HIGHER WAGES

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 100, 25 October 1933, Page 10

HIGHER WAGES

BUT SHORTER HOURS

[REQUEST TO MINISTERS

LABOUR DEPUTATION

MR. FORBES'S ATTITUDE

Increased wages and shorter hours of work were advocated by Mr. J. Roberts, on behalf of the New Zealand. Alliance of - Labour, today, during the course of a statement which he presented to the Prime Minister (the Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes) on behalf, of the trade union movement of the Dominion. Among those present were the Minister of Employment (the Hon. A. Hamilton), the Minister of Lands (the. Hon. E. A. Ransom), Labour members of Parliament, and several members of the Coalition Party. Mr. Roberts contended that the wage and salary reductions had aggravated the unemployment . problem, and in his opinion the only way. by which prosperity' could be restored was through the restoration of purchasing power, a reform of the cur-i-enoy and credit system, and an iequitable distribution of the production of the Dominion to all those who tendered service to the community. Replying, the Prime Minister said that the Government had come to the (conclusion that the policy the GovernInent. was-carrying out was the one >nost likely to be of the greatest Lenefitto the people. iMr. Roberts said the, deputation-con-feidered the present economic position teoi serious .that the issues, involved should not be discussed from the,point of .view of. party- politics or even from ihe point -of view of the employers'..or workers'-organisations. ■ The essential ■thing in "New Zealand today was to organise .production and distribution' on a-; basis, that1 would .maintain, a reasonable standard, of comfort-for ithe people ahdj would ensure; some economic'security .to the farmers, manufacturers, traders, and wage-workers! The Parliaments' of most. countries had not taken legislative action to meet the economic. changes which had taken place, and the result was. that there were millions of people 'in the world who had ' no' economic security _ whatever. Indeed, there were millions of people who were denied even the bare necessities of life. Price levels had fallen, unemployment had increased, and despite what might be said to the con-' tr'ary' all the' legislation which the Government, of New,Zealand had enacted •with the object of restoring prosperity had failed. The [plain truth was that economic conditions in' New Zealand ■were worse than at ahy: time in its history. ..•.-.'. • • ■ ! ; : DEFLATIONARY POLICY. \ The'trade unionists of New Zealand were of the opinion that the members vf; Parliament who had supported .the Government in. its ■ policy, of deflation were, to a large extent, responsible for the" terrible economic and social, conditions which .'existed in' the country, tfhey had supported legislation which reduced'the value of labour power, which after all Was the greatest factor in1 deciding the price levels of other commodities. ' After-referring to. the ■wage redactions which the Government had enfofcedj Mr. Roberts said that soon after wages were reduced price levels began to drop, both in the overseas and'home markets, and prices had continued to fall-until a few months ago. He said that the idea that the best method to reduce costs of production was to cut wages might have had some force in the days when' labour costs in the production of commodities were seventy per cent, of the total, but under present-day methods of production wage costs were only from 20 to 30 per cent, of the total. Therefore, ■when wages were reduced by ten per cont. the cost of production was reduced only by two or three per cent., while at the same time tho purchasing power of the workers was lowered.by ten per cent., and any. business man would say that to operate a business during a depression period was far more expensive than ■in times of prosperity. Wageeiitting was equally as,bad for the employer 33 it was for the workers and the State generally. If the Government had in 1931 directed that wages should 'be increased by ten per cent, instead of giving what amounted to a direction that wages should be reduced ■by ten per cent. New Zealand would be in a much more favourable economic position today. NATIONAL INCOME. Mr. Roberts referred to the marked aecline which had taken place in the national income, and added that the only method of alleviating the position was to restore purchasing power to the wage-earners- : This/should, bo the'first fluty -of Parliament. If the loss in purchasing power of the workers was restored it would also restore the ,loss-in purchasing- power of a great many people whoso businesses depended on the wages and salaries of the working people. It would ajso further increase internal price levels of farm products. The trade union movement challenged the absurd economic teaching that tho standard of life of the New Zealand people should be determined by overseas price levels. The living standard should bo'determined on the ability of New Zealand to produce commodities and render social services. The people were entitled to a standard of living in accordance with their productive capacity.. He asked why the workers of Jhe Dominion should be forced to accep't a foreign standard whon tho production per person employed in that foreign country was far less than the production per person employed in the Dominion. ' Overseas price levols should affect the standard of living here only in relation to the value or volume of the goods imported. What was required in New Zealand was a little more common ji.fenso, economic independence, and probably the superannuation of those economists who had led the people by their peddling of the philosophy of wage-cuts, rigid economy, and dependence on other countries for living standards. THe increase in exchange rate had accentuated the trouble for the wage and salary workers, who cou?d not purchase in Great Britain goods equal in value to the commodities exported. This had resulted in a one-way trade. Vessels were coming to New Zealand in ballast, and a demand was now being made by the people of Great Britain for restrictions and quotas on tho Dominion's export trade. Tho increased price obtained by the high rate of exchange was used for the most part iu paying interest on loans and mortgages. As the United Kingdom was practically the only open market for New Zealand, the Dominion could not afford to impose unfair trading conditions on the British workers. Internal prices had to increase in accordance with tho in-i-reaso in purchasing power. This had I liecn clearly; demonstrated by; thel

