NO MORE ALLOWANCES

Evening Star, Issue 21523, 22 September 1933, Page 3

NO MORE ALLOWANCES

RETIRING HARBOUR EMPLOYEES BOARD DECIDES ON POLICY After granting liberal retiring allowances, in addition to superannuation, to two executive officers the Harbour Board last night affirmed the principle to grant no retiring allowances in the future. In accordance with notice given, Mr H. C. Campbell moved—“ That the board affirm the principle that no retiring allowance should be granted to employees who retire on superannuation.”

Mr Campbell said the board had dealt very liberally with two officers in the secretarial and engineering departments, having given them twelve months’ and six months’ leave of absence on full pay respectively, in addition to their receiving superannuation. The introduction of the superannuation scheme was aimed at the termination of retiring allowances on full pay being granted by the board. Now that the board had dealt with an officer in each department the time had come when the board sonld definitely state that uo further allowances would be given. Mr J. B. Waters seconded the motion. In making tho allowances the board had created a precedent. Every employee would naturally think that ho had a right to a retiring allowance, in addition to superannuation. As that scheme was now effective, employees should clearly understand that no question of allowances would be entertained in the future.

Mr D. F. H. Sharpe; The motion has come too late I The Chairman: Better late than never!

Mr Sharpe: It is not fair now. The Chairman: It is fair. A man in each department has been treated liberally. Mr Sharpe pointed out that another department remained the harbour master’s.

The motion was supported by Mr 11. S. Thompson, who said that, after all was said and done, the board _ dealt liberally in salaries and wages with its employees. Each year a substantial sum was also contributed towards the superannuation fund by the board. There should be no call to make any allowance to a retiring employee. Both Messrs A. Campbell and J. Loudon supported the motion, although the latter doubted whether the resolution would bo adhered to by the board. He said that the superannuation fund had been established with the object of obviating the necessity of making retiring allowances. Mr A. Campbell said he would be delighted if he was offered £l5O yearly as superannuation. He disagreed entirely with Mr Thompson's remarks about salaries and wages. The Chairman said ho had deferred bringing forward his motion until the engineering official had retired, as ho had no desire to be accused of favouritism. Ho stated that the superannuation of the two retired officials meant a yearly contribution of £248 15s Cd from the board. The motion was' carried. To overcome the fear that the resolution would not be adhered to in the future Mr Thompson moved that it be a remit to the harbours conference that it be . made illegal by statute to give retiring allowances to retiring employees in receipt of superannuation. Mr Sharpe said he possessed no doubts that the resolution would not be adhered to. Each case would have to be dealt with on its special merits. The Otago board could not bind other boards. In the past the board had disregarded its own decision and made allowances. It had started and had to continue.

There was no seconder to Mr Thompson’s motion, which lapsed.