NUMBER 13 SCHEME WORKERS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24460, 20 November 1940, Page 11

NUMBER 13 SCHEME WORKERS

TO THE EDITOR Sir,— There is contained in your report of the labourer's compensation claim in Saturday's Daily Times, a statement made by Dr William Newlands that seems to be permeated with hostility against the working men who are engaged under what is commonly known as No. 13 scheme workers. During the proceedings, the counsel for the plaintiff asked the doctor if, whether during working hours, his client felt his back to be giving way he should be allowed to lie down. To this the doctor answered yes, and qualified this opinion by assuring counsel for the plaintiff that if he had gone around the town with his eyes open he would have seen men on No. 13 scheme enjoying a lie down when they are supposed to be working. Now, such a statement from a doctor of high repute should hot be allowed to go unchallenged except that it can be supported by concrete evidence, and if possible, the doctor should give the name of the working man who was known to be lying down when he was being paid wages for working. Such a man who lies down when he should be working is dishonest, and is taking money from the community without making any contribution back to the community for the benefit he is receiving from the community. If such a workman is physically fit all reasonable people will feel with;the doctor that such actions are unjustifiable, but for any person to make such a sweeping statement as that made by the doctor appears upon the surface as unfair and uncalled for. for it creates an opinion in the mind of the public that all No. 13 scheme workers are loafers and unworthy of reasonable consideration. The statement creates a deep impression upon the minds of the community emanating as it does from one of its members whose life has been spent investigating and recording the frailties of human creatures, and who should be in the position of propounding a remedy for &Uch weaknesses. Thug do I. think that the dictor -is in duty bound to proclaim- openly upon what evidence his opinion. of No. 13 scheme workers is based upon. Without a doubt the statement, as it now stands, will tend to create a stigma upon No. 13 scheme workers; If Dr Newlands unfortunately has seen a man lying down who 6hould have been working, it does in no way justify his branding all scheme 13 workers as delinquents. It is quite possible that the doctor never meant to brand all scheme 13 workers as delinquents. It is quite possible also that the counsel for the plaintiff, in his severe cross-examination, led the doctor away from his regular practice into a realm of surroundings with which he was not very familiar, and for him to advise the counsel for the plaintiff where a man could earn a livelihood ag a labourer where he could lie down when his back gave way was too much of an intelligent test for the doctor to supply a reasonable answer. Thus does he answer in a spasmodic manner the first position that comes to his mindnamely. No. 13 scheme workers. This now demands a more clear and concise answer than the answer given to the counsel for the plaintiff.—l am, etc.. R. Harrison. 15a Mcßride street, November 19.