THE UNEMPLOYED

Manawatu Standard, Volume IV, Issue 225, 24 August 1931, Page 7

THE UNEMPLOYED

SCHEME REINSTATED. SEASONAL EMPLOYMENT. Advice was received at to-day’s meeting of the Unemployment Committee, at which there were present Messrs J. A. Nash, M.P. (in the chair), Mansford, Hudgens, Graham and Lowden (secretary), that it is the intention of the Unemployment Board, Wellington, to reintroduce No. 4a scheme as from October 1. It was pointed out, however, that the scheme would not apply to seasonal occupations such as milking, hay making, harvesting, fruit picking, potato digging, or that pertaining to lambing or the shearing season, etc., for which labour had usually been employed. Tile labour for which tho subsidy would be payable, it was explained, had to be additional to that which would otherwise have been employed. The subsidy payable by the board on the resumption of the scheme would be 10s per .week for single men and 20s for married men, while the term of engagement must not be less than four weeks or more than 26 weeks. The Commissioner added that the subsidy might be subject to alteration at any time during the period by direction of the board. Mr Lowden remarked that no reference had been made to youths of 20 years of age. The chairman: It means that every mail who is employed under the scheme effects a saving to the Unemployment Board by reason of the smaller subsidy entailed. DEPUTATION FROM FARMERS. Messrs J. Boyce, L. Poupard and N. Morcom waited on the meeting as a deputation from the Farmers’ Union relative to the No. 4a scheme and, following upon the reading of the letter from the Unemployment Board in connection therewith, Mr Boyce commented that the position was just as hopeless as ever for, under the conditions therein, little labour would he absorbed. Continuing, the speaker stated that very few farmers were in a position to-day to put on men for improvement purposes whereas they could absorb some for ordinary farm work if the conditions of restriction were not imposed. At present there were some 5000 or 6000 men and boys employed on farms under the No. 4a scheme and if the farmer was not allowed to employ them on seasonal work those men would come back on the unemployment lists.

Mr Lowden: If additional men are engaged the difficulty can be overcome.

Mr Mansford: If a farmer increases his herd, can extra labour be engaged for such work?—Yes.

Mr Boyce: Few farmers can find work for extra labour at present. The state of things is such that the wife is coining back into the sheds to help with the milking. Mr Lowden asked what tile farmer was prepared to pay for the labour, Mr Poupard replying by pointing out that ill ordinary times a farmer gave, a hoy 10s per week and boarded him. The board was now prepared to subsidise to the extent ot 10s and it would be impracticable to state a set figure for it would he encouraging the regular farm hand away so as to participate under the scheme at the increased rate of pay. The farmer was not in a position to pay anything in many instances and was doing without labour with the direct result that production would decrease. After all, added the speaker, farm labour was more productive than digging up the sides of the roads.

Mr Lowden took the opportunity to explain that it was not the Unemployment Board which was employing the men on such works, but the City Council, the work having been introduced to give the men something to do during the off-week. Mr Morcom stressed the fact that a man was better off on a farm than under No. 5 scheme, irrespective of whether he received payment from the farmer or not.

Mr Mansford (to Mr Lowden): If a boy was prepared to work on a farm for his keep would you object?—No, but I think the farmer should pay something. At the termination of his engagement the man might have nothing to replace his clothing otherwise. The chairman: The whole trouble is that the farmer does not want men to undertake development work at the present time. He wants him to help with the milking and general work. However, on behalf of the committee. I will see if the Unemployment Board will permit of such being done. Mr Poupard stressed the point that many -farmers were doing without assistance this season, although they would probably engage them for general farm operations if permitted under No. 4A scheme.

Mr Hodgens directed attention to the danger of abuse, the speaker maintaining that the farmer could be charged with waiting for free labour. Provided an extra man was absorbed, he considered that the employee should be permitted to engage in general* farm operations. The chairman (to the members of the deputation): What you are asking for is that where a farmer cannot afford to employ a man he be allowed to do so under the scheme for general farm, purposes.. Mr Poupard : Yes. hut we leave it to the committee. We do not ask for a hard and fast rule. Mr Lowden : Would you allow the directors of dairy companies to act as sub-committees to consider the applications end “0.1 v.” them before being sent forward ? Mr Boyce agreed, adding that the vital point was that the scheme should embrace seasonal work. Before retiring the chairman assured the deputation that the committee would endeavour to assist them in the matter. INCREASE REFUSED. The chairman reported that he had interviewed the Commissioner of Unemployment in Wellington on the matter of an increase in the quota allowed Palmerston North, but the Commissioner had replied that he was receiving similar applications from all over New Zealand, but one and all had been refused. The hoard was compelled to work on its allowance and it had to do the best it could with the money available. Mr Hodgens mentioned that when in Wellington with a deputation he had endeavoured to effect an improvement through certain members of the House without being able to do so. The conditions were that the sum of £50,000 could not be exceeded in any one week which prevented the amount saved in any off-week being made use of.

Mr Mansford commented that he had now found that, with a view to conserving the loc-al quota, all married men who had been on four days a week work lxad heen reduced to three. To him it seemed that the men were not being asked to share the hardships equally. Mr Lowden: I have endeavoured to take the fairest way. Every man must get something towards meeting his definite obligations such as rent. A pamphlet from the Stratford com-

mittee regarding its scheme for growing vegetables was tabled by the secretary for the information of the members. Mr Mansford said that .it was more a matter for the Central Committee or the Hospital Board, and on the motion of the chairman, action was taken accordingly. Mr Lowden (to Mr Mansford): Are you doing anything in the matter of municipal gardening plots ?—Yes. RUGBY PARK. Mr Hodgens mentioned that he had noticed that tho Rugby Council intended erecting a fence round the Park Road ground with the aid o;f the No. 5 scheme. The point had been stressed that it was local body land, but be considered that to permit this was defeating the purposes of the scheme. While he was a keen supporter of Rugby, he considered that to permit of such would be grossly unfair. The chairman: The Rugby authorities hold the Park Road area under a Glasgow lease, so it is really their property. It was the unanimous opinion of the members that to permit of the work being undertaken under the scheme would he unfair and the secretary was instructed to advise the City Council that no nien would be put on the job under the No. 5 scheme.