THE PUBLIC SERVICE

Evening Star, Issue 15344, 19 November 1913, Page 10

THE PUBLIC SERVICE

OFFICERS AGGRIEVED. TH.P C(,M.\!T*S:CNEFS CRITICISED. rFaoji Our Parliamentary Reporter.] WELLINGTON. November 19. The first miestion to obtain serious attention in tho House of Representatives yesterday afternoon was the deadlock between representatives of the Post and Telegraph Service and the Public Service Commissioners. The subject was raised by Sir Joseph Ward, who, in order to train opportunity to discuss the alleged grievances, introduced the J PUBLIC SERVICE BILL.

The Right Hon Leader of the Opposition explained at the outset that he had not communicated with anv of the officers concerned, but had seen in a newspaper report, which he read, that an impasse had boon reached between a conference representing the Post and Telegraph Service and the Public Service Commissioners. It appeared that (hey had been refused an interview with tho Commissioners to yentilate their grievances. Ho went on to point out that the control of the service had passed to tho Commissioners, and that the public servants were not free men, and could not speak to a member of Parliament about their conditions of service. The Post and Telegraph Department was in contact with every section of the community everywhere, and noted for the high position it occupied in public estimation and now their representatives found themselves under a law which gave the Commissioners the power to deny them the right to. represent their grievances. He asked the Postmaster-General how he felt on the subject. The Postmaster-General controlled the whole service, and yet in this respect he was ,as helpless as a babe unborn. If he interfered ho was liable to a fine of £SO. Although he was the. head oi a department earning some millions a year, and engaged in duties which concerned almost evory person in New Zealand, ho was, in fact, a mere cipher, and he (Sir Joseph. Ward) regarded that as an anomalous condition of affairs. Tho prosent position raised a very important principle. If members of the service, by way of deputation, could not submit their view's to the Commissioners'thev would be under a serious disability. He regarded the present condition of affairs as a. retrograde step. The rank and file of the service could not get the resolutions of a conference placed before the Commissioners. That was what seemed to him to be a very unfortunate position. ANOTHER STORY. _ The Hon. A. L. Herdman agreed that it was advisable to ventilate tho case in the House, so that the facts might be made public. He thought that the public and the service had come to realise that the Public Service Act was one of the most beneficent measures that had been placed on the Statute Book. (Opposition dissent.) The members of the Opposition, continued the Attorney-General, resented its popularity because they were no longer able to utilise the influence which they once exercised. (Government applause and Opposition _ dissent.) Despite criticism, he was satisfied, from what he had heard from persons competent to speak, that tho Act was likely to prove an incalculable benefit to the country as a whole. When the Act was passed there were in tho Public Service many people who owed their position to political "influence, and it was quite reasonable to suppose that thev would resent the operation of tho Act. " As to the Post, and Telegraph Department's deputation, he said they submitted a resolution that was not based upon fact— namely, that there had been a differentiation in treatment of various officers. It was passed wildly, without thought, and the deputation admitted to the Commissioners that they had no facts to support the resolution. The deputation, however, refused to withdraw the resolution, which, said the Minister, was in fact an insult to the Commissioners, who, he believed, were absolutely justified in taking up the position they did. He went on to contradict the suggestion that there was dissatisfaction with the recent reclassification ot tue Post and Telegraph Service. "As a. matter of fact." he"declared, "there is greater satisfaction with the recent reclassification than with the classification in 1891." hi the recent classification the percentage of appeals was 8.6; in 1891 it was 17.24. As to tho service as a whole, the percentage of appeals was 29.95, as against 38.3 in connection with the abortive classification scheme brought down by the previous Administration. He gave, figures to show that some, at any rate, of the_ New Zealand officers are in a better position than similar officers in the Commonwealth, of Australia, and he contended that the classification of the service had been carried out with zeal, discretion, and ability. To his mind it was amazing that the Act had worked so smoothly, and he had the strongest possible proof that the benefit derived by the public and the service was immense. OTHER OPINIONS. -Mr Hanan said it was remarkable that the head of the department (the Post-master-General) bad nothing to say on the subject, and left the explanation to one of his colleagues. As to the. case under review, he urged that an attempt had been made by the Commissioners to bluff tho deputation into submission. Time and again railway servants had made much stronger representations to the Minister of Railways, and had not been treated by the Minister in such a high-handed manner as the Commissioners treated this deputation. It was, ho added, pure "funk" on the part. of the Government that they had not brought all departments under" the scheme. The action of the Commissioners against these men would only intensify public indignation against their establishment.

The Hon. R. H. Rhodes said he believed that as a rule the officers of the Public Service were not dissatisfied with the working of the Act. As to political influence, he believed that the Post and Telegraph Office was working moro easily now tluui in the past. In the past political influence had been used, and anyone applying on his own had very little chanco of obtaining an appointment. As to the deputation, he said that if the delegates had come to him as Minister with the same rc-i-olution he would have turned them down as the Commissioners had turned them down. They came to him before they went to the Commissioners, and ho told them that he felt sure tho Commissioners would be sympathetic. Sir Joseph Ward : You oucrht to bo fined £SO.

The Postmaster-General went on to .say that if the deputation would withdraw the personal allusion the Commissioners would he prepared to receive them at any timo. Mr Witty remarked that after the Post-master-General's speech they knew very little more than they did before. He recalled a return laid'on the. table two or three years ago showing that the person who had used most political influence on getting appointments V the service was the present Prime Minister, and the next was the prescr.it Postmaster-General. Mr Massey: Absolutely incorrect.

Mr Witty adhered to the correctness of his recollection ard quoted telegraphed protests by Hastings and Hawke's Bav branches of the. Poet and Telegraph Officers' Association in support of the conduct of the deputation that waited on the Commissioners. He contended that it was proved therefrom that tho Commissioners had been overbearing, and that the resolution of tho conference had not been ill-considered. He went on to suggest that the Public Service Commissioners were appointed in order to relieve incompetent Ministers from the responsibility of controlling their own departments. It the Post master-General had been a strong man ho would have put his foot down and said : " I am not going to allow those under my care to be brought under a Public Service Board unless all the other officials in every other department are treated in exactly the same way." The lion, member went on to say that hifi experience was that the Act was not gaining in popularity, and he argued that it was not good ' for the country. MORE TACT WANTED. Mr Veitch gave it as his opinion that the _ Commissioners had, through lack of knowledge or of experience, mis'-

understood the position. As to the Post-master-General defending the Commissioners, he (Mr Veitch) thought that the Postmaster-General should have defended his staff against the Commissioners. The latter were an expensive luxury, and were expected to show tact. Let th'em try and be not so very particular about their personal dignity, and let them realise that respect could not be forced upon anybody. It had to be acquired. It seemed to him that the Commissioners had been hopelessly tactless.

In tho course of the general debate the Hon. F. M. B. Fisher said that not so long ago members on the other side of the House used to swear by Mr Robertson (Chief Commissioner); now they swore at him. Was it conceivable, he* asked, that a gentleman who had the reputation of being courteous and fair-minded had been reduced by his new position to treating men discourteously ? The Minister went on to suggest that the papers dealing with the" matter should be printed and circulated among members, so that they could see for themselves w"hat had really happened. He explained what had taken place between the deputation from the conference and the Commissioners. The deputation had gone along to the Commissioners and submitted their resolutions. Then they were asked to cite facts and cases in support of the grievance contained in the resolution. They haggled over certain names, but the chairman of the conference admitted in the end that they really had no grievance. The "Bill" was talked out.