CIVIL SERVANTS' SALARIES

Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 56, 8 March 1922, Page 10

CIVIL SERVANTS' SALARIES

10 THI EDITOR.

Sir, —Your correspondent, Mr. H. E. Combs, has at length seen fit to explain how he arrived at his average rate of pay in the General Division (postmen, linemen, etc.) of 12s 4d. The league did examine page 71 of this year's estimates, but as there are no averages shown there, and Mr. Combs had not disclosed 1 how he arrived at his figures, we could only conclude that juniors were being included with seniors. Taking the explanation he now gives, it vail be seen, by reference to fche pa»c quoted,, that the 1969 male officers include 592 whose salaries range from £85 to £111. These we take to be juniors, and it is still evident that your correspondent arrives at his low averages by the inclusion of juniors, and then represents it a3 having reference to the salaries of men only. Of the 1969 male officers he refers to, we find that 969 are set down >t ££58. Mr. Combs says that "if, the female officers of tlie General Division were included in the calculation the a'- erage would be much lower." That is cniy a trick of suggestion again,, for on ; ; age 70 there are 486 officers shown with snaries from £284 to £450. If these also were included, of course it would make a difference. This "if" and "but" style of argument io of no value whatsoever. Instead of meeting our assertion that taking all officers' over 21 years of age 'the average salary showed at' £280 per annum, Mr. Combs shuffles out by? quoting a few cases who are not even over 21, according to his own statement. Mr. Combs's letter closes with the flippantly insolent remark that the league might show the average pay as £500 per annum by eliminating all below and above that level.

It might also be noted that the league could take Mr. H. E. Combs to he uie Post and Telegraph Officers of NVtf Zealand by simply eliminating ail otlif.vs connected with the service. The league is not likely to commit any such bbmifr.

May we suggest to your corr.2spoii'lent that in writing he Qaght to observe at least commonly decent manners. In this letter of his he says: "If the league had taken the trouble to look un page 71"—this in face of our deliberate statement that we had referred lo page 71 and our quotations from it.. If that is the style in which Mr. Combs discusses, then it is useless going further with him.

All the way through we find him misrepresenting the league's attitude, ■ and a.U because we dare to question hii extravagant statements. The league has neither justified the "cut" on tlie Public Service nor'the "cuts" on the public; it has appealed for an independent business examination of the Public services as being the most just way of dealing with the present financial difficulties. We have constantly asserted our belief that as much saving could be effected by reform of the system as by reduction of salaries.-—We are, etc., , N.Z. WELFARE LEAGUE. 7th March.