THE COAL CRISIS

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIII, Issue 10028, 20 July 1918, Page 8

THE COAL CRISIS

CAS £ FOR THE MINERS

REPLY OF FEDERATION TO COAL. GvFNERS’ ASSOCIATION.

The following official statement by the Coal Minoru’ Federation, signed by Messrs P. O’Rourke (president), R. fjemplo (miners' agent), and W. E. Parry (secretary), has been issurol: “After protracted efforts, extending over a period of seven months, un the part of the Miners’ Federation to arrange a conference with the Coal Mine Owners’ Association for the purpose or discussing a demand made by the miners for a 20 per cent, increase on the present rates of pay, and in spite of the recent attempt of the Government to bring about such a conference, the Owners' Association has resolutely refused to meet us, and consequently, our endeavour to achieve an amicable settlement of the matters in dispute has proved abortive, and a deadlock has been reached. The employers made a public statement on the matter some seven or eight days ago, while negotiations were still going on between the Government and the miners. On the other hand, tho minors refused to moke a public statement until all possible avenues had been closed against a probable settlement. We feel that our position is suon, owing to the employers refusing to meet us, and the Government’s overtures having failed to bring about a conference, that a public statement of our case is necessary. “In the Coal Mine Owners’ Association’s reply to the Government, a resolution is embodied as follows:

‘That as agreements have been entered into between individual coal mine owners and individual miners’ unions, this association is of oplnon that consideration of any question of varying terms of any agreements should only be made between the contracting parties. Therefore the request for a conference between the Coal Mine Owners’ Association and the Miners’ Federation gg unneces-

sary.’ “The above resolution, which wag the first carried by the Mine Owners’ Conference, was the finding ol a national association endeavouring to impose its decision* on individual local unions,' and these decisions are backed up by all the powers of national organisation. Further, in spite of this utilisation of its mixed strength as a national body, backed up as it is by a still larger national organisation, the Employers' Federation, the association refuses to entertain the proposal of a conference with tho Coal Miners’ Federation. This means in plain language that their national organisation refuses to meet tho national organisation of miners.

“The second resolution passed by the Coal Owners 1 Conference was as follows:—‘That as' existing industrial agreements made under the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Acts have only been recently entered into be.!,tween . the JWlnern* Union and the re-;-l.spective .mining companies, and have" j still a considerable period of eurroncy, and as there are no iustifiable grounds ! for any further increase in wanes, in j-siew of the fact Ibut the earnings of i coal-mine workers who work full nvnil- ’ able time compare more than favourably with those of other classes of ; workers, the coal mine owners cannot ‘ see their way to agree to vary the j terms of existing agreements.’ [ WAGES ONLY POINT AT ISSUEI “Tibia resolution implies that the i coal miners do not work full available 'time, and that there are no justifiable grounds for a further increase in j wages; and, as a result, they (the owners) cannot see their way to vary existing agreements. We wish it to be clearly understood that the miners are not asking fpr a variation in existing agreements, in the way that the employers wish to imply. We have not asked for any change in the work-; ing conditions or any alteration in the body of the agreements The only question at issue is one of a readjustment of wages, and this readjustment has been made imperative owing to the increased cost of living. So far the only proposals for an alteration of the conditions at present specified in the agreements have been put forward by tho Coal Owners’ Association itself, and these proposals have for their objective the speeding-up of the men, and wherever they have been adopted have resulted in a large increase in accidents. It is alleged by the coal owners, who make no attempt to prove their statement, that there is no justifiable grounds for an increase in wages. They merely make a vague assertion that the miners “were earning very high wages, ranging from 17s to 24s and 25s per day.” “Now. what is the real position of the miners actually engaged in hew- ; ng coal whoso earnings are higher • v nn the minors who work, on wages? The coal-owners’ estimate of the miners’ wages as ranging from 17s to 25s per day is computed by a- method similar to that adopted in the calculation of the wages of an actor, who, ■-eceiving £5 for a 30 minutes’ turn, is credited w : th an income of £4O per day, or £2BO per wpek. Consideration is not given in this case to tfio t : me during which the actor does not work, nor to the fact that seme actors are bettor than others. The coalowners’ statement is analogous, no allowance being made by them for the time the miner does not work, or for the varied conditions under which ha works, or for the fact that some men are. physically stronger than others. It must bo remembered that the coal miner works on an average only 24U days in the year, because 52 Sundays, 26 pay Saturdays, 17 holidays, and a total of 30 days for accidents, sickness, b-cakdowns of machinery, gas, falls, timber, want of shipping, transit, etc., must bo deducted. WAGES ANALYSED. ; “According to figures produced by tho Crown Prosecutor at Auckland in 1.917, during the trials of tho miners’ leaders, in order to prove that the . miners went slow, the average wage' throughout New Zealand was 18s 6d per day prior to tho alleged go-slow policy. As the accused miners’ officials were convicted on this evidence we presume we can take it as reliable. As a matter of fact is " as accepted, and published in a pamphlet by the Employers’ Federation. To this must bo added a 75 per cent, increase that the miners have received since tho average wage was compiled by the Crown Pro--1 sccutor, which would bring tho total [to 19s 10i per shift This wage on first

