WAGE RESTRICTIONS DEBATE

Northern Advocate, 21 January 1936, Page 3

WAGE RESTRICTIONS DEBATE

STORMY PASSAGE FOR COMMITTEE REPORT

A LTIiOUGH THERE WAS SOMETHING*IN THE NATURE OF A STONEWALL AGAINST SUCH ACTION THE WHANGAREI BOROUGH COUNCIL LAST NIGHT ADOPTED THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE LEGAL AND FINANCE COMMITTEE FOR THE RESTORATION OF ONE HALF OF THE ORIGINAL CUT OF 10 PER CENT TO ALL EMPLOYEES WHO SUFFERED THE REDUCTION. The committee further recommended that the restoration date from December 1, and this, together with several passages dealing with individual members of the staff, was included in the adoption of the report. To put these proposals into effect the Mayor, Mr. W. Jones had thrice to use his easting vote. On thfe grounds that he did not consider the report as submitted to be a true one of the finance committee’s deliberations that night, Cr. R. S. Finch moved that the report be not approved, and that it be referred back to the committee for consideration. HdSstily Done. The work of the committee was hastily done, he said, and some members were not aware of what had actually been decided. Cr. Finch referred especially to one resolution, which, he said, had been passed on his motion and had not been recorded. He said that confusion had arisen in some minds. The actual wording of the recommendation in the report, he alleged, did not fit in with the expressions made by the member of the committee.

Cr. G. H. Morrish took strong exception to these remarks. For the purpose of a free and open discussion, the committee had requested the officers of the council to leave, and, during that period, he had taken down notes which were absolutely correct. “For an attempt to be made to upset the decisions of the committee on the grounds of incorrect minutes is simply camouflage,” Cr. Morrish asserted. “It would be better for the councillors concerned to come straight out and say that they are opposed to any wage restoration. The record taken was emphatically in accordance with the resolutions put, of which only two were passed. *“The Mayor originally moved the restoration of 5 per cent, of the originally moved the restoration of 5 per cent, of the original 10 per. cent, cut, and 2J per cent, of the second cut. I left the meeting to ascertain from the town clerk whether the -whole of the staff, inside and outside, had been affected by the original 10 per cent. cut. I reported back to the committee that this was the case, and then it was that we decided upon the restoration, in which every employee was involved.” Cr. J. Donaldson: “Had councillors paid careful attention to the business, there would have been no room for confusion.” Confused. Cr. J. H. Brown: “We had reports before us from the town clerk and the borough and electrical engineers. I thought the 5 per cent, restoration applied only to the clerical staff.” Cr. J. ,W. Parkin said that he had been confused as to whether employees whose cases had been specially dealt with, and who had been given increases in salary, were also to receive the benefits of restoration. Defending himself against attacks, Cr. R. S. Finch said that at the opening of the committee meeting, the Mayor had suggested that each report be taken separately. He maintained that this procedure had been followed throughout, and that the restoration had not been made applicable to those employees under the Works Committee. The morning after the commitcee meeting, he had rung up the town clerk to this effect. Seven Amendments.

The Mayor said that at one stage of the committee meeting, seven amendments had been put forward. If any confusion had arisen it was the outcome of that, but, throughout, he had had the motion moved by himself clearly before him. As no Support was forthcoming for his proposal to restore 2J per cent, of the second cut, this had been withdrawn, leaving the 5 per cent, restoration of the original cut to stand. “I am a bit disturbed at some of the remarks passed tonight,” the Mayor commented. “I will have to tighten up procedure and not accept any resolution unless it is written out.” The amendment was defeated on the casting vote of the Mayor. Cr. Finch then moved that the restoration of cuts be postponed to the end of the financial year. He pointed out that, with three months to run, the Works Committee was left with a balance of only £BOO, barely sufficient for requirements, without any capital expenditure. His department was desperately in need of funds.

When the cuts were imposed the I council definitely promised their res- j toration when it was in a position to do so, but he contended that this con- j dition had not been fulfilled this year, i Cr. Finch pointed out that the financing of such objects as the Jubilee celebrations, Lord Galway’s visit, the waterfront conveniences, and the purchase of the library site, had been done by funds taken from his department. ; Otaika Road and Maunu Road were in urgent need of resurfacing, which work would have to be carried out this summer •or further disintegration faced. When budgeting at the end of the financial year the council would be in a different position to meet wage restorations. “Time Inopportune.” Cr. J. H. Brown considered the time inopportune for wage restorations, which, if the council could se its way to do so, could be made retrospective when the matter was considered after March 31. When he had supported sick pay and holiday concessions, he had made it clear that he was opposed to salary restorations. Condemning the close inter-depart-mental work of the council, Cr. N. E. Crimp said that he was unable to vote upon a proposition of which he was not in possession of the fullest information. Cr. A. T. Erainsby said that at the committee meeting it had been announced that the time was favourable for the restoration of cuts, and it was after receipt of this information that it was decided to give the 5 per cent, restoration to the whole of the staff. That was the time and place when the council should have heard arguments now stated by Cr. Finch. “I cannot support them at this late hour, when we have taken a definite