WAGES REDUCED.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20779, 23 January 1931, Page 11

WAGES REDUCED.

'AUSTRALIAN WORKERS.

ORDER MADE BY COURT.

CUT OF 10 PER CENT.

OPERATION FOR YEAR.

UNIONISTS VENT ANGER.

J3y Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright. (Received January 22, 10.15. p.m.) MELBOURNE. Jan. 22. T'or reasons of national emergency tho Commonwealth Arbitration Court to-day ordered a reduction of 10 per cent, in tho wages of the members of all unions—basic wage earners and those receiving more than the basic wage—but refused to make any permanent alteration in the basic wage, or tho method of calculating it, without further inquiry. In tho course of its long judgment the Court pointed out that an emergency had arisen calling for readjustments in all directions, notably in the costs of government, tho costs of production and services, rents, dividends and interest. All must adapt themselves to the fundamental fall in the national income, tho national wealth and to Australia's changed relationship with other countries. Shearers and wool-pressers, whoso wages were reduced recently, are exempted. Tho Court's order is to operate for 12 months from February 1, or longer if necessary. Considerable Stir Caused. A scene occurred in Court after the Judges had left the Bench. Union advocates and a group of union officials expressed disgust and somebody shouted: t' They ought to be shot." Then tho unionists sang " Tho Red Flag " and cheers were given for tho " Labour Revolution." The decision of tho Court has caused a considerable stir and unrest among unionists working under Federal awards. They include railwayman, maritime workers, carpenters, timber workers, metal workers, coachmakers, saddlers, clothing operatives, food preserving employees, officers of the Merchant Service Guild and a number of minor organisations. Basic Wage to Fall Shortly. The Commonwealth Statistician, Mr. C. H. Wickens, says tho Court's order means an annual reduction of nearly £30,000,000 in the national salary bill which was £300,000,000 last year. In addition to the 10 per cent, cut in wages a further substantial reduction in the basic wage will take place almost immediately consequent upon tho falling cost of living 'figures which automatically Apply to the Federal basic wage. The Federal basic wage in the several capitals on November 1 was: Sydney, 88s; Melbourne, 83s; Brisbane, 70s 6d; Adelaide, 78s; Perth, 795; Hobart, 82s. NEW SOUTH WALES. 30,000 UNIONISTS AFFECTED. PROBABLE DEVELOPMENT. (Received/ January 23, 12.35 a.m.) SYDNEY. Jan. 22. It is estimated that 30,000 unionists in New* South Wales will be affected by the 10 per cent, reduction in the Federal basic wage. There is not likely to he a general Strike, but it is practically ceitain that the Premier, Mr. J. T. Lang, will be asked to prevent wages being reduced below the State basic wage of 82s. CASE BEFOKE COURT. EMPLOYERS' ARGUMENTS. OPPOSITION OF UNIONS. The Full Court of the Commonwealth 'Arbitration Court has been engaged for several weeks in hearing evidence on tho Application of the Railway Commissioners and other employers in Australia for a reduction of 10 per cent, in the basic wage. On January 9 Mr. Crofts, representing a number of unions, asked tho Court to define the nature of tho inquiry. Was it,/he asked, a general basic wage case or was it an application to vary certain existing awards?

Judge Dethridge: There are certain cases in the list in which an application to vary tho basic wage has been made. In all rases there is a request to provide such further relief as the Court may deem fit. Application is being made for a variation of tho basic wage. Ft may be that the Court will go to the limit of its constitutional power if it makes such variation, but at any rate the legislature has recognised that it is the Court s function.

Mr. Crofts said ho liatl always advocated arbitration a3 a means of settling industrial disputes, but the time seemed to be coming when it would be extremely difficult for the workers to maintain their faith in the system.

At a later stage m the case Mr. 1. C. [Meagher, for the employers, said that the applicants wished the Court to understand that no desire to attack the workers' standards of Wages or living actuated them in their application for a reduction in the basic wage. What was desired by applicants and/by the community in general, and the unemployed specially, was a more equitable distribution of national wages. Tho much-flaunted Australian wage and standard of living were to one worker in everv four nothing but a grim jest. "We claim, said Mr. Meagher, "that n reduction of the basic wage by 10 per cent will arrest the catastrophic growth of unemployment. ['rices of wheat, wool and metals , have crashed, giving rise to an unprecedented wave of unemployment. Nearly 25 per cent, of the wage-earners ore out of work. Industries are toppling, and State Governments and enterprises are piling up enormous deficits. In those circumstances the applicants launched the present application."

The Court- was also addressed by Mr P. J. Carolari, advocate for the Victorian Railway Commissioners, who said that high wages were a tremendous factor in railway charges. It was unfair for people

to adopt the casual attitude tlfat railway deficits would bo made good by the State.

The Court was addressed on January 14 by Mr. F. H. Corke, appearing for a number of private employers. He laid stress on the serious position of industry in the Commonwealth, and said lie could have maintained, on the evidence in tho case and on the economic condition of the country, that the wages reduction should at least be 25 per cent.

Chief Judge Dothridge: Assuming that you have a 10 per cent, reduction in wages, that means that tlio spending power is reduced by 10 per cent, and the industries which cater for Mie wagoearncrs will suffer a loss of business or custom to that extent. The most important material aspect, to my mind, is what effect will that lO per cent, reduction have upon other sections of the community. Tho employers may uso it, as Mr. Crofts suggests, in luxury of various kinds, hut it will be spent in sonio way or other and most of it will be spent in Australia. I thought that this position might bo worked out in some way, for what we really havo to do is to get tho unemployed back into employment.

Mr. F laser, counsel for tho Commonwealth Attorney-General, contended that the Court could not decrease the present basic wage, but it had power to increase it.

Mr. Justice Beebv: Surely you do not ask the Court to accept that propositionthat wo havo no power, in any circumstances, to alter the present basic wage ? Mr. Fraser: I do not suggest that, but I say you have no power to reduce the basic wage. The basic wage is a minimum below which we cannot go. 'lhe legislature is cognisant of what goes on and of the decline in national income, and if the legislature considers that one of the operating causes is the high basic wage, it can amend tho section. Mr. Fraser added that the applicants must satisfy tho Court that no other means than a reduction of wages, whether by itself or in conjunction with other factors, could arrest tho present position. That was the issue. What evidence was there before tho Court that if wages were reduced to the full extent asked for, industry would be revitalised, or that unemployment would be cured ? Chief Judge Dethridge: If tho wool industry is to be sustained and prices do not rise, all charges in that industry will have to bo cut down. It may be that wool has collapsed or gone down for good. That may bo the disastrous position which we have reached —that ouy greatest industry is dead. What is the position then ?