WORKERS' ANSWER

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22819, 28 August 1937, Page 15

WORKERS' ANSWER

AN INCREASE URGED MANY BENEFITS CLAIMED BETTER LIVING STANDARDS "I submit we have proved by argument and evidence that a substantial increase in wage rates and the payment of a regular weekly wage would not only benefit the worker, but would also give the desired impulse to production, distribution and trade generally," said Mr. J. Roberts, in the course of his survey, beforo the Arbitration Court yesterday, upon the need for a higher standard wage. A new basis for the determination of wage rates was necessary, he said, as the old one was unsound from the economic viewpoint. It the purchasing power of the majority of the people of New Zealand, and at the same time lowered their living standards at a time when the productive capacity per unit had increased from 80 to 100 per cent during the past 25 years. Wages and Purchasing Low wage rates benefited only the "money-lender, large landholders and profit-hunters generally," Mr. Roberts continued. Similarly, reduced purchasing power restricted production in New Zealand, lowered the incomes of shopkeepers and those who rendered services, while it compelled thousands of workers and their families to exist on a fodder basis of living. The economic conditions of the country a few years ago were regarded as dependent solely upon the price of commodities overseas, ho said, and as wages were fixed on the economic conditions of the country there was always a tendency to lower the standard of life of New Zealand people to the level of those countries where the Dominion's exportable products were sold. This was the swan song of orthodox economists a few years ago, he said. The Labour movement had proved that the general economic conditions of the country were determined by the productive capacity of the people, and not by the price levels in other countries. Previous Rates

No doubt Mr. Macdonakl had intended to convince the Court the 1914 rates for unskilled labour were quite satisfactory, he continued, arid that the rates to bo fixed should be based upon the standard of life of New Zealand workers at that time. However, ' when it was realised that production per unit employed in industry had doubled since 1914, it was absurd to suggest that the standard of living should remain stationary. "The industrial history of New Zealand in the past 25 years proves that low wages restricted industrial expansion, and in the end brought the country to the verge of bankruptcy," he said. "The Court should see to it that there should not be a return of those evil days; The country is prosperous to-day, compared- with a few years ago. The Court could make it still more prosperous by making a new departure in the policy of wage fixation, and by increasing the purchasing power of the wage and salaried workers of this country." Higher wages and salaries in Great Britain and New Zealand would always guarantee the primary producer an economic price for the goods he had for sale, Mr. Roberts stated. Low wages could result only in lowered prices for the Dominion's exportable products, and unemployment in New Zealand. Orthodox economists who preached wage cuts and low standards of living were discredited in almost every country in the world.

Casual Workers The statement submitted by Mr. Butler was a striking commentary upon the struggle for existence of the casually employed workers, he said. Such conditions had been known to Labour advocates for years. They had pleaded for n remedy, but without success, and they again pleaded for greater security of income, a substantial increase in wage rfitos, and the payment of n weekly wage, which was bare economic justice to the workers. Mr. Roberts claimed that no evidence had been submitted against substantial wages increases for skilled and semiskilled workers, or against any section of workers being paid a weekly wage. Manual workers were as much entitled to an assured weekly income as the professional man, the employer, or any other section of the community. Mr. Roberts concluded with the following premises:—The practice of basing living standards of 1914, on the pronouncement made by the Court in W2» or 1901. was economically unsound and should be discontinued, as it had been the cause of most of the economic evils experienced in New Zealand. Wage rates should have direct relation to the ability of workers to produce goods and render services. Standards of living should improve with increased productivity per person cmnloved in industry. In assessing weekly wage rates, the Court should ascertain the enmmoditv requirements of a family of five people, and the wane necessary to purchase these commodities at present-day prices.