THE WAGES REDUCTION.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21266, 21 February 1931, Page 10

THE WAGES REDUCTION.

ALLIANCE OF LABOUR, HOSTILE ATTITUDE OF SECRETARY. PRIME MINISTER'S REPLY. (Per United Press Association.) WELLINGTON, February 20. A deputation representing the Alliance of Labour waited upon the Prime Minister to-day to protest against any reduction in wages, especially those of lower-paid men. It was claimed that a reduction in the case of men on the lower scale would place an unjust and inequitable burden on their shoulders. The secretary of the Alliance (Mr J. Roberts) said the Government’s recent declaration had come as a bombshell. The Arbitration Court, it might be taken for granted, would follow the lead which had been given 'by the Government. If that were so, there would be many workers who would be unable to meet their obligations in respect to rent and interest, and that would mean that the Government would suffer. It was ail very well to say the cost of living would come down, but rents, insurance and interest would not come down. There had been some talk of equality of sacrifice, but the worker who lost 8s a week would suffer more than the higher paid man. It would simply mean he and his family would have to go with less food. The workers were being made the victims of the banking and financial institutions. Mr Roberts said he had been told at Home that the people there were. going’ to demand that New Zealand should agree to a lower standard of living, but the workers of this country were going to resist any such action. “We elect our own Governments . here,” said Mr Roberts, “ and we will not be dictated to by any financial institution. The workers have not been consulted, and the only thing left for us to do is to call the representatives of the workers together. We are meeting in conference on March 10, and, although I am not making a threat, in my opinion no union secretary can do anything else but advise his men. not to accept the reductions. If workers do accept the reductions they will simply be telling the people of New Zealand they are willing to accept a lower standard of living. Mr Forbes said he realised that the workers regarded any reduction in salaries as a serious matter, but there were two sides to every question. In the first place, he desired to say definitely that there was no dictation, from the moneylenders or from any outside country. The simple position was that the country’s accounts had been placed before him as Minister of Finance, and he had to decide what steps should be taken. He had found himself up against the solid economic fact that the income of the Dominion had been reduced by ■£20,000,000, and it was absurd to say, in view of that, that the country could carry' on in the same way. He could not understand the deputation saying that his announcement had come as a bombshell, for the workers must have seen that reduction would have to be brought about sooner or. later. “We are suffering from the economic crash,” said Mr Forbes, “ and we are faced with the absolute necessity of taking certain measures, however unpleasant they may be, to counter that crash.” The workers apparently did not. conaider there would be a reduction in the cost of living, but he believed the reduction in wages would be reflected by a drop in the cost of living. Mr Roberts: That was not the case In 1921.

Mr Forbes: The slump of 1923; was nothing compared with the present depression. We all know the position of the sheep farmers to-day. I believe this country can’t stand up to the wages it has been paying in the past. You must know that high wages mean unemployment.” A voice: Question! Mr Forbes: A man can only employ a certain number of men under present conditions. I have stated what I believe to be necessary in the interests of the country, and it is for Parliament to say whether my proposals shall be adopted. Mr Roberts: You have put forward some excellent propaganda.

Mr Forbes: The Government is in a minority. If I was looking at the position from a political point of view, do you think I would have made such proposals? So far as the wages of the workers are concerned, that is a matter for the Arbitration Court, and I have no right to suggest anything to the court, I regret you have seen fit to take, up such an attitude, because I believe my programme will be in the best interests of the workers in the long run. However, the matter is for Parliament to decide. Mr Roberts: I hope they don’t adopt your programme. Mr Forbes: That is for Parliament to say. RESOLUTION OF PROTEST.”" (Peb United Pbess Association.) MANAWATU, February 20. A meeting of the Manawatu section of the Post and Telegraph Employees’ Association passed a resolution expressing strong dissatisfaction with the Prime Minister’s proposed salary cut, and also expressing the opinion that if a reduction is made it should be on a graduated scale. LABOUR REPRESENTATION COMMITTEE. The Otago Labour Representation Committee met the* executives of trade unions and the Labour Party branches in the Trades Hall on Wednesday evening to place before them certain recommendations which it deemed necessary to raise funds for the forthcoming municipal and general election campaigns. Mr H. T. Armstrong, M.P., of Christchurch, was to have been present, but owing to having to attend a special meeting in Wellington on the same date, he was unable to do so. Mr J. W. Munro, M.P., was also absent, being at a meeting of the City Council. ' The following resolution was moved and carried unanimously with great enthusiasm—“ That this meeting of the executive members of the trade union movement and the Labour Party branches in Dunedin wishes to record its strong and emphatic protest against the present (United Party) Government’s proposals (aided and assisted by the Reform Party) to reduce the workers’ wages by 10 per cent.” The meeting went on to discuss the recommendations brought down by the committee, which in effect were:—(l) That an appeal for donations be made to all unions and Labour Party branches. (2) That Unions and branches be asked to put forth any other special efforts to raise funds. (3) A suggestion to be put before all unions for the purpose of levying themselves lid per week, (minimum) from now on to the elections, and for this purpose stamps be issued of this denomination among the workers. A brisk discussion followed, and all seemed anxious to obtain funds. The outstanding expression of opinion was to the effect that all efforts be put forth to remove the present party from the Treasury benches. The recommendations

as a whole were unanimously adopted, and it now rests with the executives to impress on their different unions and members to see that they are given effect to. RAILWAY SERVANTS’ PROTEST. At a meeting of the Otago branch of the Amalgamated Society of,'Railway Servants, held on Saturday last, the suggested 10 per cent, reduction in wages of public servants was freely discussed. It was resolved to ask the executive council of the society to enter a most emphatic protest and to use every endeavour to have this drastic menace to the standard of living averted. The main reasons for the protest were, that the public servants as a body were being asked to make up one third of the estimated deficit, —a manifestly unjust procedure; and also that, while the Government was appealing to business people, mortgagees, landlords, etc., to assist in lowering the cost of living, the Railways Department was raising the rentals of its dwellings 200 to 300 per cent., putting them in practically every case above the ruling rental for similar houses in the districts concerned. PROTEST FROM WANGANUI. (Per United Press Association.) WANGANUI, February. 20. At a mass meeting of the East Town railway workshop employees to-day, the following resolution was carried unanimously:—“That this mass meeting of railwaymen enters an emphatic protest at the expressed intention of the Prime Minister to extract from the payroll of State employees a sum out of all proportion to their tptal incomes. We further draw- attention to the fact that in our opinion the chief burdep should have been imposed on the wealthy taxpayers of the Dominion.”