Industrial problems

Press, 17 July 1979, Page 29

Industrial problems

Sir, —In reply to Alan Wilkinson (July 13), what surveys? Discussions with several men on the merits and demerits of strikes convince me that my stand is not peculiar to women; nor is it against workers and men in general. I am concerned that strike action does no-one any good — least of all the workers. To quote “The Press” editorial (July 13): “. . . the customers suffer and the customers pay . . .” Business collapse and unemployment are a consequence of continual strikes. The employer must have sufficient production to obtain profit and to plough back into the business to provide jobs and to enable him to meet wage demands. With regard to workers: Does the correspondent imply that women do not work? As a mother of five with no wage, union or recourse to strike action I eagerly await his “. . . new technology that will eliminate their traditional jobs.”—Yours, etc., W. MARGARET DENNIS. July 13, 1979.

Sir,—l wish to record my sincere admiration for the long-suffering wives of the strikers of which there must be many. I am still old fashioned enough to believe that the “fundamental purpose” of marriage is for the wife to respect her husband and diligently care for the children of the partnership, and this alone calls for all the ingenuity and resources at a woman’s command. When we have added to this the loss of a regular wage coming into the home, is it any wonder that there is more tension on tension, and a consequential breakdown in the structure? I truly believe that the majority of men wish to honestly work for their daily bread. Who then are the small minority causing such utter chaos in our wonderful land? Whoever coined the phrase that women are the “weaker vessel” needed his head examined.—Yours, etc.,

ETHEL SOTHERAN. July 11, 1979.