MR WITHY ON REDUCTION OF WAGES.

Auckland Star, Volume XIX, Issue 179, 31 July 1888, Page 4

MR WITHY ON REDUCTION OF WAGES.

A perusal of Mr Withy's speech in Hansard, in favour of further retrenchment, tends only to strengthen our previous opinion that the position he took up was, from a democratic point of view, illogical and untenable. His argument in favour of the reduction of salaries and wages under £150 per annum is thus given in his speech in Han.ard :—

"Now as to the direction in which I think we may look for further reduction. Tho Premier in his Financial Statement laefc year stated that he did not intend to touch any salaries or wages below £150 a year, and he told us that the total of those above that amount was £366,000 per annum, and that the amount paid away in sums not exceeding £150 a year as wages and salaries to mechanics, labourers, and assistants of various kinds throughout tho public service and in the Railway Department, was £639,000 annually. Then in last year's Statement the Premier expected a reduction of £300,000. That amount has not been reached by the savings that the Government have made, and therefore the present resolution is moved for tiie purpose of encouraging him and strengthening his hands in making up the saving all round to the sum of £300,000. With regard to the reduction we are now asking him to undertake, the House will notice that the amount is small as compared with what he has done; but I chink that the Premier must go lower, and the amount off which this smaller amount might be saved — that is, the £659,000 — is to much larger than the amount off which the larger amount has been saved—that is, the £366,000—that we are asking for a much less reduction than in the former case, and it will, I think, fall much loss heavily than the original reductions have done. Now I think that amongst other items the wages in tho public service must be reduced."

Now, there we have Mr Withy's argu-' ment in a nutshell. The Premier Inst session had promised, in order to gain popularity and power, not to touch salaries or wages under £150 a-year, and this resolution was " to encourage him and strengthen his hands " to make him break his pledges now that he was apparently firmly established in his position. So much for political morality. But it will be observed that Mr Withy's argument is based upon tho supposition that the reductions already made, which fall by the way very considerably short of £300,000, have been obtained by operating on the £366,000 of salaries over £150 a year. This is not the case. The reductions have been made by abolishing sinecure offices, amalgamation of offices, and putting a stop to tho wicked wasteful extravagance that ha» been in annual operation in this colony ever since the inauguration of the Public Works scheme. Besides, it will be observed that Mr Withy, curiously enough makesuseof the expression " ft that the amount of £300,000 had not been reached by the savings of the Government," and then ho goes on to say " with regard to the reductions we are now asking him to undertake." The former retrenchment was made clearly by "savings," i.e., curtailment of extravagance; tho new system was to bo effected by distinct reductions in wages. And upon these false premises —namely, that the salaries of over £150 per annum had borne the whole brunt of the money saved by retrenchment —he argued that now those receiving under £150 should submit to have any further sum required, retrenched from them.

Mr Withy made a dead set at the railway employees. He said, " I think it has been made abundantly clear of late that wages given in the Railway Department are above the average market value." And again he said: "Owing to the high rates which have been given for unskilled labour, I understand that a large number of settlers have been unable to get the assistance which they wished to get. In fact, there is very little doubt that a great number of the settlers would like to take the place of the men and get the wages which they receive." Now this opens up a very big question, and the solution will be given by each one according to whether he holds Conservative or Democratic views. Mr Withy argues from the Conservative standpoint. He assumes that there is a standard market value for the wages of labour, that that value is readily ascertained, and the State in employing labour shall be ruled by it. Nothing could be more fallacious. Trades Unions have indeed succeeded, aftcir years of difficulty and trouble and bitter persecution, in fixing a, standard of wages for skilled labour ; but unskilled labour is now, as ever, at the mercy of the employer, and subject to serious fluctuations through competition and other causes. Is competition to decide the value of labour, or is the actual value of the labour performed to be the guide as to the rate of payment ? If the former, let us illustrate the question by the following evidence given by one sent to inspect one of the large common lodging houses of London:—'" One woman was frying a bit of bacon with some broken greens and potatoes, and I questioned her about her wages. ' This 'ere's my wages,' she ansvered; ' I went to work in Petticoat Lane this morning at 7 o'clock, charing, and I've worked till I'm fit to drop, and they gives mo fivepence and them broken victuals —that's fourpence for my lodging and a penny for the bacon. It's that or nothing. Plenty others could bo got if I didn't."

Or take another illustration. A man applied to an Auckland contractor the other day to be taken on a job. He said his family were starving, he had been long out of work, and he would willingly work for four shillings a day and be thankful To which the contractor replied, *If I had no vfork for you to do, it would be of no

advantage to me to have your services for nothing ; as it happens I do want a man, but I will not take advantage of your necessities ; you will of course get the same wages as I am giving the other men." If Mr ° Withy's argument be eound, this contractor was not acting wisely. His clear duty, putting common humanity out of the question, was to have accepted the man at his own market value and pocketed the difi'erence himself. Mr Withy's extraordinary assertion that the high rates of wages paid by Government prevent settlers from settlers from employing labour is almost to absurd to notice. The settlers what with taxation, importunate moitga-P-ees, and bad markets, are gradually beinc crushed out of existence, and are quite unable to employ labour at any price. If they really want it. they can get it now and could get it for%ears past at a very low rate of wages with board, but unfortunately the very large majority of them can-iob even give thab. The state ment that many settlers would gladly change places with the regularly paid° and fairly comfortable . Govern - ment employes i 9 no doubt true, but the same holds good with regard to the positions held by every individual in the Government service from the Governor downwards, and if competition and tho lowest wages required is to rule the rate of pay of the State's labourers, then by all means apply, the same rule to every branch of the service, and the highest-paid and all other appointments would no doubt be willingly accepted for a half or a fourth of what is now being paid for the same service.