Wage increases

Press, 19 February 1986, Page 18

Wage increases

Sir,—Your editorial of February 14 places a lot of the blame for high wage settlements at the door of the Higher Salaries Commission without mentioning the true culprits — middle and upper management in the private sector who gave themselves massive salary increases at a time when they were preaching belt tightening for their work forces. The formula that the commission had to work to was iaia down by the National Gov-

ernment and required it to study the movement in the private sector and apply that to State salaries. It is no wonder the workers were frustrated, as you put it, when they saw what their bosses had given themselves while they had been tightening their belts and seeing prices and dividends skyrocket. Example is the best leadership. The growth rate in luxury homes, cars, spa pools and boats, etc., is hardly the best way to convince workers that a decent living wage is too much to alm for.—Yours, etc., E. L. BARCLAY. February 14, 1986.

Sir,—Just about every union has been threatening strike action if wage demands are not met and another disastrous wage spiral seems probable. Our Government tried hard to give us a stable economy; but received no support from union members such as that so-called economist and Labour intellectual, Rob Campbell, who actually fuelled the drive for high ,:wage increases. Stan Rodger’s policy of non-intervention and his Govern?.? ment's acceptance of the Higher Salaries Commission only highlight his ineptitude. In the <past New Zealand |ed the world in some of the most enlightened and beneficial legislation yet enacted. A powerfulLabourGovemment could again lead the. world by putting an end to strikes. This could be done by restructuring unions to give all members opportunity to hold office and make decisions and by setting up a really effective appeal system; but this will not happen while Stan Rodger is Minister.—Yours, etc., TED MULCOCK. February 16, 1986.