SHODDY SHOES

Auckland Star, Volume LXXII, Issue 229, 27 September 1941, Page 8

SHODDY SHOES

OF N.Z. MANUFACTURE

STANDARDISATION URGED

Thousands of pairs of shoddy shoes are actually being manufactured in New Zealand every week, states the secretary of the Dominion Federation of Boot Trades' Associations (N.Z.), Incorporated, Mr. G. Shields, in a letter to the Star. Hundreds of pairs of shoes have to be discarded every week for the simple reason that they are absolutely irrepairable without partially remaking and the addition of new insoles and this, after only three to four weeks of wear, as a result of paper and cardboard insoles and stiffeners, and, in many cases, through the whole structure being shoddy. It was recalled by Mr. Shields that during a recent debate on the Standards Bill in the House of Representatives a Government member exhibited a pair of women's shoes which had cost 27/6 retail and which had been worn only three weeks when they required half-soling. The insoles were of paper or cardboard It was clearly obvious to anyone listening to the debate that there was nothing said which implied that New Zealand boot and shoe manufacturers as a whole were turning out shoddy shoes, but rather that those who did so were well in the minority, Mr. Shields added The T£ * interpretation gathered was that the shoes exhibited before the House were typical of thousands of pairs of shoes manufactured in New Zealand by a few manufacturers whose interests and motives were purely of self. Boot and shoe repairers throughout New Zealand could verify this, as the quality of the insoles of many thousands of pairs of shoes was on a par with the shoes brought before the House, and the price was not confined to 27/6 a pair U rL ran £^ d up to as hi Sh as £2 2/ ' The difference in production costs between shoes with reliable insoles and stiffeners and that of shoddv material was a matter of only a few P £ n SS' Admittedly manufacturers of shoddy footwear were onlv a minority, but unfortunately * this practice by the few reflected disZ e £\ *°, n &? , Industry generallv, added Mr. Shields. ' The standardisation of footwear wJ, d th br,ng - ? veryone into M »e. and from the evidence seen everv dav of the week of the effect of " shoddv materials used in the manufacture 6f footwear it was evident that some form of compulsion was necessary to safeguard the public and the honest sincere manufacturers from those Ve f re J ess scr »P"lous. The trade mark of the manufacturer who stood behind the quality of his goods was the guarantee of quality, and he had nothing to fear from standardisation. The public should at least know for what they were paying good money and they should have some guarantee that they were receiving Sh fd money, concluded Mr