PROTEST BY OTAGO BOARD

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21987, 23 June 1933, Page 7

PROTEST BY OTAGO BOARD

Consequent on a telegram despatched on Wednesday by the Otago Education Board to the Department of Education requesting authority to. employ additional teachers under the rationing scheme, a message was yesterday received from the department stating that an investigation conducted into the financial position of the rationing scheme showed that the number of additional assistants appointed throughout the Dominion under the scheme was absorbing all the savings, and the department could not therefore increase the number already authorised. After the department’s reply had been read at the board’s monthly meeting yesterday, the chairman (Mr J. Wallace) stated that on the basis of the Otago figures it was difficult to understand that this was so. The saving here, after paying for eight additional assistants allotted in February, was, at the end of May, £215, while the current monthly saving was approximately £4O. This saving was sufficient to provide work for nine more unemployed teachers from now until the end of the year. This was the saving under the department’s scheme.- The board had made a further saving, warranting the employment of six more teachers until the end of the year. If the allotment of additional assistants in February was in accordance with the size of each board, then all boards should have approximately the same proportionate saving as the Otago Board had. The rationing scheme was primarily for the benefit of unemployed teachers, and naturally it benefited schools where the additional assistants were employed. That, however, was a secondary consideration. The additional money was provided by the simple expedient of paying almost all relieving teachers at £IOO per annum, and the saving between this and the scale rate was used to provide more work. Before there was a rationing scheme, additional assistants were provided by the department in all urgent cases of abnormal increases in attendance in schools. ,If these were being filled now, out of the saving under the rationing scheme, then there was a distinct breach of faith with the unemployed teachers. The saving arising through paying less than scale rates should be spent in providing additional work, not on filling positions that would in any case have been provided for by the department. If the saving in this and other districts had been absorbed by the extra assistants granted to certain other districts, then the scheme was not being administered to the benefit of the general body of unemployed teachers. The only fair method was to allow each board to spend its own saving as each district had proportionately about the same number of unemployed teachers. The unemployed teachers in Otago were evidently being penalised because other district's had been given more assistance than their saving warranted, and possibly assistance which would in any ease have been found by the department and not paid for out of the savings under the rationing scheme. Mr Wallace then moved —“ (a) That the department be asked to state—(l) whether cases for additional assistants which would in any case have been recognised arc being paid for out of the saving under the rationing scheme; (2) on what basis additional assistants were apportioned in February last; and (3) the number of asistants allowed to each district in February and number since; (b) further that the board accept the responsibility of appointing now, eight additional assistants until the end of the term: (c) that on receipt of the department’s reply, the matter be referred to a sub-committee of the board to consider what further action shall be taken.” Mr D. T. Fleming seconded the motion and said he could not see any justification for the department’s action. He did not think it was doing the fair thing by the teachers. Mr Wallace saifi that the Auckland Board had used up all its savings. The department, he thought, did not take the same view as the Minister, who held that the scheme was to help unemployed teachers; and seemed rather sympathetically inclined towards the board’s proposal when approached recently at Wellington by himself, Mr Fleming and Mr Carrington. “ He has been over-ridden by the department,” remarked Mr W. M. Cooper. Mr Wallace pointed out that if the board carried his motion, it was committing itself to the appointment of eight assistants, and added that whilst the board was trying to play fair with the department, he thought that the department was not playing fair with the board. The motion was carried.