CONTRACT v. DAY LABOUR.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume I, Issue 45, 4 February 1911, Page 9

CONTRACT v. DAY LABOUR.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —I noticed by the report of the Hastings Borough Council meeting last night that the Engineer, Mr. Climie, has recom mended that the works of the Council be carried out by contract Now, sir, I hope that the Council will act with reason in the matter, and not be weak-kneed about it. Let us consider first that no contractor is going to do the Borough works on just what it costs for ma terial and wages. Every contractor must pay legal State wages, and of necessity employ foremen. No contractor can buy in a cheaper market than the Council can. Every contractor will employ only young, strong workmen, will examine their teeth before engaging them, and will reject lambs with broken mouths. What does this mean ? It means that men whom the Council employ at the present time in all probability will not get employment under a contractor. That is to say, that persons having small homesteads in the Borough will have to leave and find employment elsewhere, and take their families with them. But, someone says, that will give place to younger and better men, and their money a ill replace those who remove elsewhere. Not so; no young men will bring their families to reside in a dear-living place like Hastings is. to take on casual labour under a contractor who may discharge them at an hour's notice. This means. then. that the Borough Council, or those who are in favour of the contract system may want to feather some contractor’s nest at the ratepayers’ expense, or c ist* that they are too weak-kneed to carry out the work and want someone else to shoulder the responsibility, get out of the worry themselves, let the ratepayers pay for it, while the contractor scoops the pool and removes to a better clime to enjoy the well-earned feathery nest provided by a weak-kneed Council. Then the business people will also be losers, because the honest toiling settlers spend their money within the Borough, and are not likely to remove unless hard times force them to do so. And again, if there is any surplus which a contractor must have, are not the workmen more entitled to it than a nomadic contractor * Are not people who spend their monev amongd the storekeepers in Hast ings more entitled to it than a wandering contractor.' Yes. sir. I' should think so. and 1 earnest h hope that the merit.ers of the Hast ings Borough Council will act dis erectly in the matter and study the welfare of the people (ratepayers included) of Hastings and carry out their works and get honest labour for honest money spent. Thanking you in anticipation. —1 am. etc., C.B. Hastings, Feb. 3. 191 i.