ships in the South Island.

The WWU says the use of Mainland employees casualised work previously done by permanent employees, undermined safety standards and unfairly replaced South Island workers with North Islanders.

Cater Holt Harvey chief operating officer Jay Goodenbour said last night that while the union was entitled to keep picketing, the company was unmoved by the Union's actions and could now "get on with our business."

"We believe the court order confirms what we have been trying to say all along - that we should be able to go about our lawful business," he said.

"We regret that we had to go to court to ensure this right - I hope this isn't the way every business needs to go to become more innovative and competitive."

But WWU national secretary Trevor Hansen said the dispute did not go away with the injunction - a ruling he had expected.

"It's hard to argue against the case put forward by [Carter Holt and Mainland]. We expected they would go in claiming violence and other things that are actually not true. What people sometimes forget is that in six months of peaceful picketing there were perhaps three or four that got anywhere close to violent. But there was no physical violence on the part of the union."

The question of how violent the dispute became is at the core of the issue, and accounts of the behaviour of the protesters have differed greatly.

Carter Holt and Mainland say WWU members engaged in violent and unruly confrontation, including using smoke bombs, puncturing tyres with spikes and throwing lighted flares at Mainland equipment.

The union argues that its role has been to reduce tension and it always encouraged peaceful picketing.

It also says that Mainland staff "gave as good as they got," according to court papers.

These issues were mentioned in yesterday's ruling but not ruled on. The decision simply restrains the WWU from unlawful picketing until a substantive case for damages is heard in the Wellington High Court. This hearing is not due for several months.



In that case, which comes after Carter Holt rejected further mediation between the parties, Carter Holt and Mainland will seek damages from the union for a variety of alleged grievances, including conspiracy and hindering the performance of contracts.

In his conclusion, Justice Eddie Durie reserved his decision on costs.

"I do not think the full justice of the case will be apparent until later and costs should be considered then," he said.

Carter Holt has costed deferring docking times to suit police shifts and carrying the commercial risk of the delay at around $25,515.

And it says the extra managerial costs of the dispute amount to a further $61,000.

Mainland assesses its costs at $362,441, not including legal fees, for the cost of engaging staff from distant places due to the unavailability of local labour because of the dispute.

The WWU says the items claimed as losses by Carter Holt and Mainland actually represent costs the two parties were obliged to incur as responsible organisations in dealing with the watersiders and the local community.