Stop-work Meetings

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31322, 18 March 1967, Page 12

Stop-work Meetings

Sir,—Congratulations to Mr McAuliffe and his associates for their brave show of opposition to Mr Skinner. If Mr Skinner and his many thousands of unionists have consciences, they will admit that an honest 40 hours of work from each of them every week would do many times more good to our economy than all their protest meetings can ever achieve.—Yours, etc., A TOILER. March 16, 1967.

Sir,—Has “Hypocrite-Hater” ever studied the figures the Government receives from racing. The average worker loves a day’s racing, and rightly so. I am a worker, and have been all my life, and I have spent many a day enjoying racing. If the Government dispensed with racing how would New Zealand fare? Have a think.—Yours, etc., A WORKER. March 17, 1967.

Sir,—The economy of this country is vitally dependent on shipping, overseas trade being our very life-blood. For several years I was employed on vessels calling regularly here and each voyage witnessed the tragedy that is New Zealand cargo-handling. Space will not permit details but recently a Minister of the Crown performed singlehanded a task that wharf labourers claimed required more. Unfortunately, conditions on the wharves appear to be accepted with tolerant amusement. Irrespective of opinions regarding the recent removal of subsidies on certain items, the Government should first have used any means possible to remove the cancer that is strangling the waterfronts and crippling our economy. Mr Skinner would also be better employed assisting towards this end than by presiding over mass meetings during working hours, thereby aggravating the symptoms of impending depression that already are too apparent.—Yours, etc., CONCERNED. March 17,1967.

Sir,-Many British working families would very much like to come to New Zealand to escape from the dictatorial ruling powers of the trade unions which have dragged their country down over the years to the present low level. Most of these people have known that similar conditions prevail in this country and the events of the last week or so must surely convince them that New Zealand is no longer the place where a man can do a fair day’s work without the hindrance of strikes, stop-work meetings, and other activities that impede progress. Mr Skinner should bear this fact in mind before his next application for more immigrant labour, for it is quality, not quantity, that will count in this industrial war and the idlers must be kept out.—Yours, etc., X.U.K. March 17, 1967.

Sir,—Mr Skinner, in his trouble-making speech on Wednesday, said that “the farmer should not be put into a better position than anyone else. .. .” These words, I can only assume, come from a person completely Ignorant of the economics of New Zealand, and completely ignorant of the farmers’ position over the last 10 years. They have been facing their cuts for years without squealing. With prices, continually falling and costs mounting, the farmer has been faced with wage rises forced on him by Mr Skinner’s complete lack of understanding of fanning economics. If the farmers took the idiotic stand we witnessed in Christchurch on Wednes-

day the country would have been in a state of chaos 10 years ago. But fortunately for New Zealand, the farming community have enough common sense to face world fluctuations like intelligent human beings. These incorrect statements coming from Mr Skinner can do nothing but harm to this country. What an embarrassment Mr Skinner must be to the Labour Party!—Yours, etc-, COMMON SENSE. March 17, 1967.

Sir, —If more skilled effort were put into the production of goods in the factories, the goods would be of a much better quality, more would be sold, and the critics would “get off the backs of the workers.” If R. Davis would look round his place of work, I guarantee that he would find a large number of people taking more than 10 minutes for their tea break, and wasting plenty of time in between jobs during the day. We criticise only because we have cause to, not just for the sake of -it. —Yours, etc., SOPHOCLES. March 17, 1967.