THE CO-CPERATIVE SYSTEM.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIII, Issue 12, 11 May 1912, Page 5

THE CO-CPERATIVE SYSTEM.

A DEPUTATION TO THE MINISTER

As soon ns the Hon, W. i). S. MacDonald and the Hon. George Laurenson had addressed the residents of AVhangamomona, they were cornered hy a deputation of co-operative workers.

Mr Edward Bradley, the first speaker, said lie was a member of a gang of six working mostly on river diversion south of Whangamomona. They were not earning a living wage; the highest pay of the six men working for five weeks had been £6 16s. At the present time, as he had said, they were on river diversion. But they were not there for diversion; they were not out on a holiday. “We are not loafers. No; none of us,” he added ,and there was a general murmur of assent from the men gathered round in the room. “I don’t doubt the engineer’s measurements,” he went on to say. “The measurements are quite correct. But a better price should bo paid. Considering the price paid for food, wo arej absolutely underpaid. lam a married man; three or four of us arc 1 married men. I cannot make enough to pay the storekeeper for groceries.” Ho continued that he was sorry that Mr McKenzie, the engineer of the Public Works Department was not there.

Mr Mulvaney, the next speaker, said that they were working under great difficulties. Their work took them up to the ankles in mud. Every morning it took an hour to an hour and a half to halo the water from the place they were working. They were not getting anything for that. He thought that they really ought to have the minimum wage of Os a day guaranteed them; for the class of work they were doing 10s a day was a fair minimum wage. The ministers must understand that they were working hard for their living. If they had been out for a holiday, it would be a different thing.

Mr Bradley, speaking again, said he wished to emphasise the fact that on river diversion work there were peculiar difficulties. They could easily win the dirt, hut it was difficult to get rid of it. The schedule prices were all right for railway formation, and there men could average 11s 8d per day. In river diversion they had to handle the stuff twice, and could only make 6s per day though they worked much harder on this class of work. The present prices paid to them were certainly not sufficient to remunerate them for the labour they wore giving to the department. Then, again, the cost of living was tremendous. He would give the prices of eight articles which formed the basis of the necessaries of life. They paid 8d per loaf for bread, Is 4d per lb. for butter, 8d lb. for meat, 3s 6d for 231bs. of potatoes, 7s 3d for 501bs. flour, 13s per bag for sugar, Is Id per lb. for bacon. A voice: “No; Is 2d now I” 6s 6d a tin for kerosene. These were the prices they paid, and they were practically in a position of starvation. They were not able to meet the credit that was given them' by the storekeepers. A voice: “It is impossible for us to meet the demands made by them.” The speaker continued that he appealed to them as ministers in the Cabinet to devise some system whereby they would bo able to avoid the extortionate prices they were paying for the necessaries of life. A co-op-erative system might meet the case. They (the ministers) must remember that they were working at Whangamomona, fifty miles from civilisation. He had sent £5 to New Plymouth the other day for groceries, and ho could have saved about 5s to 7s per £1 on the prices obtaining at Whangamomona. Still it cost 7s 6d to get three and a half cwt. of goods from the railway siding to their camps, even if they did deal direct. He considered that the Department should put the necessaries of life within their roach at a reasonable and not an exorbitant price. He was speaking on behalf of practically tlie whole of the gang north of Whangamomona. V Tho first speaker here interposed that the goods did not reach them as consigned. Goods were missing when they reached their destination. Another point, which he had not referred to, was that they were not only asking tho Minister of Public Works to consider the question of raising the rate of pay so as to provide a living wage for them, but there was the fact that the conditions of work for tho last five weeks had been such as to preclude them from earning a living wage. They would ask that some recompense be given them sufficient to make good their losses for tho last five weeks.

Mr Nugent emphasised the fact that they did not wish to damage the cooperative system in any way. It was one of the finest systems that had ever been devised, and it was a credit to Seddon and Ballance. He for one did not wish to see private contractors brought again into the public works. They were all supporters of the co-op-erative system, and did not wish to do it damage. But it was, in their case, simply a had application of principle; it was a prostitution of the system.

Mr McCluggago remarked that the County Council was giving 2d per yard more than the Public Works Department.

Continuing, Mr Nugent said that the lucky uiau on day wage got a minimum of 9s guaranteed. He had worked under contractors and 'had worked on a day wage. Ho could tell them that he had never worked harder than ho had done during this last five weeks, yet ho only got Gs 2d per day. Why could not piece-work-ers, whose natural incentive was to work hard, to do their very utmost, mini more than that 9s per day? Why should they on the co-operative system bo singled out for low wages? They

were all prepared to work long and hard. But they could not work at that price. Such prices could only make a loafer out of a good man. Ho had had an eventful life, and had worked in many countries. Like many another man ho- was striving hard to get on to the land, but he found himself baulked.

The Hon. McDonald said he was glad of the opportunity of meeting the representatives of the men, and appreciated the manner in which their grievance had been brought, but ho regretted to hear that the rate of pay was not sufficient. He realised that men working away back on these works were entitled to every consideration, and to a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work. He had now heard their side of the question, and he promised that he would go into the whole matter very closely to ascertain what system the engineers were working on, what wages was possible by an average workman in the class of country, and in the conditions under which they worked. He was familiar with the co-operative works in his own district, and mustsay that there was no complaint thero from the men, who earned from 8s to 14 s a day. If it were worth more to work this land than the men were getting, then they would get more, and if in five or six weeks a gang of hard-working men could make only the amount which the speakers had stated, then they were entitled to more. Mr McDonald remarked that the system of co-operative works had been designed originally not with a view of injuring any man, nor of attempting to get out of a man a shilling’s worth more than he would give under any other system. The system had been designed to give a living wage to men who for some reason or other were not able to obtain the average wage under contractors. The Government ■had decided that 9s was to be the minimum payment to day labourers, and if it were shown that men working diligently and reasonably well could not earn that amount, then the system needed to be altered, for the Government did not desire to get one shilling’s worth of work from any man or men without paying for it. As for the price of stores, he recognised that in districts like this, where freight charges were so heavy, storekeepers could not make great profits on heavy goods, and he himself had suggested that, the Government should make orovision for storing these heavy goods which were necessaries of life, so that the men on these works could obtain them at fair prices. He didn’t want to see men working for a mere existence. Co-operative labourers were entitled to as much; consideration as any other class in the community. He assured the deputation that he and his colleague, the Hon. Mr Laurenson, would very carefully consider the whole matter.

Appealed to by tbo men themselves, Mr J. McCluggage, the latter said that the speakers were all steady and hard-working men. The Hon. Mr Laurenson endowed Hs colleague’s remarks. He crew attention to the .fact that the co-op-erative system was introduced in the face of.bitter opposition. (A voice: It exists to-day.) The Government had been held up to ridicule on its account, it having been alleged that the men were loafing on the jobs and making big incomes. He had seen for himself the men working hard under difficult conditions, and heard how that their earnings were low. He had occripied a few minutes by running through the figures of a paysheet, and found six men averaged only 9Jd an hour. * But the minimum rate of pay laid down by the Government for men on day work was 9s a day, and this was as. little as they could reasonably ask able-bodied men to work for. He promised to go fully into the whole matter with the Minister of Public Works.