RAILWAY WORKS

Greymouth Evening Star, 5 December 1929, Page 2

RAILWAY WORKS

POSITION OF RELIEF MEN. WELLINGTON, December 3. A definite statement that it was impossible to employ permanently all the men employed on railway construction work was made by the Minister for Public Works (the Hom. Mr. Ransom) to-day, in reply to a deputation representing the New Zealand Workers’ Union. If the men were dissatisfied to work as relief workers they would have to be prepared to accept dismissal. Mr. A. Cook, the secretary of the Union, said the relief workers in the railway camps were anxious to know whether they were to enjoy the privileges enjoyed by other workers in the matter of holidays and so on. He had received a telegram from Mr. Coates in which it was stated that the Minister had stated that railway workers would not be regarded as relief workers.

The Minister said Mr. Coates had taken the matter up with him on the floor of the House, and his reply was in Hansard. The whole point was whether the Union desired to see the men retained permanently or to see them dismissed. That was the alternative. “If you force our hands,” said the Minister, “the onus must be.fin you if the men are discharged. A"re you willing to accept that onus? We can’t take all these men on permanently because, in the first place, we haven’t got the accommodation.”

Mr. Cook: We understand the difficulty about the accommodation. What we are. asking is that the men should enjoy the wages, privileges, and conditions specified in the agreement until you are in a position to build the accommodation. The men, he added, wanted to know if they were going to get their holidays or not. Never previously had railway construction works been regarded as relief works. Mr. Ransom: Do you say the men should be dismissed if we can’t put them on as standard workers? Mr. Cook: Rather than see the railway construction works as relief works we would prefer to see them put off. Mr. Ransom: You are dodging the question. Will you take the responsibility if the men are put off? Mr. Cook: We must take it, but it’s rather beside the point to talk about putting the men off. They would have to be found work elsewhere.

Mr. Ransom said there hajj been no change of policy, and the Government did not desire to turn railway construction works into relief works. Mr. W. Wallace said a circular had been sent out by the Public Works Department giving a general instruction that men employed after October 1 last were to be classed as relief men. . Mi Ransom: I would like to see that circular. I did not send it out. Mr. Wallace: lam only talking about what I have heart! from your officials. I think it is pretty right Mr. Ransom: I don’t think so Mr. Wallace said if the men were to be employed on standard jobs as relief workers it was going to damage the standards that had been created. He would like to see standard jobs preseived as such in the interests of everybody concerned. There was a certain stigma attached to the classification of relief workers

Mi. Ransom: I deny that any instructions have gone out that any standard works should be brought down to the standard of relief works. Railway works are not going to be made relief works. It was only the promise of the Government to find work for everybody that led it to place relief workers in the railway camps. If it is found possible to retain the men they will be made standard employees, but if.it is not they will have to be found work elsewhere or else be discharged. We can’t put them all on permanently. ' . Mr. Cook: But how long is it going to take you to decide?. Mr. Ransom: lam not going to be tied down to any .time. /It is a question of finance. It will be impossible to retain all these men as standard workers. Apparently you are more concerned about holidays and so on than about finding the men work. It seems to be that once a man is placed on relief work he sets about to make it a standard job and stick there.