sight might seem rather high, hut when multiplied by 240. the average number of days worked, tho actual year’s earnings arc £238 13s. Against this yearly income he has an outlay in 1918 of £219 3s 3d. based upon a budget compiled by the working miners’ wives in the various districts. This budget covers the necessaries of life, for a man, wife, and three children, which is, according to our statistics, the average family. It also includes £29 for explosives, light, and tools, 1 etc., which must be bought by tho miner, and which wore conveniently forgotten by the coal owners when Rating the ‘very high wages earned by the miners.’ ■ We wish it to be understood that the budget covers bare upkeep, and does not include union fees, Accident Association, medical subscription. newspapers, Lodge dues, insurance, crockery, ironmongery, furniture, boobs, education or recreation. It will be seen that the miners’ financial balance at the end of the year is £l9 T 3 9d, ou *' °f which ho has to provide for all the essentials not included in the household budget, and in addition make provision for old age.

PAST AND PRESENT WAGES. “In order that the miners' case should be clearly understood a comparison based upon tho domestic budget must be made between his financial position, as shown in his yearly balance, to-day, with that of 1914. Such a comparison proves that the miner at present is approximately 55 per cent, to tho bad; his surplus, after : paying for bare necessaries, out of j which he has to meet all the family .exi penses not included in tho budget, has been reduced to that extent. The j miners’ wage in 1914 was 16s lOjd per | day, that is according to the average wage quoted by the Grown Prosecutor at Auckland in 1917, 10 per cent, being added during the three years between 1914 and 1917. Here again let us multiply his daily wage by the aoI tual days worked. 240. This makes his I income for the year 1914 £2Ol 16s 4d | against an outlay of £144 18s sd, ini ; eluding £2O 10s for explosives, lights 1 , tools, etc. Thus he was left a balance, | over and above bare upkeep, of £56 17a lid in 1914, as against a balance in 1918 of £l9 9s 9d. Let it be hero noted that the difference between the cost of living for the same budget’in 1914 and that of 1918 was £74 4s lOd, as against the rise in earnings of £36 16s Bd. It will be seen by those figures that the miner is not so well paid as the coal owners would have the public believe, and that there is some justification for the'minors’ demand. The only increase received by the minors in wages from • the commencement of the war to date is 171 per cent.

j “Side by side with this 17i per cent, increase in wages, the index figures of the Government; Statistician show that the increased cost of the three combined food groups for the Dominion, excluding clothing, boots, household utensils, rent, etc., has risen 39.6 per cent.* Wo now come to’, the men who work on wages in and around the mines. . The earnings are very much lower than those of the miners engaged at the face. While the coni' ditions under which these men work are ' similar to those of the miners, the average time worked by them is 255 days as against 240. It might be asked why the wages men work more_ time I than the hewers of coal. That is explained by the fact t,hat,-.these men are- noL,,snbjeoted .to -the ‘same loss ,of time as the hewers afo, thrOugh timber, pillars, fall of roof, breakdowns, shipping, transit, etc. The wages man in 1914 was receiving an average of 10s per day. This multiplied by 255 working days made bis income £127 10s, against an outlay of £124 8s 6d, leaving him a balance of £3 Is 7d to cover essentials not included in the Budget, and to provide for .old agn“ln 1918 the average; wage of this section of the mine-workers was 12 s .per day, which, multiplied by 255 days, trives him an income of £153 per year, against an outlay of £1903s 3d, leaving a deficit of £37 3a 3d. It will bo risked] no doubt, how this section or the mine-workers live. The answer is that such men can only managed to struggle along on a lowered, standard of living. Not only is the coal-owners’, state-, ment misleading, but it is also selfcontradictory. They first state that there is no adequate reason for an increase in wages or for any variation of the existing agreements. Yet they proceed to state that ‘the mining companies are prepared to enter into contracts which will materially increase the earnings of truckers, and thus remove any complaints as to the rates of pay being received,’ • “It will bo noticed that the mineowners acknowledge the existence of a grievance in connection with present rates, and by their alternative proposals, themselves of a roost vicious nature, they in effect concede tUe justice of the men’s claims Why the coal-owners are anxious to make these variations in the body of the agreements is quite obvious. Thoir adoption means the speeding-up system, which is repugnant to tho miners, and a forerunner of increased accidents. INCREASED PRODUCTION.

