CORRESPONDENCE

Grey River Argus, 2 August 1935, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE

BULLER UNEMPLOYED. (To the Editor.) Some misrepresentation appeared i u your issue of July 27th, under the Denniston news, which I would be pleased to correct! through your commas. Your correspondent stated that I urged the unemployed of Denniston “to declare the co operative contract job black.” This is incorrect. What I did urge, and strongly so. was to refuse to work on Denniston-Waim-anguroa road job under the co-operative contract conditions as laid down by -the P.W.D. and the Unemployment Board. To merely ’decare the job “black” would be simply a negative attitude and a fu I tic one when the Unemployment Board—as in this case —are endeavouring to force the unemp’oyed to arcept what they call “full time cm pioyment.” As organiser for ih“ National Unemployed Workers' Movement 1 must advocate the policy «>f the N.U.W.AL, which is to fight for fuP trade union rates 01 pay. for all unemployed eng-aged on standard work and a five-day week, with fu 1 ■ pay for wet weather. To “dor’a t 1 n job black’’ would imp’y 1! • gain.- 1 full ’line employment and in favour of the existing sfarva ■ nef rates. The line I -t i three meetings at Denniston a question was. to refuse the oonditi | offered and to fight for t’-ndc union I rnie.H aS paid to County C unril road workers, and wet weather cor o ions rhe Mi'lerton unemployed tu’-n.>d .‘ ••vn *!ii> rn-ODernt’vp cnn l -nr- d dn •tf ! !(l‘ , d trade un mi cnndP’oris find Denniston 'akmi up 'h - •• •••.-' -f«”d ns fh/'n the i. 1 -. ( v lorrinf? P?' r D m y - ’---n •■♦V-w iWiHl’d havr hn'"; rr-rnof v Thf'rr> the real imrive .nr”-’( contraei. work T T m mrdevnr'nt Board have made ;f nm + o clear that ‘ho'r policy is tn 4 * ’•eh ahi li tn to theinivmplnvpfl” i-to f”H Dtvp wnri<. 'IhPT pffnr’s in thi? ip ♦<> subsidise Incal horl’p'-' nnfl Gnvnrriment departments. P.W.D nnfl TT "'> ways Board etc., tn 50 mr rent. n"<01 “standard work ’’ This “standard work” is opened ii" under the cooperative contract, based on 10s 6d pei nav married mon and 8s 4rl s’ng’e nieii. The cos’ of standard work is estimated on the above and the ■“■ntractors must not. and cannot, nveiage above that amount. Your correspondent quotes Is 5 86d, Is 6.87 a. Is 5.86 d. Is 4.09 d, Is 0.5 d. Is 8.03 d per hou>. The average of the«e rates is above the rate —of 10s 6d per day. These figures may lie correct, but they are misleading. This is the average houi'v earnings hy the contract party tor days worked only. Time Ipst hrnugli wet weather is not paid for. Explosives, and damage t o or loss of tools is stopped from earnings, and also 'Wage tax. Under these conditions n. very low average per week can be earned —les s than 10s 6d per ibiv. No matter how hard the men mar work, the basic rate of 10s 6d and 8s 4d!for married and single men respectively must not be exceeded. This cannot in any sense be regarded as ,t contract because a maximum is fixed. It’ would be better described as task work. The Hnemployment Board forces the unemp’oyed to accept tilts work under threat of starvation, and the P.W.D. or local bodies intensify the exploitation by the co-opera-tive contract: system. Thus not only are trade union conditions smashed, but the employed workers arc robbed nv the wage tax and their pennies are used to finance standard works, whereby then follow workers arc lorced to work under coolie conditions. The question is one that concerns overv worker and to break down ’lie slave conditions unnosed .s one that requires the united forces ot all working class organtsations—employed and unemployed anke. I am. ote “ M. ORMEROD. Organiser U.W.M Movement. Grevmouth. August Ist.