WET-WEATHER PAY

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 147, 24 June 1933, Page 10

WET-WEATHER PAY

REPLY TO MR. MILLER

Replying to Mr. Miller h statement in yesterday's "Post," Mr. A. Black, secretary of the Labour Representation Committee, said today:— "I am pleased that Mr. Miller has acknowledged the accuracy of my statement as regards Mr. Eraser's anxiety to keep tho by-election contest as far removed from national and Parliamentary politics as possible. It is also very satisfactory that" Mr. Miller also •acknowledges the truth of my statement that Mr. Wright moved that the wages of the employees of the City Council should be reduced by 5s per week, and] that payment for time lost, through wet weathor should be withdrawn. J "The excuse put forward for the withdrawal of payment for wet weather is altogether too feeble. If the engineers and foremen couldn't make up their minds when men ought to knock off through wet weather, they themselves would not be able to come in out of the.wet. There is really no difficulty in the matter. "In regard to the expense' to the 1

ratepayers involved by" payment for | wet weather the excuse is still weaker. The'amount was l-500th of Id per £1 j on the unimproved value, "I am certain no. ratepayer would grudge a guaranteed weekly income to i the homes of the council's" employees j at such a small cost. No decent-minded ratepayer would accentuate the strugglo for even one worker's wife and family to save such a small amount. . •'ln any case there is no evidence that the reductions wero passed on to the ratepayers. Surely it was doubly unjust to give tho council employees both barrels at once—a reduction of 5s per week, and withdrawal of payment for wet, weather at the same time. " "I recognise Mr. Miller's fairness in informing your readers that Mr. Fraser was absent from the council .meeting when these decisions wero arrived at. Howcyer, it should also bo known that in spite of illness Mr. Fraser emphatically protested against the council's action in the 'Evening Post' of May 30, 1922, and, on Mr. Wright endeavouring to explain away and justify his action, Mr. Fraser replied reiterating his strong protest on the following day, June 5. "The assertion in regard to Mr. Chapman is too .ridiculous. Mr. Chapman had fought hard for payment for wet weather and had helped to obtain it. He still stands for the principle. It is obvious that Mr. Chapman tested the council on the first recommendation of the finance and property committee involved, a well established practice, and did not consider.it necessary, or omitted to have his protest recorded on the second resolution to which he was, and always has been, strongly opposed.",