GENERAL WAGE ORDERS

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27375, 14 June 1954, Page 8

GENERAL WAGE ORDERS

JURISDICTION OF COURT

DEFENCE BY WORKER ORGANISATION

Determination to resist any efforts to oreak down the right of the Court of Arbitration to order general wage increases is expressed in a statement from the Federation of Labour and other industrial organisations. “We will continue to seek to have the present system made more effective, it adds.

Signed by the Post and Telegraph Association, the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants, the Locomotive Firemen’s and Cleaners’ Association, the Railway Tradesmen’s Association, the New Zealand Workers’ Union, the Public Service Association, and the Railway Officers’ Institute as well as the federation, the statement says there is a need for employee organisations to work together for the welfare of their members and the community. . “The Court, being by law established and by law empowered to make the determination, we assert that it was the obvious duty and responsibility of the Government to take such- action as was possible and necessary to ensure that the Court’s determination was effective and remained so,” the organisations state, referring to the increase of 10 per cent, in wages granted by the Court last year. “But the Government immediately took action to reduce subsidies and to increase prices, thereby defeating the intention of the Court and reducing the standard of living of wage and salary_ earners. “Moreover, these actions of the Government went beyond what could have been regarded on any calculation as having been necessitated by the increased wage costs. To this extent, the additional subsidy reductions and price increases reduced the standard of living and we assert that this was not the result of the wage increase. “Further, by administrative orders, the Government facilitated increases in prices by private traders, and it is now obvious that some traders and employers, encouraged by the Government’s own example, and by its relaxation of controls, have used the wage increase as i the occasion and excuse for price increases which were not made necessary by the wage increase. Court’s Efforts “Frustrated” The developments had demonstrated that while it was important that there should be an orderly method of determining the general wage level, the efforts of the Arbitration Court to ensure that wage-earners had a standard of hying commensurate with the productivity and prosperity of the country could be and were frustrated by other agencies over which the Court had no control, the statement, continues. “There is, therefore, an obvious necessity for more effective control of prices and for integration between the authorities which control wages prices, and finance.’’

The Court of Arbitration was not restricted to events which had occurred before a hearing, and was expected to take account of events about to happen. That provision was nullified if the Government did not disclose that in the event of a general wage increase being ordered it intended to reduce subsidies.

Asserting that it was false to say that wa«e increases must be swallowed up in price increases, the organisations say that in particular it should be emphasised that price increases had been caused by a number of factors, including increasing prices for imports, increasing prices for exports, and financial policies.

Although the effect of wage increases is frequently diminished by actions such as have taken place on this occasion, in our history wage increases have played the major part in sustaining and improving the wageearner’s standard of living. “To fail to press for wage increases while . Prices inexorably/ increase would be to accept a lower standard of living for wage and salary earners

while the standard for other sections of the community rises higher a n “Propaganda is now being reinforced by a concerted drive to take aw<u from the Court the right to orde general wage increases. This woul ? a retrograde step for workers and jo the community, says the statement