“Tho implication of tho coal-owners that the miners could do more work is surely not put forward seriously, in view of tho fact that tho miners ot New Zealand are to-day producing more coal per' man than at any other time in tho history of tho country. Indeed, as mining statistics prove, tho output per minor in New Zealand

is a world’s record. Yet, in face ot this, tho owners ask the Government to appeal to the miners’ patriotism to increase the output of coal. Ttns trading upon tho word ‘patriotism’ will bo estimated by the public at its proper value. Wo are tempted to suggest that tho consumers of coal couJd appeal with greater reason to the owners, in tho name of ‘patriotism, in connection with tho increase in tho price of coal, particularly when it js compared with the increase in the hewing rates received by the miner. These increases in tho retail prices, extending over a period of six years, together with the average increase per ton in hewing rates are as follow:

INCREASED PRICE OF COAL. ■ “The increases in the retail price of State coal ranges from 3s to 6s per ton. The increase in the retail prices of private companies’ coal ranges from 6s 6d to 38s per ton.' The increase which the miner has receive dfor hewing the coal ranges from 4d to 6d per ton, and the miner has to pay for his tools, the price of which have increased over ICO per cent. “The above statistics show that the price of coal in bulk has increased from 6s 6d to 28s per ton, while the miners’ increase has been only Aid to 5d per ton. This latter, surely, cannot be considered a very ‘unpatriotic’ increase, when compared with that imposed by the owners. “We are anxious that the public of this country should be conversant with the position, as it affects both the miner and the consumer of coal, and with that end in view we are prepared to place all our cards on the table, and let the public be the jury- We are firmly of the opinion that neither dignity nor prestige would be lost by either the coal-owners or the miners if both sides agree to meet in conference for the purpose of free and open discussion of the matters involved, but that, on the contrary, the best interests of the community would bo served by such a meeting. MINERS OPEN TO NEGOTIATE. “In conclusion, we would point out that the Miners’ Federation has endeavoured in every possible way to avoid anything that might conceivably lead up to an industrial dislocation. They have already done their utmost at a great , expense to the miners’ unions, to bring about a | conference which; - they feel ' certain-, would be the preliminary to I a ' satisfactory settlement. In this course of notion the miners have mainly been influenced by, the serious shortage of coal supplies at present existing, and the hardship which that shortage entails, to tho public in general, but more particularly to the poorer classes. So far as tho Miners’ Federation is concerned, it is still open for negotiations. Meanwhile, wo - Jay our case before the pebplo of New Zealand, confidently believing that they will agree that our attitude is a reasonable one, and that it is the duty of tho Government to take such steps as are necessary and just to bring about a consultation between the Coal Owners’ Association and the Miners’ Federation.’’

* o CM .a .§ •fe . Class o Coal. S |si V rH P. •Sa si l M O Btt? S.E-S |Sfe Wellington, Slate 6/Wesbport ... 14/Australian. 16/Christchurch. State (Aug.) 4/4Jd Westport ... 18/4id Australian 25/Blackball ... 28/Sd Dunedin. State 5/4Jd Westport ... 36/50/6 14/6 4Jd Australian 16/Kaitangata 80/6 42/fi 12/4dd 4|d Green island 19/6 26/6/6 Wanganui. State SS /- 3/4Jd 4d Westport ... 20/Australian 60/20/-