UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14685, 19 November 1909, Page 3

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

THE EMPLOYER'S VIEW. (Per United Pkess Association.) WELLINGTON, November 17. Mr F. W. Hobbs, of Christchurch, read a paper on insurance against unemployment at the Employers' Conference.

He said: —" From a broad humanitarian standpoint it will be readily admitted that if equitable schemes can be brought forward which will help the workor to tide over periods ol unemployment, which will provide him with a. sufficient income to remove the dread of absoluto want when riecreptitude and ago rob him of his earning powers, and which will ensure to liim in sickness a provision for himself, his wife, and bis children, such schemes (should receive not only our approval, but our earnest and ictive support in getting them carried through, looked at as a business proposition on the part of the (State, such schemes have much to commend them. The State will not, however, reap the full benefit of the improved physical qualities of its people unless they go hand in hand with an improved moral character. The tendency to lean on the b'tato is already very marked, and is an indication of a weakening of individual character and independence." Tho writer reviewed tho schemes that had been established in Europe to ensure the workers against sickness and unemployment, and made a lengthy reference to tho British proposals to secure compulsorily insurance against unemployment mi the basis, roughly, of Id a week each 'from the worker, the employer, and tho State. Passing on to local proposals he praised the National Provident Bill. " This new proposal of the Prime Ministor," he says, " demands most favourable consideration, because it not only secures an easy means of providing for age, sickness, and incapacity, but because, it is based on tho cardinal virtuo of thrift. Self-help must precede State help is the doctrino laid down by the Primo Minister."

Mentioning the Hon. A. K. Giunness'6 scheme, which stipulates a contribution from employers (three-fourths of the levy) to insuro workers against unemployment, leads Mr Hobbs to make a general comment on tlio position of New Zealand's industries. He submits that the conditions here vary very much from those of Britain ami sther countries. "As employers," he remarks, " we claim that the Arbitration Act already compels tho industries to pay the wage necessary to provide a fairliving for all time, altor a worker finishes his apprenticeship, and to tax them again would be forcing them to pay part of the eharges over again. '.The incapacity o; tho worker to meet bad times could not, he said, be generally duo to insufficient wage rates, but more often arose from that instinct of human nature which was as strong in the employers as it was in tho workers and which made us realise tho assured pleasures of to-day rather thaiv the possiblo needs of to-morrow." ■ After other argument, Mr Hobbs adds: "Another very grave fault of the proposal is that industries in wJiicli labour comprises a large proportion of the costs would have to contribute heavily, while those in which the labour coste are small would escapo very lightly. Wo should now be manufacturing for tho great portion of the needs of our people, but instead of this being tho case wo are mot with an enormous expansion in our imports. Heavier burdens would tend to further curb this development and to increase our importations, If Parliament passes legislation for compulsory insurance against sickness, accident outside workin" hours, or unemployment, then let those who are to Benefit find the necessary funds. If this is not entirely possible, 'let the wholo community share the burden of tho extra amount required in the same maimer they now do all other calls of the Stat*. As employers wo may "be prepared to lielp the administration of such an act by retaining and handing to the State the prescribed portion of tho worker's wage. This in itself is no small thing for us lo do. If the fund is to be subsidised wo <vill do our part in ratio with other laxpayers, but we shall fight most strenuously against, any attempt to. differentiate against us and saddle us with any crcater proportion of the cost than that borne uy other taxpayers."