operations of the National Bocovery Act since it had been in force in the United States of America. "THE" BEST MARKET." The home market was after all the best market, continued Mr. Boberts, and it was the market they could control. Mr. Boberts criticised the monetary system and asked whether such a system which had brought ruin to thousands of people should be supported in the future. In reality it had sentenced thousands of workers and their dependants to three years of insecurity, misery, and want. By the adoption of a common-sense system of controlled currency and credit and sane methods of production and distribution, there would be an abundanco of the necessaries of life for all. There was no reason whatever why there should not be a controlled currency in New Zealand. The Dominion could establish a currency based on the goods produced and the services rendered in the Dominion and the trade union movement was of the opinion that an economic price could be guaranteed to the farmer and manufacturer. Statements had been made that a guaranteed price for the farmers would take £20,000,000 annually, but these statements were no doubt due to the fact that some people could not consider currency questions except in terms of gold, sterling, and overseas price levels. There was no power _ that could prevent Parliament establishing a State-controlled currency. HOURS OF LABOUR. Mr. Eoberts referred to the phenomenal growth of labour-saving devices and said that the only method of dealing with the situation was to shorten hours of work. • Ho suggested that legislation should bo passed establishing a five-day week of seven hours in all industries where the five-day week could be economically applied. It was realised that in some industries, work had to be continuous and at present three' shifts were being worked. This shouldbo changed immediately to four shifts of six .hours each, but in any case, the working week should not exceed 36 hours. Referring to the unemployment problem, Mr. Roberts said that on the basis of factory production figures, the loss of production alone through 80,000 workers being unemployed was £33,500,000, and if they took the farnir ing'industry, .the loss would be greater. These figures showed conclusively that doles and• unemployment'■ schemes would not meet, the situation, and it should be 'the' duty of tlie 'nation to get the workers.1 back into employment.' l| wages were increased and hours:shortened, they would turn-the corner towards ' th'at! prosperity ■ concerning whi6h some people'had talked so'long; PRIME MINISTER'S REPLY. In the course of his reply, the Prime Minister said that ho was glad to have had the opportunity of meeting the members of Jhe deputation. The Government often had to listen to a great deal "Of criticism from people who thought they could run the country more .efficiently. . Mr. F. Langstone, M.P.: Hear, hear.. Mr. Forbes said that very often those who were most dogmatic in their opinions knew least about the subject. There was an old saying about the valour of ignorance. \ Mr. Langstone: But knowledge gives confidence. In America, said Mr. Forbes, there was an endeavour to.bring wages to a minimum rate, and that minimum rate was not the rate.in New Zealand; it worked .out at about something under £3; '. ''■'.■ Mr. Boberts said' that some, of the skilled mechanics had had big increases inwages. Mr. Forbes said that higher wages would a'dd'to the costs of production. , ' Mr.: Boberts: You are taking wages. as the: total cost of production, and they represent, only about 20 per cent. • ■'Mr.. jFo'rbes: If the employers say it was' a mistake to reduce wages, they can. still-pay ■more; ■ Mr. P. Fraser, M.P.: The bad employer drives out the good. .Raising .wages and shortening hours were being done voluntarily in America, said Mr. Forbes. Mr. H. T. Armstrong, M.P.: The same voluntary principle is applied in America as you applied to the conversion loan. ; a Mr. Forbes said that the Government was." endeavouring to shape a course along sound lines. Would the Government be .justified in doing something which it thought would make' matters worse? ■" ' s . Mr. Boberts: Will you appoint a committee to examine the question? Mr. Forbes: We would end up where wo are today. The representations would have the consideration of the Government, but it remained for the Government, to sum up the position, concluded Mr. Forbes.