THE RAILWAY EMPLOYES' CONFERENCE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2057, 27 July 1893, Page 11

THE RAILWAY EMPLOYES' CONFERENCE.

Wellington, July 24. The Rail way Employees' Conference closed their sittings to-day.

A deputation from the conference, accompanied by Mr M'Kerrow, the Chief Railway Commissioner, waited on the Premier this morning. * In reply to a question by the Hon. Mr Seddon, Mr M'Kerrow said that the conference had bean held with the approval of the commissioners. Mr Gray, secretary of the conference* explained the amendments in the Railway Insurance Bill, as proposed by the conference and by the commissioners. He said that it was the desire of the conference to have the bill so framed that it would give satisfaction to all grades and classes of the service. Personally he knew that the whole service agreed with the principle of the measure, and if the Government would secure its passage through Parliament they would receive the thanks and support of the service generally. Mr M'Kerrow explained that when the rules and regulations were fixed it would coat very little to carry out the bill. The commissioners were anxious for some scheme that would obviate application being made to them (the commissioners) and the Government for compensation in every case of accident, as was done at present. The commissioners wished the bill to be a selfsupporting measure and with a State guarantee, but the conference desired a Government subsidy on the men's contributions. That was, to the commissioners' mind, the crucial point of the bill. Taking the present strength of the service, the subsidy would amount to a little more than £5000 annually. Mr Seddon, in reply, said that he would object in toto to the proposal to allow the men to increase their contributions for the purpose of increasing the amount of their retiring allowances, as such a provision would be entirety to the advantage Of the best paid men in the service. Mr' Gray interjected that that proposal had emanated from the shunters. Mr Seddon : Then they are asking for an utter impossibility. Continuing, he, said that the action of the delegates in meeting to frame legislation on their own behalf was one that he did not altogether agree with at first, but as it was with the sanction of the commissioners he had nothing more to say. It must be borne in mind that' the whole Government service had to be considered, not one branch of it, and the Government could not legislate piecemeal. Here was one branch of the service asking for a subsidy of £5000 per annum, and what was done to one branch might fairly be claimed by another. The admission that the friendly societies and insurance companies could do all that the bill provided must be seriously considered, as the Government must take into account the effect such a bill would have on these institutions. This phase of the question was a very serious one. What, he asked, might be the effect of the withdrawal of a large number of men from friendly societies, especially in the face of the statement that some of the latter were not very strong financially? The Government must look at this side of the question, as in the event of a disastrous result they would receive blame. It was admitted, however, something required to be done in regard to many features or the bill, and the Government were desirous of doing this something. He would place the views of the delegates before his colleagues, and ask the commissioners to get the proposals contained in the bill submitted to actuarial computation. Fair time should be given to every man in the service to consider the proposals, and if any objected they should have the support of the meeting in sayiDg so. The Government could not act nastily in a matter of such great importance.