SALARIES IN THE POST AND TELEGRAPH DEPARTMENT.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 268, 12 November 1928, Page 11

SALARIES IN THE POST AND TELEGRAPH DEPARTMENT.

(Published by Arrangement.)

PRIME MINISTER'S STATEMENTS CHALLENGED. —— « On September 27 last, the Prim® Minister made a statement, in the course of a meeting held at Kilbirnie, Wellington, to the effect that there had been no decrease in the salaries of Civil Servants, rather had there been an increase owing to regrading, and not one singlo servant had his salary reduced. As a result of subsequent newspaper controversy, the Prime Minister published a correction on October 9, from which it was naturally concluded that he would have the grace to avoid any further misrepresentation of the position. From newspaper reports since received, however, it is clear that the Prime Minister is continuing to make public statements which are not in accord with the facts as they apply to the Post and Telegraph Department, and it has therefore become the duty of the Post and Telegraph Employees' Association to put the true facts before the public. The Prime Minister has stated that he has made a particular study of the position, and that not one single officer is now suffering from the effects of the salary cuts inflicted by the Public Expenditure Adjustment Act in 1922. Notwithstanding the Prime Minister's proclaimed interest, and the assurance he gives, a comparison of the official records discloses the following position :— Clerical Division. —In 1921 1046 officers received £320 per annum. In 1922 all these men, with the exception of a few promoted in the interim, were reduced to £295 per annum. From that day to this no less than 528 of these individuals have remained stationary at £295 per annum. In other words, despite the Prime Minister's assurance to the contrary, these men have not been reim- ' bursed one penny piece of the salary cuts. General Division.—ln 1921 986 officers . received £258 per annum. In 1922 all these men, with the exception of a few 1 promoted in the interim, were reduced ' to £233 per annum. In 1924 the maxi- ' mum was raised to £240 per annum. In 1 1928, of the original 986 affected in 1922 | no less than 465 are stationary on £240 ; per annum. In other words, they are still suffering from the effects of the ' salary cuts to the extent of £18 per annum. • Thus it will be seen that the Prime • Minister's claim that all officers who suffered reduction in 1922 have been reimbursed, is without foundation in fact. The Prime Minister's line of argument 1 is a narrow evasion, and does not even 1 possess the virtue of accuracy. The true position for consideration, however, is set out hereunder: In 1920, when the official cost of living figures were 62 per cent over prewar, the Government recognised that the salaries paid to Civil Servants were inadequate, and an allround increase was granted of £50 per annum, for senior officers, and £25 per annum for juniors. This had the effect of partially, • though not fully, restoring to Public Servants their pre-war standard of : living. ) In 1922, on the argument that the cost , of living had fallen, and owing to financial depression, the Government reduced | salaries by £25 per annum to seniors . and £15 to juniors. The reduced scale . of salaries thereby brought into effect has operated till the present day, notwithstanding that the cost of living had 9 risen in 1924, and has remained constant e at a level approximating that of 1920. 1 It therefore, evident that a • remodelling of the salary scales in the Post and Telegraph Department is long 3 overdue. Wellington, November 6. 1928.