WAGES AND COSTS

Taranaki Daily News, 24 June 1931, Page 14

WAGES AND COSTS

PASSING BENEFIT ON MANUFACTURERS’ PLAN. "BOYS’ WAGES RELATIVELY HIGH.” Wage-reduction was discussed by the Wellington Manufacturers’ Association on Tuesday evening when a summary of the Arbitration Court’s decision prepared by the New Zealand Employers’ Association was submitted. It was mentioned that boys’ wages would still remain relatively high, lads in merchants’ * offices and apprentices not being affected by the cut. One remedy, it was said, lay in securing some revision of the fates paid to boys. Work could be found for husbands, sons and daughters if they would only buy the goods that were made in New Zealand, added another. Members of the association are to be circularised recommending that any saving be passed on to the public. Mr. J. P. Luke said he had gone into the effect of the cut on prices and it was a big mistake to run away with ,the idea that if a 10 per cent, cut was made in wages the cost to the consuftier, would be reduced by 10 per cent. Mr. J. Abel remarked that in many articles it would mean a reduction of about 3.2 per cent. Mr. Luke said he and two others had worked it out in their* businesses, and the average reduction possible was not more than 5 per cent. The chairman, Mr. J. T. Spears, said j it was generally reckoned that the | ratio of labour cost to selling price' jwas 33 1-3 per cent. • Mr. Abel:'But the manufacturer is not in a position to' compel the retailer, to pass on the reduction. The chairman said the costs to the public had already been largely reduced, and while economy might be effected by the reduction in wage costs it would only be lessening the losses already, incurred. To give too much prominence to the sentimental plea might be damaging and dangerous as it might led the public, in anticipation of further reductions in prices, to stop buying. Mr. Lyke pointed out that the federation only asked that the manufacturer, while safeguarding his business, should pass on the saving to the consumer. In some cases the saving would be only a fraction and the retailers would collar it, and the public would get no reduction, said Mr. H. Bull. ’ Mr. J. G. Marshall thought the reduction in wage costs should be passed on, otherwise the public would suffer. ONUS ON RETAILER.

Mr. Abel: The manufacturer cannot pass it on to the public, and if- the retailer does not the public will blame the manufacturer. Mr. J. H. Whitaker said another aspect of the matter'was that when the redaction in wages made reduced output might follow. The chairman said that was a real menace, production wages were the issue that mattered. If what was suggested took place it would mean that the cost of living would go up instead of receding. He suggested that-members of the association should be asked to use the wage cut with discretion, giving all advantage possible to the public, but centring thought on the productive wage , rather than the money wage. Mr. A. Seed said he had had a good deal to do with the Employers’ Federa- • tion, and had seen something of the restrictions which had crept in in the awards of the Arbitration Court. In 99 cases out of 100 it was owing to the lack of interest on the part of the employers in combating those insidious requests by . which labour unions, gained little concessions on an award. ; So it went on. Employers as a „ whole had ibeen too prosperous and had become too indifferent to their own interests. The chairman’s opinion was that Mr. Seed had stated the case exactly. ; Mr. Luke agreed, but said if the verbiage was cut away it was wages all the way along. Wages had been the ibone of contention all the time. It. had been give and take at the Conciliation Council, but when it came : to wages it was taken to the Arbitration Court. ,This had grown up year by year until [the wages were out of all reason. ( Mr. Marshall: The cost of living has gone up because the workers have not been giving a fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay. The speaker quoted instances .to show the time taken on a certain job six mouths ago and at the present time, Showed 12 hours in one case and between seven and eight at the present time. LIMIT ON APPRENTICES, The chairmim drew attention. to the fact that the Arbitration Court limited the number of apprentices, in many trades one apprentice to four journeymen, but the conditions were such .that, employers did not even want the one. Another member remarked that a lot boys could be employed if it were not for the wages awarded by the Arbitration Court. Mr. Marshall said he could put several boys on at once, but it would mean putting men out. After two years a boy could become as good as a journeyman with the machinery they had for turning out the work. Mr. Marshall proceeded that if boys iand girls, and their parents too, would only wear New Zealand-made boots, stockings, and other things, the problem would be solved. Women growled about their husbands and children being out of work, and were wearing a foreign dress and foreign boots. He had three visitors at his house recently, and all were ■wearing imported boots and socks. The tonus was on them to buy New Zealandmade products, and that would solve the : problem of work for boys and men too. i Mr. Luke deprecated the idea of or- ! jganisations engaged in social work coming and interfering in the matter. , He drew attention to the award which made a 10 per cent, general cut, but did pot allow them to cut apprentices’ wages. The wages of boys in merchants’ offices were only maintained i [because the wages of apprentices were [too high. Mr. Marshall pointed out that there ; were plenty of boys at the Technical ■ College who could not get a job. “We i will help boys in employment if they ■ will buy our goods,” ho added. “.The i onus is on the parents to buy the goods 1 which the husbands, sons and daughters : inake.” < It was agreed to circularise members j on the lines suggested by the chair- j man. <