“Why We Are Discontented.”

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 7930, 13 October 1911, Page 5

“Why We Are Discontented.”

The Facts Behind the Strikes (By a Labour Man, in "Daily Mail.") WHY have we had so many strikes these last two years or so ? According to several widely-accepted theories we ought to have made groat progress recently and we working men. ought to be far more contented now than we were, say. ten years ago. We have our thud consecutive Liberal Government in office, assisted, by a Labour 1 party. We have had much legislation moulded by Liberalism and garnished oy Socialism. We have got our trade unions lifted practically above the law. We can strike and boycott and picket with great freedom. We have got old-age pensions. We have got our labour exchanges. We have got our Trade Boards Act, our amended Compensation. Act, our Mines (Eight Hours) Act, and other measures designed to improve labour conditions. Wo have also got it, it is alleged, booming trade —prodigious Imports and exports. In ten years the gross value of our foreign commerce has gone up from .£377,000,000 to .£1.109,000.000, Growth of Temperance Moreover, we have had a marked growth, of temperance. According to the

. calculations of Sir T. P. Whittaker we . saved .£16,000.000 in our national,drink . bill last year compared with tho per ; capita rate of consumption of drink only . ten years ago. Here, then, wo have a combination of . factors—Liberal-Labour legislation, booming foreign trade, and a spread of temperance—which, according to certain schools of thought, should bring great prosperity to our people, particularly to our workers. But in. our strikes and threats of strikes and in our riots' we have a display of discontent unparalleled in modern Britain. And what are tho facts at tho back of this unusual discontent ? Tuning first to wages we find, according to Board of Trade returns, that since 1900 our workers have had their wages ( increased in only three years, suffering II reductions in. the other seven years. On top of this we have had more taxes imposed upon petty luxuries, and tho cost of food has gone up, leaving our working classes in a decidedly -worse position, on an £ s d basis 4 at any rate. And of Unemployment. Unemployment has‘also increased. In the five years, 1900-4, the average percentage of unemployed trade unnondsts was 4.1. In the next five years It stood at 5.2. In 1900 we had 25 per 1000 out of work. In 1910 we had 47 per 1000 unemployed. We had this growth of unemployment in spate of increased emigration. Last year three times as many of our people emigrated as in 1900. Turning next to pauperism, what do we find? We are constantly told that cue of tli© chief causes of pauperism—also of crime, lunacy, and many other evils—is drink. But what are the facts? Between New Year’s Day 1900 and New Year's Day 1910, ■with a big reduction in consumption of drink, the number of Indoor paupers in England and Wales increased from 199,000 to 270,000, in spite of old-age pensions; the number of outdoor paupers rose from 603,000 to 539,000; casuals relieved on tho one day from 9000 to 17,000; and lunatics from 72,000 to 93,000. After making nil due allowances these facts do not square very well with certain Loudly advertised theories. ' With less beer wo have got more paupers; with less whisky more lunacy. But that by the way. The point hero is that there is some solid foundation, for labour's discontent —we have lower wages, higher cost of living, more unemployment, more emigration, and more pauperism now' than we had a decade ago. Our conditions of labour have got Wei’s© in th© last few years, in spate of Liberal Government, Labour legislation, and growth of temperance. The Policy of “Speeding-Up.” '

And that is, not all. Besides our lower wage rates and our greater unemployment as revealed by trade union figures and emigration returns, we have had a still greater reduction in actual earnings, and a still greater growth, of actual unemployment, and casualisation of .employment, Giving to the adoption '■ of a speeding-up policy in many of our industries whereby men do, their work in less time, with fearer intervals of rest allowed them in the workshops, and ter less money- than formerly. In m any cases where labourers used to be employed regularly at weekly wages and enjoyed frequent rest times without loss of pay they aro now rushed over their work and have their pay stopped tho moment the work is done. We have evidence of this rush in our accident figures. In ten years the number of reported injuries to workpeople in our factories end workshops has gome up from 79,0!K) to 117,000. The number of actually killed has increased more than 60 per cent. In our manes there has been a big growth of accidents clearly attributable to mischievous labour -legislation. In 1900 we killed 1012 miners. , lu 1910, with the Bight Hours Act in operation, we iriHod ■lßl2. Slaking allowances for increase in numbers employed the accidents involving claims upon the relief societies have gone up in ten years from 184 to 249 per . 1000 members. To put the matter in a I nutshell it moy be said that in the last few years wages have diminished, unemployment has been aggravated, toil intensified, and dangers multiplied. Can we wonder at discontent ? An Era of Bad Leadership.

Whereas in the last half of the nineteenth century we had progress, we have had in the twentieth century, so far, retrogression of a pronounced character. After two generations of wiser laws, rising wages, increasing power of trade unionism, reduced accidents in mine and shop, a growth of industrial humanisation, we have now entered a new dispensation in which our laws are foolish; in which our trade unionism is being weakened by bad leadership, by indiscipline, and by the incubus of politics; in uhieh nioro of our workers are being lamed, maimed .and killed; in which, in a word, industrialism is being brutalised.