Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

BRITISH RAILWAYS

QUESTION CF WAGE REDUCTIONS

UNIONS ACCEPT CHAIRMAN’S FINDINGS.

Press Association—-By Telegraph—Copyright

LONDON, January 24. (Received January 25, at 1.5 p.m,) Three Railway Union executives rejected the companies’ suggestion aifd accepted the chairman’s hndings, [A previous message read ns follows:—An unprecedented deadlock lias been caused by the issue of five separate reports by the members of the National Wages ' hoard for the Railways. Hitherto the board has always managed to agree upon certain principal liudings. This time only the railway companies’ own nominees accept the companies’ full claim for wages reductions totalling £5, 000,000-. The union delegates are unanimously against them, and the representatives of the railway users arc divided, two for and two against the claim. The chairman, Sir Harold Morris, separately reports in favour of reductions only to the extent of one-fifth of the companies’ demands. The newspapers take a serious view of the situation. Some suggest that the end of the board as a method of conciliation may result. Financial journals and most of the Conservative organs express the opinion that the companies’ case is proved, 'flic ‘ Daily Ux press ’ takes tho view that wage cuts only increase trade depression by reducing the people’s .spending power. It says the companies and tho unions should agree to the chairman’s recommendations. The railway companies surprisingly accepted tho recommendations of Sir Harold Morris.]

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19330125.2.88

Bibliographic details

Evening Star, Issue 21319, 25 January 1933, Page 7

Word Count
224

BRITISH RAILWAYS Evening Star, Issue 21319, 25 January 1933, Page 7

BRITISH RAILWAYS Evening Star, Issue 21319, 25 January 1933, Page 7