“INDIFFERENCE ” BY WORKERS

Press, Volume XCI, Issue 27642, 26 April 1955, Page 10

“INDIFFERENCE ” BY WORKERS

Plea For Improved

Attitude

ADDRESS TO INSTITUTE OF SECRETARIES

(New Zealand Press Association)

AUCKLAND, April 23. Lack of responsibility and indifference today permeated the whole commercial structure of the Dominion, said Mr N. M. Speer, retiring president of the New Zealand branch of the Chartered Institute of Secretaries, at the branch’s annual meeting in Auckland. He said the 40-hour week had developed into a 40-hour pay week. Labour could not be secured without a guarantee of regular overtime.

“Thus, time wasted during the normal day is expected to be compensated for by the working of overtime at penal rates,” Mr Speer said. ‘‘Not until we return to a higher standard of values and moral conduct in our attitude to our daily jobs will we effect that reduction in costs which alone will result in a lowering of the cost of living.” Mr Speer said too much emphasis was placed on the contents of the weekly pay envelope, and too little on the building of a career for the future. The automatic progression provided in many awards, with increased remuneration merely because of length of service, was robbing youth of the incentives necessary to qualify and equip people for added responsibility and managerial office. Many youths leaving school were induced by the prospect of high wages to undertake employment in avenues which could offer only a precarious future, said Mr Speer. Management had been prepared to offer extravagant conditions and incentives in its bid for the limited labour resources available.

Labour had only its services to sei], said Mr Speer. It could not be blamed entirely for taking advantage of the extraordinarily favourable conditions. Changed View of Duty He said the previous conception of a businessman’s duty to supply to the public goods or services at the lowest economic price seemed to have changed to ‘‘the public will pay whatever price is demanded.”

“The employee justifies his attitude on the basis that, if the employer can take time off, why should not he,” Mr Speer said. “He no longer considers that there is any obligation on him to do a fair day’s work, but rather that he has a duty to his fellow workers to do just the minimum necessary to qualify for the retention of his job.”