PUBLIC SERVICE SALARIES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18592, 28 June 1922, Page 5

PUBLIC SERVICE SALARIES

PROTEST AGAINST SECOND CDT (Ti* Dkitbd Press AssoolatioK.) ■WELLINGTON, June 27. The objections of the various branches of the public service to the second cut in salaries *of State employees, which the Minister of Finance proposes to effect as from July 1, were voiced at a meeting held in the Town Hall to-night, at which a number of members of Parliament were present. It was stated that all the local members of Parliament had been circularised to assist, the association in inducing the Minister to postpone the reduction. Mr T. M. Wilford, M.P., on behalf of his party, outlined his position. He said ho would oppose any cut in salaries of £320 or under. Mr R. A. Wright, M.P., sent a communication stating that he had interviewed the Prime Minister with _ reference to thecut, and had asked that it be avoided. Messrs G. Mitchell, P. Fraser. Sir John Luke, and Dr Newman all stated that they were opposed to the cut. ' Speeches were made by Messrs D. G. Sullivan' on behalf of the A.3.R.5., J. Combs (P. and T. Association), Miller (Public Service Association), and Robertson (Railway Officers’ Institute), pointing put the injustice of the contemplated action. A resolution was carried endorsing the action of the various executives and committees, and urging them to continue _to press thb case against a further reduction in the salaries of public servants, knowing that such a reduction will bring the inmates of thousands of homes below the bread and butter line. It was affirmed that the duties and responsibilities of public servants hau been increased and the cost of living had nor fallen, vide the Coart decision A further reduction was equivalent to special taxation, thereby defying the fundamental principle that every citizen should be taxed for the country’s needs in proportion to his moans. . The meeting concluded with the singing of the National Anthem. MASTERTON, June 27. At a meeting of civil servants, comprising about 80 representatives of all (]epartments, a resolution was unanimously carried protesting against the second cut in salaries as unwarranted and inequitable. (1) Because the Arbitration Court had announced that the cost of living was 67 per cent, above the July, 1914, level. (2) The bonus to civil servants was assessed when figures were 63 per cent, above the 1914 level. (3) The January cut was in excess of the reductions to other workers. (4) That while public servants' were prepared to shoulder the country’s burden, it considered that the infliction of another cut was not justified by the cost of living figures, and was, in effect,’ a special tax on that section of the community.