WAR RISK GRATUITY TO SEAMEN

Dominion, Volume 36, Issue 307, 22 September 1943, Page 10

WAR RISK GRATUITY TO SEAMEN

Reply To Criticism FEDERATION PRESIDENT’S STATEMENT

Critics of the Government, had wrongly reported the facts about the war risk gratuity of £9 a month to merchant seamen, said the general president ot the New Zealand Federation of Seamen s Union. Mr. F. P. Walsh, yesterday. \\ ar Cabinet's approval of the gratuity in no way transgressed the provisions ot .be stabilization regulations. “First of all, the gratuity is nor an extra war risk bonus.’’ said -Mr. M als.i. “As a gratuity it differs front a bonus in that it is not paid in cash now, but is to be paid out after the war It is credited at the rate of £b a month, and after deduction of taxation the balance is paid into the individual seamans National Savings Account. If. he has no account, one is opened for him. “As will be seen from the regulations, the granting of the gratuity does not run counter to stabilization. M ages and other rates of remuneration are stabilized by the Economic Stabilization Kegulatioiis, 1942, the general purpose being to hold all rates of remuneration at the levels of November 15, 1942. Under the regulations, however, increases can be granted in certain special circumstances and one of those circumstances is where, an employee is engaged in work involving additional risk to life or health." Nobody would deny that New Zealand seamen were facing additional risks in the course of their employment, he said. Merchant seamen in this war were among the first to suffer from the attacks of the enemy. Great numbers of them had los„ their’lives in enemy submarines and air attacks and there had been innumerable accounts of their endurance, courage and devotion to duty in the face of danger.

Within Time Limit.

“The stabilization regulations also provide that where negotiations for increases were under way before December lu, then those negotiations could be completed within six months’ limit, Mr. \Vals.i continued. “The negotiations between toe union and the Government concerning the war risk gratuity to seamen began m October. 1942, and they, accordingly, come well within the scope of the regulations dealing with transition*!! cases. “From this it will be seen that far from being contrary to the provisions of the Stabilization llegnlations, the granting 01 this war risk gratuity to seamen entirely conforms with those regulations. . It should be added that before War Cabinet authorized this gratuity the proposal was before the Economic Stabilization Commission, which recommended that the proposed increases be approved. “The £0 a month deferred gratuity and the £6 a month original war risk bonus received by Xew Zealand merchant seamen can he compared with the bonuses being paid to Australian and United States seamen at the time when uar Cabinet approved payment of the gratnty. Australian seamen, instead of being paid their war risk bonus on a flat rate, were paid on a percentage basis. Crews on Australian articles, for the first, three months’ service on one ship received as war risk bonus 33 1-3 per cent, additional to their combined wages and overtime and if they remained on a ship after that period the bonus became oU per cent, payable for the whole period that they were employed, including the first three months. This Australian bonus was payable monthly in cash. Tor. example, a master on Australian articles receiving £9O a month in wages and overtime would receive au additional x4a a month war risk bonus. On New Zealand articles he receives £6 a month war risk bonus in cash and the £6 gratunty payment, less taxation, is credited to mm in a National Savings Account, and he receives it after the Avar.

American Bonus. “American seamen in the Pacific received a flat war risk bonus of 100 dollars a month in cash and an additional 100 dollars in cash when their vessel entered .the main New Zealand ports. 11ns extra 100 dollars was paid merely for entering those ports. In the event ot their vessel calling at the port of Sydney, the additional amount was 12a dollars. If they entered itwo New Zealand ports as well as Sydney in the one month, they received 325 dollars additional to the original 100 dollars war risk bonus, making a grand total of 425 dollars in bonuses. . “Those who criticize payment ot this war gratuity to seamen constantly contradict themselves. They set out to condemn the Government for approving the gratuity and yet in the same breath they emphasize that the seamen thoroughly deserve it. They have taken the matter up solely as part of their electioneering campaign ; but why should the merchant seamen be used as a chopping block for such a purpose? Can anyone say that New Zealand merchant seamen have not played their part in this war.