UNEMPLOYMENT.

Taranaki Daily News, 13 June 1930, Page 14

UNEMPLOYMENT.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —Lately comments have been forthcoming in your paper on the above perpetual problem, and no one, whether a taxpayer, a citizen, or a member of a local body, should turn a deaf ear to the cry for work by those desirous of earning their daily bread. At the recent conference at New Plymouth two statements made caused me to reflect deeply upon the cause of unemployment and the correct solution to the evil. One of the speakers said that he trusted that unemployment would be a thing of the past in a year or so. The other speaker said that unemployment was a disease that has come to stay.

With your permission I will make a few comments on unemployment and see if some semblance to the true cause may be found. Of .. course, off-hand it looks as if the unemployed are surplus workers after all others are absorbed into callings and industries. In a measure this is correct, but it is the fluctuating economic barometer which is the most obvious cause. As your correspondent in to-day’s issue has put it we have plenty of work that requires to be done, only the means need be forthcoming to carry it out. This, whether it is really grasped or not, is the keystone to the whole unfortunate position. The main cause of unemployment is, to my reasoning, primarily due to exorbitant wages being paid for services in various callings, or getting right down to bed-rock, the present immobile Arbitration Court. To any business man it is apparent that if he had a revenue or turnover capable of paying, say, £5O per week in wages he may pay one man £lO and ten men £4, but should there be 11 men requiring work then he must take from the first highly paid man and give to the other- requiring employment. Or it may be that hits - available revenue falls to £45. Under present awards his only course is to dispense with the services of one. The only alternative is to give a lower rate of pay. It is quite obvious that with the present cost of living for a family man £4 is not excessive, therefore, as a reduction must take place it is again obvious that the most highly paid should be the first to be retrenched to find room for the man who has ho work. If this principle is riot followed' through, then the man must be kept by taxation, and it may be found that the man who is only receiving sufficient to keep himself and. his family is paying the same taxa tion for this purpose as the man drawing the higher wage, and further he has already barely enough. As high wages to privileged persons often absorb unduly money or revenue available for general wages, the employer must, to enable him to meet his obligations, put off all sundry labour at the earliest moment. The Arbitration Court lays down a wage as .a standard irrespective of the fact that in order to pay it often the capital itself is undermined or the business is run solely for the benefit -of the employees. This has forced employers at the earliest possible moment tp discharge any surplus labour. This is particularly so in relation to our dairy factories, and whereas formerly it was possible to keep men on doing repair work, etc., now it is schemed how soon they may be put off, and as many young men (not all) engaged in this class of work do not make provision for the slack period a certain number must look for employment. This is also applicable to many other seasoriaible industries, and it appears to me that the union principle of a basic wage during the winter inontliis should not be, operative. I was recently told of a public institution that had various applicants apply for help or work; as one man was a tradesman he was offered £4 per week until he found work elsewhere, to do odd jobs connected with his trade. The man was willing to do this, but his union forbade him to work unless at the union rate, and as the means of public bodies are often- limited and the work was not pressing the work ceased. This could apply in many other instances, therefore, I feel that we arc faced with two alternatives, (11 lower the wages of all the highly paid and give employment to more, or (2) keep to our presentselfish, vicious system and have an ever increasing band of unfortunate men who are economically pushed out with no work by which to earn a living. Io keep these men employed the community must be taxed. Properly reasoned out it is apparent that if all these men had normal occupations or work to do under private employers the country would be much better off because private direction and enterprise is far more reproductive than where employinent is “simply found.” It is quite certain that a fault has developed in our economic system, which is increasingly swelling the numbers of those seeking work. Inventions, machinery, etc., account for a proportion, the replacement of men by women in sedentary occupations further accounts for more, but a graver cause jn creating artificial value for services given is the main cause. We have university piofessors who call themselves masters of arts, and surely they could tell us the true remedy to what is purely an economic matter. However, it is extraordinary how many palliatives are resorted to by politicians without finding the coi-

rect solution. It is evident that the solution is simple and right at hand. It is obvious that it must be a social adjustment. I have written this letter because I think that a good discussion on this subject may educate some people and further cause a little more sympathy to be felt for those who are genuinely seeking work and are prepared to give value in return. Thanking you for your valuable space.—l am, etc., J. S. TOSLAND. Pihama, June 9. P.S.—I have seen quite a number of young men “on the road” lately. They appeared genuine workers, so the position is becoming acute. I have also been in close touch with relief workers, to whom 14s per day is only paid for a fortnight, after which all go on to piece work, and good solid workers many oi them prove to be. Some make quite good wages; others do not do so well, but the system is equitable.—J.S.T.