BOROUGH COUNCIL EMPLOYEES.

Northern Advocate, 23 March 1934, Page 3

BOROUGH COUNCIL EMPLOYEES.

-V I (To the Editor.) Sir, —The remarks of Cr. Holmes at a recent meeting of . the Borough Council give one “furiously, to think.” They are a good example of the type of penny saving, niggling economy that is, in public and commercial life, making the relations of employer and employee increasingly difficult. It is admitted that in approaching questions of public administration the economic facts must be squarely faced. But surely it is possible to avoid reckless expenditure on tbej one hand without paltry meanness on! the other. Wo shall never reach anv j ■ i degree of social harmony so long as j we entrust the conduct of our affairs to men whose one grand panacea for j ■ our economic ills consists hi the simple expedient of diminishing the emoluments and privileges of employees—especially poorly paid ones —and who consider everything but the problem of the ultimate goal of all efficient administration: human welfare. In this case, it is obvious that the small decency proposed will not add to the rales or incur any expense worth noticing. On the other hand, it w ; H yield a real benefit in the refreshment of tired men, and in Hie improved health of jaded wives and children. It is a poor logic which results in a repudiation of the principle that decent conditions arc a first charge np'on industry. Wo do not find our professional classes voluntarily declaring for either small remuneration or poor conditions because ‘ ‘ times are hard.” These arc forced upon that class which cannot defend itself:the working class. Some of us would like to believe with Benjamin Kidd that history discloses a growth in men of the altruistic spirit, with a genuine concern for the welfare of the other follow, but of late such a belief has received many rude shocks. I do not believe for a moment that GO per cent of our ratepayers, despite hard times, are willing to deny a brief vacation to men who have laboured the year through, whether they be classed as permanents or casuals. The tone of our public sentiment iu New Zealand is today being sensibly lowered. We have in administrative positions, along with some fine men, another class who have spent their lives, not iu pursuing ideals or personal culture, but in searching for ends purely selfish, men whose religion is acquisition and whose god is proportv. Is it too much to hope that, while giving due regard to economic facts, we may be capable of adding thereto some little concern tor the welfare of the “other fellow”? — I am, etc.. j RATEPAYER.