CITY'S EMPLOYEES

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 139, 16 June 1930, Page 10

CITY'S EMPLOYEES

DISMISSALS CRITICISED

LABOUR RESOLUTION

At a meeting of the Wellington Labour Bepresentation Committee held in the Trades Hall on "Wednesday evening, Mr. P.* Fraser, M.P., presiding, delegates from the General Labourers' Union reported that dismissals of workers with long ..services in the employ oil the City Council were taking place, and that these men were being informed that when the now relief works were commenced under tho Government's latest subsidy proposals they would be given preference of employment. The committee passed the following resolution unanimously:—"That this meeting protests against the action of the "Wellington City Council in dismissing labourers from its employ at this period of the year, when work is so difficult to find. This action of the j council is all the more reprehensible when, in conjunction with other bodies, it is making provision for relief work. The Labour Eepresentation Committee is strongly of the opinion that the City Council should endeavour to retain the men in its employ rather than add to the number of unemployed by discharging them, thus rendering- more difficult a problem it declares it is trying to solve, and adding to the misery which it claims it is striving to alleviate." The committee also expressed its opposition to the continuance of rates of wages on relief works in the city which fell below tho minimum provided in the Arbitration Court award, and registered its conviction that under the more generous subsidy terms offered by the Government, there was leas excuse than ever for relief rates of wages.

A "Post" reporter who made inquiries of the City Council regarding the position was told that, as in past years, men who were over 65 years of age were called upon to retire. In 1917,. council employees were given the opportunity of joining the. National Provident Fund scheme, which made it obligatory for the men to retire at the age of 65. Those who had joined the scheme retired upon a pension, but those who elected to stay outside had no pension. There was nothing new in the dismissals of men at the age of 65 this year, the policy having'been recognised for some years past. _^