THE New Zealand Herald. AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 28. 1920. THE RAILWAY DISPUTE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVII, Issue 17456, 28 April 1920, Page 6

THE New Zealand Herald. AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 28. 1920. THE RAILWAY DISPUTE.

Th~e section of railwaymen represented by the Enginedrivers, Firemen and Cleaners' Association has precipitated a North Island strike, •which everyone will deplore, at a moment which the public will deem most inopportune. Almost as many North Island residents are away from their homes at the present time as during the holiday season, and a similar movement of population is to be anticipated in the South Island ' during next month. This lightning strike, of which only a few hours' notice was given, threatens to delay the return of many to their homes and their occupations and to prevent thousands visiting the towns and cities -through which £he Prince of Wales will pass. It may be taken for granted that our visitor will not be seriously inconvenienced — the Government may be trusted to see to that even if the men on strike do not facilitate the passage of the Royal train. It will be far otherwise with the large number of New Zealanders who have either gathered or intended to gather in the cities to gr-et the Prince. They will be the first victims of the locomotive men's hasty action, and they would be more than human if they did not resent the dislocation of transport at such a juncture. Whether or not the locomotive men deliberately seized the moment as one favourable for enforcing their demands they will be unable to clear themselves of the charge of sacrificing the public interest to gain a sectional advantage. A more inconvenient | hour, from the public point of view, j could hardly have been selected'; | from the railwaymen's point of view j the choice is likely to prove as un- ! happy. A strike which commences I by antagonising public opinion opens j badly indeed, and seldom has an industrial body given the public greater cause for anger than the locomotive men have done.

This is the more to be regretted because railway servants had a case which at least merited careful inquiry. Their loyalty to the Department and to the public interest is proverbial, and though the locomotive section has now made special demands the claim of railwaymen as a whole was the entirely reasonable one that they are entitled to the same " real" wages as they enjoyed before the war. The public has

never questioned such' a proposition} and the'" Government has already made one serious effort to accept and apply it. Unfortunately there is no simple and complete test by which the rise in the cost of living can be measured. Mr. Justice Stringer was of opinion that a bonus of 6s. a week would restore the wages of second division servants to the effective pre-war level and. made allowance for the fact that the amended schedule of last year did not fully compensate the men for increases in prices up to that time. Railway servants challengel the accuracy of his conclusions, and though they have advanced no rebutting evidence they are at least entitled to be heard in support of a contention which is widely accepted throughout the service. The real origin of the dispute is that there is no exact test of the rise in the cost of living. All calculations are partial, and many, are iiighly controversial. The railwaymen are laying emphasis on an estimate given by the Prime Minister-that the cost of living in New Zealand had increased by 62 per cent, between July, 1914, and March, 1920. This apparently referred to food only, which is proportionately dearer than some other items in the family budget. Taking three food groups and rent the increase up to February last was 42 per cent. The basic wage of the railway schedule is now £3 12s a week, against £2 14s before the war, an increase, allowing for the current bonus of 6s a week, of 44 per cent. The root cause of dissatisfaction in the railway service probably is thai although wages have risen in fairly close proportion to the cost of living they have not advanced to the same extent as in other occupations. One comparison will illustrate thi point. Early last year the Arbitration Court fixed the basic wage for skilled labour at Is 7id an hour, and this, with a war bonus, has beer paid since. The Court has now raise- thai' hrastc -wage ta» 2Sj, with a bonus of 3d an hour. The increase on the basic wageitself higher than the pre-war wage—together with the bonus, is thus 7id an hour, or £l 10s a week. The increases for semiskilled and unskilled labour ranged between 6&d and 7d an hour, or £l 6s and £l 8s a week. The increase of second division railwaymen during the whole war period, including the current bonus, has been £l 4s a week.

On the facts there would appear to be occasion for' a frank conference between the Department anr> the railwaymen, and events wero. moving to this solution when th« locomotive staff took its ill-timed decision in favour of a strike. The Government has proposed to set up a commission to adjust railwaymen's wages in the light of any increase in the cost of living between January 1 and June 1. If the order of reference "were widened to permit the commission to review the rise in prices during the whole war period railwaymen would probably accept the inquiry. Alternatively, the decision of the Amalgamated Society to take action under the* labour Disputes Investigation Act— a course also under consideration bv the Officers' Institute— a prac tical way of escape from the present deadlock. The public will refuse to believe that the matters in diss pute are so serious as to warrant a strike. It still expects the locomotive men to revert to the constitutional action favoured by other branches of the service. If the locomotive men will do this and thGovernment will bear the railway servants' case fully, and consider it sympathetically, an early settlement should be reached. It is not necessary or excusable that in the meantime the transport system of th North Island shouldbe paralysed, and that railwaymen should take thrisks of a strike, one of which is loss of superannuation benefits.