CITY COUNCIL WAGES.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20612, 30 July 1932, Page 11

CITY COUNCIL WAGES.

Ids o* th* razss. , ire come to "the Itist ang," as my critic from the scene „ doas he goes by some >ns and sentiments ry briefly dealt with, ny original letter in lat tbo challenge lias rows down the whole jle detail of whether liimmn and minimum Jie Council, cited by \ bority of Mr H. i>. t or not: He says it Lit instead of proving a, ho wants me to nen,t. No wonder i revioos letter to his •c. Let me again reihat Mr J. McCombs rith Mr Acland's prohe did not question e rates cited by Mr not Mr McCombs the m figures and finance arty? I am quite Auction in the higher a worker I feel that in such a business is irt first and then iujr fellow with a high His position would lable. 1 am wholour of finding regular >rc men by reducing ;o of £3 10s per week, isb to sa»v that that wage to-day. Every church knows it. personal note. 1 ani that this little coni carried on without ty contemptible pear© so often found as this. It has intliat 1 am a member Association and pcr;my of Labour. Let j voted for Labour at . ! am not a member Association nor hare igle meeting of that a one of the unemj not even in the £t3o to which "Astrnea" rather in the 10s i class who arc being J camp—so that '".V I am lucky enough to at work for the year, rely I have a right uestion of tiiis sort, > protest vehemently 3ortionment of the , to n few. while it >e others. And I can r>re forcibly Localise, d follow my suggesrJavp a possible chance in the extra ]2O men long as a Council's ied and conducted to political formulae, so *ct to see such unomplete disregard ot sense, as our Counlayina in regard to unemployment ever tigp. I Vfis one of believed Labour it to-day how liuicli it or nifi i-asss of your corres- , ompel my admiration substance. There is the action of the ' 1 rfasing to apply the , tfion T.obe the rate-

payers. It is a question upon which I should like legaJ advice whether an action at law by a ratepayer would not succeed ins t, th© Alavor and Councillors. 1 presume there "must be sonic protection against givinw away the ratepayers' money, for that is what it amounts to. If it is within the law to pay more than current rates ior labour, the Council might choose io pay £lO a week or accept the highest lender for contracts instead oi the lowev. Him the unfortunate ratepayer no redress against use p." I.is money for political purposes?— ours, ct'-., UATKPAYKK. • luly -JVU-li, ioa-j.