THE PLIGHT OF THE FACTORY HAND.

Taranaki Daily News, 12 March 1920, Page 2

THE PLIGHT OF THE FACTORY HAND.

To the Editor. Sir,—lt is pleasant to meet a correspondent who ran deal with n. question the same as "Your Own" at Wai-toMoi. 1 beg (space t® reply as briefly as possible to the several points brought up in Ills notes of tlio 4th last. I hope he will regard my statements as honest. Evidently "Cheddar" and I agree that factory wages aro not consistent with the prlceß or produce and the cost of living, as compared with pre-war times. I contend that tho price of land Is advanced by paying low wages not only In factories, but all wages In any way connected with the Industry. And the lower the wages -im higher the profits that can be made from' the land thus showing batter returns at tho ond of the year. Yes, tho unltiated think that by approaching the employers "in nr v propeir manner" (whatever that may be) the matter could be adjusted amicably, and It Is don® so but with no recognition to"the employee. Since 1914 I approached' the directors four times in the only way accessible, for ft ripe in salary, but "declined- wltK thanks" was the response to my appeal. Factory workers are in receipt of privileges not enjoyed by ether trades, but the difference between the factory man's cash income and the tradesman's Income is more than would buy the privileges. Take an average factory asjlstant at £3 10s (see advertisement In today's paper), and Mr. Master's statement (in the same) that local bodies pay l!>s per day, which is £4 10s per week, a different'" of one pound. Put the factory man's allowance, say imilk 3s, butter 3s, fuel 3s, and house 6s (which Is ample for the class of house provided). We have the laborer 5s a week better off than the factory mtu'., and he has had to work 1 days a week for bin bit. Sir, the day laborer gets 15s for p'.rk and shovel, and the factory man who has qualified and is doing the work only gets 10i. or less than 15s with the allowances. Ia It just? When compared with tradesmen's wages the position Is more inconsistent than ever. Perhaps factory man hopes to become a manager some- day, but as there ;uv not enough factories to go around the men should get a wage to live on and to buy 6ome land, but how long at £3 10s a week will It take to buy an acre of land at present prices? An employee chucking his job is a different thing to a farmer selling his farm. Tlie employee doesn't sell his job. Besides, that is no remedy. Would "Your Own" advocate 1370 dissatisfied tramway oien "chucking" it to got redress? Or Jlie Christchurch police "chucking" it for the same reason? For they are dissatisfied, as shown by the throe telegrams in to-day's News. I prefer (out of consideration of space) to leave the farmers' profits out of this controversy. The gentlemen referred to by "Your Own" cannot be conversant with the conditions prevailing at most factories. If "Your Own" can arrange a conference between tho directors of dairy companies and the employees, either collectively or each company individually, he will have tho thanks of 1000 men. And, in closing, I would suggest that when the3o matterß aro considered that we take the average of 10 years prewar times as a. basis, and consider the position and have regard for the cost of living, status, merit, length of service, and value of produce.—l am, etc, WHEY. Warea, sth March.