Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

The Correct Use of English Sir, —While the above is under discussion I would like to point out the glaring error so regularly made by everyone here, and that is the constant reference to Auckland's metropolitan area instead of city area. The dictionaries define metropolis as the mother city, the chief city or capital of a country; therefore Wellington is the only city in New Zealand that can claim a metropolitan area, just as at home London alone refers to its metropolitan area, though Birmingham has a population equivalent to about twothirds of the whole of New Zealand. Mary Gkr Bottling of Fruit Sir, —After main assurances and much, delay housewives were provided with the equipment for bottling fruit. The rubber rings which would have enabled them to use their old containers and lids did not appear on the market. They were expected to scrap their old material and re-stock with the new modernised preserving jar. At the cost of several pence extra per jar they place a cap fitted with a ring over the fruit, and screw a lid down upon it. On the morrow the lid is removed, and the cap, theoretically, remains in place tightly held by suction. In practice, in nine cases out of ten, the cap comes off with the lid, and the fruit requires resterilising. Being good New Zealanders the ladies do not complain. The husbands -of some would like to know who has imposed this extra charge on the public, and whv such inefficient material was put into production. The present monopoly system is fruitful*in such abuses. A very little rubber is saved by the method at the cost of much expenditure in metal caps and lids. !'• Shifts for Farm Worn Sir, —Since most of our able-bodied men are now in the armed forces, the work of the country, especially farm work, has to be done by women, children and elderly or partly-disabled men. These workers are not tit to work the long hours customary on dairy farms. This work should be done in two shifts, the first doing the morning milking and then a few hours of ordinary farm work, while the second, beginning later in the day, would finish with the evening milking Heavy jobs could be reserved for the middle of the day, when for a short time both shifts would work together. In this way it could be arranged for dairy farmers to work a 40 or 44-hour week, as other workers do. These shorter hours would soon have a marked effect on the health and happiness of the workers. It is not right for dairy farming to involve the practical enslavement of the farmer's whole family. If dairying can only be carried on in that way, then either this country is unsuited for the industry, or the whole position needs adjusting. A Fountain. Producers' Reward Sir, —"Sharomilker" has brought to the public notice a matter which has caused sharemilkers in my district considerable concern since the announcement of the additional 1.21 d labour reward. We interpret the payment as being a straight-out grant to put those farmers, whether owners or sharemilkers, on a basis reasonably consistent with other sections of the community. and to enable a farmer or sharemilker to pay a minimum adult wage of JUI 17s Gd weekly, plus keep. That is all right as far as working farmers are concerned. But what, about farmers who are employing sharemilkers, all farm work and maintenance being done by the sharemilker? Is the sharemilker still to do all this work and only receive one-third of the labour reward, while the owner who provides no labour pockets twothirds? Take my own case as an example. I have been sharemilking for one owner for the past seven years, providing all labour necessary on the farm, even to additional hay-making labour. Will anyone assert that he should receive two-thirds of the labour reward while I receive one-third? Another matter, too. which will bear investigation is the subsidy of £1 a calf for all over five which are reared. This subsidy is to bo taken from the calf pools, a queer way to assist farmers. I would ask who is to get the £l, the owner or the sharemilker, or is it to l)o divided. These matters and one_ or two others require immediate elucidation, as a new season is close at hand and owners and sharemilkers arc entitled to know exactly where they stand. Personally 1 think sharemilkers belong to a forgotten cl.ass. They work long hours and are fulfilling a very definite task in producing butter and cheese in furtherance of our war effort j with very little complaint, and no paid I holidays. Wake Up.'

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19440421.2.22

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Herald, Volume 81, Issue 24874, 21 April 1944, Page 4

Word Count
790

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR New Zealand Herald, Volume 81, Issue 24874, 21 April 1944, Page 4

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR New Zealand Herald, Volume 81, Issue 24874, 21 April 1944, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert