BOROUGH WAGES

Evening Post, Volume CXIII, Issue 57, 8 March 1932, Page 12

BOROUGH WAGES

50 PER CENT. CUT AT PETONE

DECISION AFFIRMED

{The Petone Borough Council three •weeks ago passed a resolution reducing %he wages and salaries of its staff by 10 per cent. .An attempt made at last night's meeting to have that resolution Rescinded failed by five votes to four.

Three notices of motion on the "subject were before the council last night. JFhe first, :by Councillor A.- Scholefield, "was to rescind the resolution imposing the 10 per cent, cut and to make the cuts on a graduated basis ranging from total-exemption to 7£ per cent". Councillor V. E. Jacobson gave notice to move.that the cut be qualified by paying not less'than £4 8s a week to any married man, and that a committee be set up to adjust anomalies arising from the imposition of the cut. . Councillor V.-A. Noble's motion was that no married man, employed by the council should receive less than £4 5s S, week after the application of the cut. The motion to rescind the resolution imposing the 10 per-cent, cut was moved by Councillor Scholefield and Seconded by Councillor Noble.

It was suggested by Councillor Jacobfeon'that the suggestions made in the three motions and by other councillors should be examined by the Finance Committee. It was apparent that not every councillor "was satisfied with a fiat 10 per_ cent. 'cut.

Councillor R. W. Toomath suggested the appointment of a special committee to investigate every man's case and to avoid anomalies ."by making suitable increments" in "wages, still keeping to the spirit of the cut. :

Agreement with this was expressed Jjy Councillor J..C. Burns.

. A case against the rescinding of the 3.0 per cent, cut was made by Councillor E. T. E. Hogg. Now was a time of deflation, and wages must come down as the cost of living was coming down; If the wages of the lower-paid servants of the council were sufficient last Jyear they were sufficient now" with the cut, for the cost of living had- fallen proportionately. .He quoted statistics to demonstrate this; The cut should Toe made in fairness to the large number' ©f ratepayers who were either unemployed . themselves^ •' or sharing the "burden of unemployment by having relations out of work. Moreover, many of the ratepayers were employees .•■. of the Government, which was meditating a further cut. A difficult year was phead.

It was pointed out by Councillor Jacobson that th© council had* a duty to its employees as well as to the ratejayers.

Councillor J. W. Longman, said that !he would yoto against the rescission of the cut, although the cut was distasteful to him. Any anomalies could be adjusted by the council when the esti-mates-were r being-framed.

Councillor C. P. Brockelbank said Ithat they should not alter their previous decision in justice to the ratepayers, many of whom were getting considerably less than the council employees^ :■"". •■: .'■

• The motion to rescind was put and lost; ayes were the Mayor (Mr, D. MeKejizie), and Councillors Scholefield, Noble, and uacobson, v and the inoes were Councillors Longman, Hogg, jToomath, Burns, and Broekelbank.

; ;As the rescinding motion was lost, the previous resolution stands, and cantot be altered for six months.