SHIPBUILDING METHODS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 25364, 23 October 1943, Page 4

SHIPBUILDING METHODS

WASTAGE OF MAM-POWER ALLEGED “ GESTAPO DICTATORSHIP ” Wo have received a long letter, over the pseudonym “ British,” criticising the stupendous muddling of man-power that has, as is alleged, characterised the execution of the shipbuilding programme at Port Chalmers. “At the outset,” our correspondent writes, “I wish to state that the.reputable firm in whose yards the ships are being constructed, is not a party to, nor has it much control over, the conditions. It receives its orders from the various Governmental departments and has little authoritative control over its own works. Of the numerous factors leading to the cause of these conditions the man-power department _is possibly the greatest offender, as with it lies the power to engage men or dismiss them. It is here that the greatest evil lies. Surely the management is more fitted to state its requirements in regard to artisans and labourers. The man-power authority directs a man to the works and he must be started: the management dismisses a man for some genuine reason, and the manpower official sends him back with the laugh cn the boss, for he has had possibly a couple, of days’ holiday on full pay. Attitude of Employees “ Episodes of this nature lead a great number of the employees in the works to believe their services indispensable to the job, so much so, that they state the boss could be deleted from the staff. In effect, their wages are assured for little more than their presence on the job. In some cases the men, having no inclination to work at menial occupations, and being-totally unfitted for and incompetent to perform skilled work, have not a job to do, owing to the superabundance of their ilk in the work. There are, however, a few conscientious men, who are both willing and able to do a fair day’s work, and to these men credit is due, especially when exposed to the example of the indolent and undesirable elements.

“The next greatest loss of manpower,” our correspondent says, “is the result of craft custom and ritual, chiefly among boilermakers. The pinnacle of this craft is termed ‘ marking off,’ which consists of transferring the markings of a wooden template to steel plate, angle, etc., marking holes, shape, and size in white paint. This custom, in the light of ‘ a war effort,’ is an invidious saboteur, and in normal times is hall-marked inefficiency, the possible .origin of which is to be found in some concern which is not obliged to furnish profit and loss accounts to the people who pay the wages. In this category there is also a percentage of men who are both capable and industrious, and perform their duties satisfactorily, but inefficiency is rampant. The tremendous job of building ships and other craft could, and would, under private enterprise, be carried out at much less cost, with less labour, and in less time, and I defy anyone who is conversant with the conditions prevailing to repudiate this statement. The reaction of a section of the labour element is to a great extent a feeling of sang-froid and satisfaction. There pervades a mutual collaboration ’twixt Government and employee, ‘ You for me and me for you, but you must support your master’s policy in return.’ This, another gesture of Gestapo dictatorship in whose hands, precariously balanced, lies the prestige of a wonderful country which once lived happily under the laws of democracy, but at any time now may founder so that a gang of imported cheap orators may still retain their mastery! ” Controller’s Reply. The letter, of which the salient points are summarised above, was referred by us to the Controller of Shipbuilding, who has replied seriatim to the allegations made by “British.” He observes that it must be appreciated that in the building up of a staff for the construction of ships the National Service Department could supply only a very small percentage of trained men nad had to secure, through the man-power authority, a very large percentage of unskilled labour for the shipyard at Port Chalmers. This labour had to be trained, and during the period of training there was a considerable amount of loss, as men had to be tried on various sections of the work so as to secure the maximum results. It is a well-known fact that the powers of the man-power officers are such that a man cannot leave his employment without their permission or that of a properly constituted Appeal Court. The controller admits that there have been cases of men being dismissed and of their being reinstated after appeal, but he says this is not peculiar to the shipyards at Port Chalmers; it is absolutely contrary to fact that there has been a considerable number of such cases. It is also definitely contrary to fact, the controller says, that the boiler-makers at Port Chalmers insist on their class of work being strictly allocated to their particular trade, and will not brook interference, and also that they demand assistance in connection with the various jobs, such as “ marking off.” The number of boilermakers in the yard has been of sufficient number to put through the programme. These men have been drawn from various jobs in and around Dunedin (including the Railway Workshops), and also from some of the jobs in other parts of the country. The employment of boiler-makers’ assistants in connection with the “marking off” is an established practice and is considered a necessary part of this particular phase of the work, due to the accuracy that is called for. Interference Denied. The statement that the works at Port Chalmers are controlled by the Government and that the management has absolutely no say in the control of the shipyard is definitely denied by the controller. At no time, he says, has any Government official interfered in the management of the shipyards. The work that is being carried out in connection with these minesweepers must, of necessity, be inspected by officers of the Marine Department, as that department is responsible for the issue of a certificate. Officers of the Marine Department are also responsible for the checking of all accounts in connection with the whole enterprise. The inference that the company does not require to worry as to the costs of these vessels is also contrary to fact, as there is a fixed percentage for overhead and a fixed percentage for profit, and the overhead and profit are payable only on a pre-detemined amount and in the cases of the earlier ships, the cost over the amount allowed meant htat the company, not the State, suffered the loss.

While it is recognised that the first more than the amount estimated, the latter boats are definitely showing a considei'able improvement as regards costs, and it is worthy of note that the official opinion of the workmanship that has gone into these vessels is of the highest and that the vessels that have gone into commission definitely reflect ci-edit on the men who built them.