PUBLIC BODIES AND THE CUT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20898, 13 June 1931, Page 8

PUBLIC BODIES AND THE CUT.

The division of opinion in tho City Council upon the question of making a uniform reduction of all wages and salaries is a reflection of a similar conflict of views and actions in many of the local authorities. There is a disposition to seek means of modifying the reduction of wages, and this finds its expression in either uncompromising opposition to any reduction or advocacy of various expedients. Public bodies and their members, like private employers, find themselves in an invidious position. No humane employer willingly reduces wages, and none has done so conscientiously except under the pressure of necessity. But sympathy with employees should not overrule a judicial consideration of the circumstances. It is the duty of public bodies who hesitate to apply the cut to examine the alternatives. Is it possible to maintain the present rates of wages without restriction of services or retrenchment of staffs; would a reduction of wages facilitate relief in local taxation or revision of the charges for public services, thus contributing to the general reduction of costs that is essential if prosperity is to be restored 1 ? After an exhaustive examination of all the circumstances, the Arbitration Court declared that "it is economically impossible to maintain money wages at their present level." It did not venture to say what level of wages is economically possible, but its final conclusion was emphatic, that a reduction of 10 per cent, was the least that should be made and that its immediate and general enforcement was imperative. There is no doubt that the reduction in the aggregate national income has been far more than one-tenth nor that individual incomes from investments or commercial profits have been more severely reduced, and those employed on salaries and wages will be fortunate if they retain regular employment at nine-tenths of former money rates until the depression has passed. Any attempt to place sections of employees in a privileged position will, in these circumstances, inevitably defeat its own purpose. Since a cut must be made, it is only equitable that it should be applied uniformly and without discrimination. Private employers who endeavour to avoid it will probably jeopardise their business and incur the risk of having to make large dismissals. Members of local authorities, who are administering not their own but public money, have no right to make experiments at such a critical time. They are under an imperative obligation to adopt what has been sanctioned by the overwhelming body of public opinion, and use the consequent saving to the best possible advantage, in providing employment, or reducing local taxation and charges for public services..