Building Costs

Dominion, Volume 38, Issue 306, 25 September 1945, Page 6

Building Costs

Sir, —While T agree to a certain extent with Mr. R. G. Love in his address to the Wellington Chamber ot Commerce regarding building costs today, I do not think' that his figures in any way give a clear picture of the actual facts, hirst, his inference that carpenters’ wages amounting to 4/0» are loaded on to a £lOO6 job is entirely wrong. Hie tact is that in 1939 though wages were nomin-, ally 2/9s, plus sd. tool allowance (not insurance) very little if any work was done at that figure, and was invariably higher, usually 3/- an hour. Today the position is that carpen teas’ wages are 3/04 plus cost-of-living bonuses, plus the IJd. fool allowance, making a total ot approximately 3/41 an hour with lour hours overtime thrown in, as well as half an hour a day travelling time included. He also made mi mention ot the fact that for nt least five years earpentors’ wtifjos have boon under war einei"■pney regulations, a flat rate paj input of 3/3 an hour for a 54 and later a 4bhour week’. This with taxation. off Jett the carpenter with less than £7/10/- a week if he had no lost time. Luder the new award of a 40-hour week plus four hours overtime there is a drop of over 5/- on this amount. So, in spite ot very slight increases in wages and overhead charges, it will be imperative to look elsewhere for the terrific increase in building costs. Mr. Love’s figures on the cost of materials arc substantially correct, and I agree with him, as one who also has been associated with building for nigh on half a century, that the surgestion that a builder makes a profit ot £5OO on a £l5OO job is not only ridiculous, but childish nonsense. I am, etc., A. STENBERG. , Palmerston North. September 21.