The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1925. A RAILWAY CRISIS.

Auckland Star, Volume LVI, Issue 30, 5 February 1925, Page 4

The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo.

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1925. A RAILWAY CRISIS.

» ■ - For the cause that lacks assistance. For the wrong that needs rcsf*ton««, For the future in the distance. Ami the good that wo ~ct- da.

It is evident that very Serious trouble is expected at Home through the refusal of the railway companies to grant the demands submitted to them by the National L'nion of Kailwaymcn. This "National Programme" for the improvement of the position of railway workers is, as our cable message indicates, a farreaching one, and there, never has been much probability that it would receive a favourable bearing. Rut lv reject the N.L'.IL proposals is one thing and to meet them with counter-proposals for sweeping reductions in wages is quite anotln-r matter: and the fact that the railway companies have taken this course certainly suggests that they are anxious to bring mutters to a crisis as quickly as possible. At all events, even if they arc not "riding for a full." tbey have taken the very course which is most likely tn convince nut only the railway employees, but the mass of the

wage-earners throughout the country, that the great capitalistic organisations are bunded together to resist the workers in their efforts to secure a hearing for their just claims and redress, for genuine grievances. The National Programme of the N'.t .!!. is certainly a very comprehensive document. It has been described by the editor of the "Weekly Westminster" as "the most complete and systematic scheme that has yet been advanced" in the interests of the wageearners. "It covers," we are told, "a! 1 the innumerable grades of workers. It deals will, hours of work, wages and pensions. It is meant as a sort of rail waymnn's charter; and if the X.C.X. succeeds in its aim. its members will be incomparably better off than the workers in any other industry." Among other things it provides for pensions for all employees at the age of (in. a maximum 44 hours week, a salary of fi.l/ a week, exclusive of "tips" for the younger porters, who start at IS years, and proportionately higher pay fur all the other grades in (he scry ice. X'ow. in criticising these proposals, we arc forced by (he circumstances of the case in consider something more than their abstract justice. As the Liberal organ which we have already quoted puts i(, "regarded as a definition of the kind of conditions necessary to secure to the workers a comfortable anil secure life, these demands seem to be not unreasonable in themselves. *' Hut the acceptance of the N.U.R. programme would mean an increase in wages from 10 millions to •'SO millions a year, and Hie question is whether such an increase in cost of

production is now practicable impossible.

To put. (1„> ease in general terms, if the X.C.R. programme represents merely reasonable conditions of work and pay for the average worker, then it ought to be applicable to all classes of workers at

once. Whether this improvement In conditions would actually increase the productive capacity of the workers to any large extent must be a matter of

conjecture. until the experiment is made. Rut on the face of it, we incline to the view represented by the editor of the "Westminster,'' who holds that

"even if the capital invested in industry were denied any return at all, it is tertian that our present national income would not suffice to pay all workers on the scale demanded by the railway-men."

Tt would, therefore, appear that the only hope for the N.U.R. programme is that the railway employees might be ahle to induce or compel the companies to grant their terms, with the intention of passing on the increased burden to the general public by simply raising freights and fares. As the railway industry is

"sheltered"—that is, it is not subject to any outside competition—and "funda-mental"--that is. the majority of other industries depend upon it it is possible that the N.U.R. might force the companies to omply at least for (he time with its demands. Jlut what would be the elTect on the eonntrv as a whole.

Dearer coal, higher transport charges, and a consequent general rise in the cost of living would render the investment of capital unprofitable and limit employment; and the last state of the railwaymen themselves, along with all other workers, would be worse than the first. Xo doubt the position of the railway workers might be substantially improved without giving the whole country a "set-back" at tho same time. But this line of criticism certainly suggests that

(be N.U.R. programme in its present form might easily produce more evils and injuries than those il attempts to remedy.