WORK AND REMUNERATION.

Taranaki Daily News, 29 September 1930, Page 2

WORK AND REMUNERATION.

(To the Editor.) Sir—l read your article in reference to' the Governor-General’s speech, and especially referring to that part re the primary producers, also your leading article re primary production about the same date. Now neither of these articles is any assistance to the primary producer as they are both on the produce more and keep the cost of production down racket. Now, I would like to know how the farmers can do any more to keep down both the costs at the butter and cheese factories respectively; for, as you are aware, extensive reports, on all factory costs of manufacture, etc., are given to the suppliers every year, and in most instances are criticised pretty closely, while there is a degree of rivalry between practically all factories as to the costs of manufacture. etc. In regard to the farmer’s part on the farm, he has to keep costs down or he would soon have to walk off the farm. This refers to all primary producers. He employs as little labour as possible; his family and.self work long hours —average 10 to 11 hours a day from beginning of September to the end of March, under all sorts of weather conditions. He averages, inclusive of Sundays, from 64 to 70 hours a week, while "those under arbitration awards average anything from 44 to 48 hours per week, and that mostly under favourable conditions in regard to cover from weather, etc. Now, the, workers on relief gangs get 14s. a day 48 hours a week, equivalent to £4 4s. per week. The farm labourer on dairy farms. works seven, days to the week and averages 64 to 70 hours to the week on an average of from 375. 6‘d. to 455. per week, plus board, or, say, inclusive of board, at 30s. per week, for an equivalent of £3 12s. for 66 hours as against relief workers’ pay of £4 4s. for 48 hours. The above does not take in women or boy labour on farm. The farm labourer, therefore, has per above worked 18 hours more per week and receives 12s. less wages than those on relief works. How much less thau carpenters, coalminers and other workers coming under arbitration awards? You have only to look up the award scales of pay per week to see that he receives from £2 to £4 less and puts in 18 hours more work, and then newspapers, politicians and labour leaders tell the poor farmers and farm labourers to produce more, while they hold their snug billets backed up by those that are working under arbitration labour award rates. Then, as regards award rates of pay, the politicians, labour members of Parliament, newspapers, etc., say the standard of living must not be encroached on. Now I put this challenge out, that the standard of living of small farmers, say, milking from 18 to 30 cows, sharemilkers and farm labourers, is far below those receiving arbitration award rates of pay, and then politicians, newspapers, etc., wonder why unemployment increases while the above incentive exists, and talk about putting more people on the land to repeat the process and add to the excessive burden the primary producers are already carrying, by taking out. the costs of same from the 94£ per cent, total exports of New Zealand by the primary producers. I would refer you to the conclusion of the article “Aid to Prosperity” in today’s issue. I would also refer you to show the trend, of events to estimates criticised in your paper wherein the Minister, Mr. Smith, in answer to a Labour member’s query as to how many men had been put on road works, stated that 109 men had left of their own accord to go ou to relief work, and the relief works are subsidised by the primary producers of 944 pci’ cent, exports to the extent of £2 to every £1 found by public bodies, etc. The primary producers this year will be curtailing by afr least a half (they will have to) their spendings in the town. Then the business people, being hit at last, will begin to cry out about a. reduction in arbitration awards, production costs of secondary manufactures, etc.

Top-dressing of land has contributed to the farmers’ increased production during the last 10 or 12 years, but neither the arbitration award labourer nor the town business man has contributed very little to same, if any. —1 am. etc.. C. H. AUSTIN. September 25, 1930.