The Ensign. MONDAY, MAY 23, 1910. GOVERNMENT STROKE.

Mataura Ensign, 23 May 1910, Page 4

The Ensign. MONDAY, MAY 23, 1910. GOVERNMENT STROKE.

A few weeks ago a letter was published in the 'Otago Daily Times' drawing attention to the methods adopted by certain workers to restrict their output. The writer alleged further that the employees were not giving a fair day's work in return for the union award wage whteh they enjoyed. The 'Lyttelton Times' commissioned a reporter to ascertain the experience of Christclmrch firms in this matter. He found that "several large employers of labor who had made comparisons between the amount of work done in certain manufactures in New Zealand and that done in similar industries in Britain and in America expressed opinions in each case that in no industry in New Zealand were the results achieved by human and mechanical agencies in co-operation as good as those of the older countries." Exertion wages were paid in several factories, which had a tendency to keep the out-!

put up to what it ought to be. It was understood that some of the unions had to prevent the payment of exertion wages but they had not achieved this object. A partner in a[ large manufacturing business in the city said that "there was no doubt that workmen in New Zealand did not work at the same rate as those engaged in similar trades in the older countries of the world, but lie was not prepared to say that there Wis a deliberate effort either by individuals or by unions to restrict the output." Mr F. E. Jones, who until recently was connected with a latge manufacturing and packing Vasiifcss, said "that his experience was that for some unaccountable reason the employer could not get any extra speed 'out or the hands, who were mainly gills and youths. At times the firm had aft'ered bonuses in addition to piecework rates for those who could ex-' ceed : a 'certain production per week, but it 'fed never had any effect. It was tried because of the scarcity of labor for the work, but it was seldom that any girl or boy put forward a special effoft to earn the bonus. He had found that 'the case was exactly as stated in | Dunedin." These were the opinions exr pressed by the principal firms inter- : viewed. On the other side of the question Mr 11. R. Rusbridge, a prominent trades unionist, said that as a trades unionist and "one who had been closely identified with trades unions in Christchurch for fourteen or fifteen years, he must emphatically deny the statement made by the correspondent of the 'Otago Daily Times' with regard to the restricted output. He could say absolutely, as far as his own trade was concerned, that there had been no restriction of the output by the workers. He had had plenty of opportunity also to observe the workers in other callings, and he was quite sure that the fact of a worker being a trades unionist had no tendency whatever to lessen the amount of work he did. Members of trades unions were just.as honest in their work as others were." Mr Rusbridge went on to charge employers with incompetency, stating that many of them had had no training for the trade they managed. Mr D. McLaren, M.P.j was also interviewed. He said he had never heard "the charges made supported by detailed proofs, and from what he had learnt of the condition of the industries of New Zealand he was satisfied that the workers engaged T in them compared, in respect to both skill and industry, very favorably with those of other countries. An employer whom he had met in the North Island had complained of a restriction of output, but when he had stated facts it appeared that the only ground for his allegation was that he had found among the many workers employed by him one or two who were not fully competent in workmanship." 'The Dominion' dealt with the subject and . supported the charges made in the Dunedin letter. It affirmed that the principle of payment by results is the soundest possible one to follow, and continued: "We very } much doubt whether there is a competent worker who is not at heart firm in his belief in the fairness of the principle of payment by results. He is led to believe, however, that a 'bonus' system or a system of 'exertion wages' would be the thin end of a wedge for the shattering of the 'solidarity of labor.' The men who make this appeal to the workers' sense of loyalty to their class—a loyalty that can be wholly an admirable thing—know well enough that such a system of payment by results would be the thin end of the ! wedge that would shatter the system necessary to the agitator's prosperity. For it would remove the discontent of the employers and by enlarging production and profits would eliminate much of the discontent among the workers also." From the inquiries made by the 'Lyttelton Times' it would appear that the charges made by the 'Otago Daily Times' correspondent are not without foundation. But it is questionable if the restricted output is so general as he would have us believe. 'The Dominion' suggests that a Royal Commission might discover a remedy for restricted output. New Zealand Royal Commissions have not been remarkably successful in suggesting remedies for the evils into which they have inquired, and it is improbable that the one suggested would be different from others. IP restriction of output is as general as is stated it will be most difficult to eradicate the evil, and its continuance will not only affect the industrial wealth of the country but will sap also the virility of the workers of the Dominion.