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

ARBITRATION COURT.

THE EMPLOYEES' CASE

——. (BY TELEGRAPH—PRESS ASSOCIATION ) i WELLINGTON, April 23. ! Mr M. J. Mack, secretary of the' -A.5.R.8., continued the employees' c<;se ■before the Arbitration Court to-day in «support of the case against a reduction •of bonus, saying that the railwaymen who did not all pay such high, rent as -other workers and received part of xheir -clothing, were not able tcv keep pace with, the cost of living on present wages without overtime. Mr Evans (Otago) contended that no reduction should rom© before the commission. He defined a reasonable stond-; -ard of living. j Mr Armstrong, on behalf of Canter-' bury Unions, protested against any re- - duction, saying; that the 1914 standard • of living had not been sufficient, and that the wages of to-day did not enable them to. live up to that standard. If a commission were appointed it should go closely into the question of rents. A reduction of wages was no way to improve thftjiifosperity of the country. Mr W. Maddison dealt exclusively ■with the subject of a fair standard of ljving, saying that if a proper standard were set up it would result in an increased output, greater industrial peace and increased national wealth.

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/HNS19220428.2.68

Bibliographic details

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLII, Issue XLII, 28 April 1922, Page 7

Word Count
201

ARBITRATION COURT. Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLII, Issue XLII, 28 April 1922, Page 7

ARBITRATION COURT. Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLII, Issue XLII, 28 April 1922, Page 7