QUICK TURN-ROUND

Evening Post, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 121, 24 May 1944, Page 6

QUICK TURN-ROUND

COMMISSION'S AIM

QUESTION OF HANDLING COSTS

"Mr. Appleton, candidate for the Mayoralty and Harbour Board, states that the outstanding achievement ot the Waterfront Control Commission, of which I am a member, has been to increase substantially cargo handling costs, which were reflected in the price of every article inward and outward which had been handled on the Wellington wharf," said Mr. J. Roberts, Labour candidate for the Mayoralty, in addresses given last night. "Does Mr. Appleton assert that the Wellington Harbour Board has increased its charges for cargo handling since the commission was established, for on numerous occasions officials of the Harbour Board have informed the commission that the Price Tribunal has refused to allow an increase in these charges? Therefore, unless the Harbour Board has defied the law, and increased charges on its own account, any increase in the costs ot cargo handling inward or outward, whatever they are, cannot have been passed on to the public." The commission's bonus, Mr. Appletonl has asserted, had resulted in a progressive increase in the board's percentage, of the total distribution from 5.3d in 1940-41 to 22.6 din 1943-44. That misrepresented the position, for Mr. Appleton did not understand and evidently was not sufficiently interested to make inquiries as to the basis of profit ■ distribution, under the cooperative contracting system, by the Wellington Harbour Board. When the commission was appointed it immediately set about to introduce a pay-ment-by-results system which would give the men some incentive for increased efforts in lieu of the unsatisfactory wage, basis whereby the longer the job the greater the'return to the casual worker employed. Contract rates were fixed for the loading and discharging of ships, and as any increase in the rate of work from or to the ship resulted in a similar increase by the men employed on the wharf and in the sheds, arrangements were made whereby the Wellington Harbour Board would pay a profit distribution on man-hours worked by casual waterside workers employed, by the board equivalent to that paid to men engaged under contract on the ship, said Mr. Roberts..

. "The introduction of the co-operative contracting system has not meant any increase whatever in the cost of handling cargo by the board," he said. "The system has resulted in a substantial in-

crease in the rate of work and expedition of shipping, profit payments being made to the men concerned which would otherwise be paid in wages over a longer period." Mr. Appleton had made a comparison in cargo handling costs between the year 1937 and the year 1943, but the commission was not appointed until April, 1940, and any comparison so far as it affects the commission should be made between the years 1939 and 1943. An examination of costs for these years indicated that there had been an increase of 2.34 d per ton in the handling of overseas cargo; and in fact there had been a progressive decrease in costs since 1941. The cost of handling coastal and Australian cargo had increased to a greater extent, due to exceptional circumstances brought about through war conditions, some of which were the increase in wages of 2d an hour and cost of living bonus equivalent to those granted by. the Court of Arbitration, the change in the nature of cargo handled, the greater proportion of such heavy cargoes as iron, tin, raw materials, and munitions; congestion in wharf sheds, necessitating additional labour and double handling; the increase in night work and the slower handling in artificial light; and the greatly increased quantity of transhipment cargo handled at the port. When those facts were taken into consideration, said Mr. Roberts, it was surprising that the increase in costs had not been greater during the war period, but the cooperative contracting system had not been instrumental in increasing the Harbour Board cargo handling costs. On the other hand, the quick turnround of ships had resulted in a reduction in revenue through port charges. ■ , DISPATCH OF SHIPS. "The fact that ships are now discharged and loaded in a much shorter time than in the days when the shipowners and harbour boards controlled the industry does not seem to concern my> opponent," said Mr. Roberts. "Under the old system, overseas, vessels were detained on the coast of New Zealand for an average of 36 days loading and discharging. Under commission control the same and larger vessels have been discharged and loaded in an average of 16J- days. This speedier turn-round of ships has been obtained by continuous work day and night, Sundays and holidays, by the waterside workers; the co-opera-tive contract system, which gives an incentive to the men to perform better work; and centralisation of shipping, all of which have been introduced by the Waterfront Control Commission."

Whenever there was a rush of shipping about two years ago the Wellington and other harbour boards were unable to clear the sheds and consequently shipping was delayed; in other words, the board fell down on its -job, continued Mr. Roberts. On the suggestion of the commission, a cargo clearance committee was appointed, which included representatives of the commission, the consignees of cargo, Railway Department, the Chamber of Commerce, and a Harbour Board officer. They undertook the job which the Harbour Board failed to do.

"The facts are that my opponent knows very little about Harbour Board work, and that he has had no experience whatever was fully indicated on an occasion when I went before the board and pointed out that continuous work was necessary in order that New Zealand's produce should be loaded for overseas and that there should be a speedier turn-round of vessels in the coastal and inter-colonial trade," said Mr. Roberts. "The only contribution which Mr. Appleton made to the discussion was that if ships were loaded and discharged more quickly the board would suffer a substantial loss in wharf dues. It never occurred to him, it appears, that the carriage of New Zealand's produce overseas and the proper use of the coastwise trade was of paramount importance to our war effort, to our kinsmen in Great Britain, and to the economic life of this country."

Referring to Mr. Appleton's statement of the need for steps to be taken to assure a more reasonable and economic margin of wharfage in relation to cargo handling costs, in order to preserve the financial stability of the board, and that as things were shaping it was faced with a prospect of a loss in the current financial year, Mr. Roberts said that the report of the Harbour Board for the last financial year showed the most prosperous year in the history of the board, which, in fact, did not know how to hide its reserves, and there was no reason to suppose that this yedr would be any different. "The Wellington Harbour Board is one of the wealthiest public institutions in New Zealand," he said. "If Mr. Appleton went into such details as the assets of the board, its reserves, ai.d many other matters affecting its financial stability, I am sure he would not have the temerity to make such an absurd statement."