LABOUR EFFICIENCY

Evening Post, Volume CXIII, Issue 88, 13 April 1917, Page 7

LABOUR EFFICIENCY

REPRESENTATION ON BOARD

THE MINISTER'S DIFFICULTY.

A protest -was entered by the Timber Workers' Federation in a deputation to the Acting-Prime Minister (Sir James Allen) yesterday against the action, of the Government in not having Labour representation on the Efficiency Board.

Mr. T. O'Byrne, Chairman of the federation, said- this was a most important matter >to the Labour community. They had in their ranks men who had made a special study of economic production and distribution, but they had no representation, s while the other side, which did not study these matters in the same way, had all the representatives. They considered a slut had been cast on the Labour movement. 1 Sir James Allen : No, no. Mr. O'Byrne : Well, we have some very fine men,, skilled in organisation, and we should at least be consulted.

, Mr. Hiram Hunter said they did not wish the Government to. nominate a Labour representative, but to allow one to be elected by the trade unions, in the same way that the representative on the Arbitration Court was elected. That was the only way in which they could obtain a man entitled to speak on behalf of Labour.

Sir James Allen said that when th& Efficiency Board was being set up—it was in his original memorial to Cabinet —they considered whether they should select a Labour man. "I had made provision for a Labour man, if not on\ the central council, on the subsidiary councils, and intended to pay him, as I recognised that a man could not bei expected to give up his time without come salary." The members of the board now selected we>e honorary, and received nothing more than their travel-ling-expenses. They were selected because they were proved business men, of business capacity, patriotic and loyal, with initiative and resource, possessing the Confidence of the community. He! did not say that they could not have : got a Labour man with all these qualifications, but he. must admit that he found it very difficult to find him. If he had selected a Labour man. from- the ranks of one section, that would have caused him more trouble than making no selection at all. They knew the jealousies that existed among Labour. But he hoped even now that they would takei Labour with them in this efficiency movement. He hoped to have a Labour adviser for the board. He could not accept a nominated man, but he would consider a nomination if it were submitted to him, Th« Efficiency Board would have to be consulted, and he would ; have to exercise his own judgment, but he assured them that ne would ■consider it only for the good of the efficiency movement. In reply to a remark from a member of the deputation,! Sir James asked : " How long does a man remain a Labour man—if we put a man on the board, how long would he retain' your confidence?"' ■■■■■■,

Mr. O'Byrne : As long as he advo Gated our principles.

Sir James: Well, your views might change. He proceeded to say that Mr. Frostick was a man who had risen right from the ranks of Labour and had undoubted sympathy with Labour, Mr. Moss was at one time president of the Canterbury Carpenters and Joiners' Union. He had become a successful farmer since, but was not a rich man., A member: That has changed his views.

Another : There are as great Conservatives in the ranks of/Labour as ekewhere.

Sir James replied, that he considered those two men 'as Labour representatives. Any man selected would bo criticised if he had advanced a little.

Mr. J. Read: You don't find that about Mr. M'Cullough (elected representative on tho Arbitration Court). Mr. O'Byrne: We claim that the working, class is not represented. Sir James Allen said he wished to have the assistance of Labour. He had appointed Labour men to all the Military Service except Auckland, where, aftenmaking a request that they should be represented, the Labour people declined to nominate anyone.

Mr. Read 3aid this was a most vital matter to Labour. He referred to tho request of the Master Coachbuilders that overtime rates should be reduced by ?5 per cent. It was only the overtime ratea which safeguarded the eight-hour day. Such a proposal was disastrous, but Labour had no means of countering except through the press. Sir James Allen said that they might be assured that any such proposal would be most seriously considered before being adopted. He' understood that the proposal was that during the war, with so many men out of the country, men should work a little longer as their share of the war sacrifices. That, if it were limited to the war, might be reasonable; but it would be different if it were proposed to continue it after the war. A member: Would you take the employers' profits? Sir Jame3 Allen replied that they were taking 45 per cent, of excess profits in addition to increased land and income taxe3. If it were necessary more would be taken.

Mr. Read: You have consulted the other side, but not with us.

Sir James Allen: The other side have not been consulted. No one' has been consulted. He repeated that if a Labour man were suggested he would consider the nomination.