THE MUNICIPAL BATHS.

Evening Star, Issue 19410, 19 November 1926, Page 5

THE MUNICIPAL BATHS.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —I notice the City Council, at its last meeting, could not agree too well in regard to the question of appointing a new lady assistant for the baths. It is not generally known that if the new assistant was appointed she would take the place of Mrs Olds. This strange procedure originated in a small group of the General Committee some time back, headed by Cr Sincock, and supported by Cr Clark, Cr Larnach, and the town clerk. Crs Hayward and Hancock, more loyal to justice, opposed the scheme. Cr Sincock has for years past attacked the custodian, and, undaunted by his many failures to dispose of him, is apparently determined to gain his ends at all costs. In his new scheme Cr Sincock seeks to break down the dual control of the baths, and force the custodian oijt of the baths dwelling. Two of the General Committee have refused to couple themselves with the -scheme. From what can bo gathered, the young woman who is to fill Mrs Olds’s place is to be imported from the North Island. What I want to point out is that Mrs Olds has boon employed at tho local baths for tho past thirteen years, and there has been no complaint made about her duties or any information asked as to why she should have to accept dismissal or be refused tho option to be reinstated under tho new idea. Cr Sincock should bo made to show his hand in this case. If Mrs Olds merits Cr Sincock’s attack, then ho should give tho public (who are tired of his bath grievance) his reasons. I have attended tho baths regularly since their opening, and know very well the worth of Mrs Olds, who is too valuable a public servant to be thrown aside for another for no special reason. The baths are going along very nicely, and the bather who desires better treatment that he is getting there is very hard to please.—l am, etc., George Fey. November 19.