CLASSIFICATION.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 333, 21 October 1908, Page 12

CLASSIFICATION.

THE RAILWAY DEPARTMENT. (Contributed.) Tho Railways Classification Act of 1907, was framed on the understanding that the youngor members of the' service wero to deriro reasonable benefits. Had it become known nt the initial stage that the railway management simply played on the feelings of those members to gain, support by their gross misrepresentations, to suit their own purposes, tho Bill would not lmve passed into law. What is the result? A Bill, providing for a certain rate of salary for specified services rendered, but interpreted so as. to imply, just what- tho management wishes. ] .On,the face of such an Act, why shpuid"tM!ipower j.ofi enforcing such an interpretation be allowed? Tlio manner in which it is read by the Department, to tho minds of tho majority of railway, officials, seems wrong, and probably is legally so. ' Now, what do we find? A body of officials hi .a-.source, of discontent, simply through the paltry, actions of their heads in depriving them of what all along they have been led to believe their rights. What has caused tho intricacies complained of by the authorities in compiling the classification? The reply, in short, is easily given—departmental adoption of anomalous methods to effect a saving at tho expense of its members. Disabilities are numerous, and if tho authorities are not yet alive to tho position, tho abundantly signed petitions now in circulation, and tho many appeals going and gono forward, it is, hoped may make them realise tho fact. A clerk, say, with ten years' present service, draws in all' £865, though tho new Bill provides for the samo period £1150, yet it, is not deemed advisable by the railway heads to offer any compensation to tho old servant who lias given his services' at' a smaller amount), comparatively speaking, in all, £295. Will tho Department point out the_ substantial benefits to bo dorived in looking forward two or three years?' Five pounds covering practically two years is not what might be termed luxurious. It was never _ contended that cadets wero being treated differently from other officers, but it is maintained that they aro being treated entirely - differently _ from what they were under tlio previous Bill, which, is word for word with the present Act, and they (590 odd) havo just _ causo for complaint. Will the _ authorities deny that tho Prime Minister mado uso of the argument when questioned in tho Houso regarding delay to the D—3 that tho matter of placing casuals on the permanent list; necessitated a considerablo amount of communications with district offices, which involved much delay, ctc., or words to that effect. Is it not a singular thing these casuals do not appear on tho list at all? Much has already been said on this subject, and the authorities - might well ponder over tlio following:—That the Classification of Railway Servants is not based on tho truo •reading of tho Act, but many suffered disabilities, which fact is borne out by appeals, and largely signed petitions from members complaining of injustices dono them; that the legal rights of cadets from tho salary point of view have v been deprived them.