REDUCING THE BONUS.

Auckland Star, Volume LIII, Issue 99, 28 April 1922, Page 6

REDUCING THE BONUS.

CASE FOR THE WORKERS. I "WAGES AND PBOFZTS. ] ■3y Teleatraph.—Press Association.) WELLINGTON". Thursday, j The Arbitration Court continued hearing eviiienee this afternoon on the question oi the cost-of-living bonus. Mr. J. M.-Combs, M.P.. -aid: Wage-!. apart from tiie withholding of the .1 bonus, already had been reduced hy the .--aardoyer--- who were paying only the minimum wage and by only intermittent employment. Worker-,* wages had aaways lagged behind an increase in the cost cf living. It —as true wages had faiien in other countries, but wages there had increase,! in a greater ratio than the increase in the cosr of living, tie contended that the 1014 standard was not faia- in New Zealand, and unfortunately New Zealand workers did not to-day obtain as high a wage measure.' in purchaoing power. a= they did in LOU. Discussing eronom.i conditions, Mr. MeCombs argued that tiiere was evidence oi increasing prosperity for New Zealand. Escorts for the year just .•iosed exceeded in amount the total for the two best pr»-war years. Heavy imnortations in InaiO and at the beginning or l'.Vil had only temporarily disturbed the balance of trade. Very -=Tib-tantial reductions in prices should take phi,'" before were reduced. II; T. Bloodworth also addressed the Court on behaif of the workers. He said it -va- remarkable no retailer-; had ■ been caiied by the emplo-ers. The fact was the retailers were adversely affected by the reduction in the spending power ,of rhe workers. What had affectetl the' ■'arrr.e-.-s' position was the reduced pur'•ha.Jag power cf European purchasers. Where an improvement was needed here was in management. Alter traversing the question at some , length. Mr. Bloodworth concluded by .saying the demand for reductions in 1 wages and salaries came largely from ! land .-peculators and men who only by an abuse of ianguaige could be called • bona-ide farmers. Had the enormous i profits made by these land speculators. j merchants, and manufacturers vanished I into thin air. or did they still exist in i farm lands, stocks and shares, and in I much enlarged and much more valuable | business premises? he asked. One thing was certain, ami that was that since no such oroiits accrued to the wage earner Ihe had no unexoerte'ed surplus thus | locked "in. When the employers and j producers made an extra pro-rt one year ■ j they did not immediately raise wages. j Why, then, should wages be reduced at j the first intimation of reduced profits? ■ j Before wrges were reduced the Legisla-1 ture should call upon all those clamourI ing for a reduction to produce all the 'requisite documents to show what hapi nened to the Droits they made during ! the good years —years in which they did ! not ask that wages should be what inI dustry could bear. It was not right to 1 reduce wages because a few merchants ' and land speculators "got nipped" by i over-speculation. They never intended Ito share their profits with the workers. j Why. then, should the workers be asked jto bear their losses? T 0 keep wages at ' the --.recent level would teach the spectri lator a lesson. It would also tend to 1 weed out -he rneSeientv employer, who from a strictly economic point of view j tended to depress wages and increase prices. Such were the reasons why they | opposed any reduction hi the rates of i remuneration at the present time and ■ asked the Court to order that the pre- | sent minimum, rates continue tor at I ; '.east a further six months. ! Mr. McComba. M.P.. urged that a Cost {of Living Inquiry should be set up to ! ascertain the basic wage. j The President of the Court said that iin IDL! family ibudgets a-ere collected. 1 but this information was out of date in I 1010. The Government r-tjli=-tician sent cut 20.000 budget books, but only 106 averc returned, and many were not satir— f.ictorv. If the Government repeated ! the experiment he hoped the workers would be urged to comply a- closely as possible with the requestMr. MeCombs =aid we had not established a base yet. Such an inquiry as he had suggested would be necessary for I the purpose. TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS. EMPLOYEES' CASE CONTINUED. ir:r Telegraph.—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. The employees' case en tne bonus question was continued in the Arbitration Court to-day. when Mr. Mack. •-peaking in tae capacity of secretary or" the Amalgamated society of Railway Servants, earnestly supported the case against any reduction being made in wage*. He declared that railwaymen. ' who did not ail pay such high rents as other workers, and who received part iof their clothing, were not abie to keep • pace with the cost of living on the present wages. He handed in family budI get* in support of bis argument. Mr. L. F. of Otago. contended that no reduction should take place unt.i -' a eommis-icHi was set un to define a : reasonable -tar.dard of living. He rci the trade outlook, and quoted j varioßS report.- promising good times-. Mr. Armstrong, on behalf of the Canleronry Unions. r*vote«te.j ana-nst any reduction, -aying that the If 14 standard .of 'ivrng had not been sufficient, and that wages of to-day did not enable ; them to live up to that standard, ff ja commission were appoint* l ,! rt should :go clc-ely into the que -rl.-n of rents. ! Reduction of wages was no way ro unprove the pro.*perit.v of the country. Mr. W. M iddison exclusively i with the -übject of a fair standard of I living, saying that if a pr.-per standard .-'.■. ere r .et up it result in increased I output, greater industrial peace and inIcreased national -.vealt'n.