THE COOKS' AND WAITERS' AWARD.

NZ Truth, Issue 79, 22 December 1906, Page 8

THE COOKS' AND WAITERS' AWARD.

';'-.■':,■: TO THE EDITOB. Sir,— l have read with amazement your leader on the above subject m your issue of Dec. 15. It is all so contrary to the attitude of your paper on questions affecting the interests of the workers generally that I am not sure even now whether I have rightly understood the trend of the- article. To begin with, you seem deeply solicitous of the welfare of the proprietors of the "large class of private hotel and boardiri'ghouse. keepers" but your enthusiasm for them seems to have blinded you to the fact that their*emplbyees are entitled to some consideration also. And, if not to "Truth," w,here, m heaven's name are they to gov tor sympathy? You may I be right m your contention thait the proprietors are hardly clearing ex- \ penses. owing to - the high price of commodities, but whose fault is that? I Surely not their employees, and if not theirs, why should they be made to pay the piper? If. the proprietors are not making sufficient to pay working expenses and reasonable interest on the capital outlayed m their business, then the obvious remedy is to ..raise prices, and not make ends meet by sweating their employees. It would seem from an impartial perusal of your leader that you advocated the employees being content with their lot on account of the little return the proprietors are making m their business. I shall be glad to have your assurance that such is riot your attitude. Are the "tyßical cases'? you outline meant to be taken seriously ? The figures are. absurd, rendering the conclusions, founded on them worse than Useless for purpose of comparison of the probable working of the award. You admit that hotel servants have always been working at a. disadvantage compared to other toilers, but— ou inform us that these people have accepted work knowing the conditions, and with their eyes open! You might have gone further, and pointed out how m. any trade where sweatinp. exists, the poor beggars wh 0 are working under sweating conditions, accepted employment- with their eyes open, and therefore should 'riot agitate., to better their lot! Anyhow, the contention is not, more far-fetched than' your own. What is your author--itv for the statement that the Cooks' and Waiters' Union made their demands m expectation of having to cut them down owing' to the opposition of the bosses .? ; Even if true, and I would like something m the way of proof, what sort of business men are they who, allowed their interests to be sacrificed by not appearing m their own defence ? Frankly, Sir, I think your article is calculated to do harm by the false assumption, apparent throughout, that there are two onposing interests involved. As a matter of hard undeniable fact, a nd a fact to the interests of both parties to operik reognise, the. interests of the employer : and employee are iden- ! tical. Let tlie employer irrant legitimate demands ou the part of the ! workers, md the- workers will reciprocate. The contention is not quite as absurd as some er plovers imagine. Flmr-loS'Ces have votes, nnd know how to u?e Ibn* into th-*; V-ar-"a;n. >V*7 Zealand ha 1 *- move faddists to th? s'-u?"? . -v ile .hr-i. ?nv i noun ii .■■> e-.rth. Pare the employers

drive the vote of organised labor into the enemy's camp ? Are tbey. such fools as not to recognise that their interests are the same as. the men's? Quite a number have said to me since the publication of your last issue that "Truth" is playing to the hotelkeepers. I have hotly denied this, and I trust, Sir, you will justify my words. While Dick Seddon was alive he was quite able to prevent the creation bf a strong and well-organised labor party, labor being content to vote the democratic ticket without troubling itself about separate representation. Seddon is dead, and, however one may admire the democracy of Ward, yet it were folly not to recognise that labor is awakening to a sense of its power, and is determined on organising its forces to attack the political citadel. The next election will see straight-out labor candidates m all the chief constituencies. The nublicly-expressed intention t 0 run Labor men at the forthcoming municipal election is indicative of what is to follow. ~

With organised labor o n their side the ; publicans need not fear prohibition. The natural predilection of the working man is all against the domination of - a set of howling fanatics, such as the Prohibition,- Bible-in-schools, anti-Tatter sail, and antievervtbing crowd. v lf the employers are such idiots as not to know who rare their friends, well, they deserve all they may get. If they treat their hands fairly, the hands will • reciprocate. If the7 are going to fight against, the employees, instead of helping them to their rights, it will be somebody's funeral, and it won't be the workers', either.

As I said before, if business don't pay, raise the prices. That's the obvious wav out of the difficulty. The public are not entitled to cheap board and residence at the expense of the workers m -hotels and restaurants. Surely this attitude is fair and reasonable. If there are any legitimate rrievaJices, the Union is prepared, 1 ,feel sure", to consider them,' and deal ■nstlv ■ .both to employer and employee. -Where the emnlover manifests, individuals or cnllectivelv, a desire to refuse the hjmds reasonable =treathi'prit. thp n look out for" sVuialls. and- it "won't he labor that will have ,to shorten sail.— Yours, etc.. OyO', W. A. LLOYD. Wellington. . Dec. 18. • . (Mr Lloyd' has entirely mistaken our. attitude on the matter, but. thenp motives' are so apt to be misconstrued. For instance, there are some,pee"le who want very badly to know how Mr Lloyd, who has been such an ardent "White Australia" advocate vti Pueen..ia'nd and' Western Australia, came to" entertain his Chowshir? Piwsn"- Hon Cheno- at the Empire the other -day. .'To' this paper it seeriife ] very inconsistent somehow.— Ed.)