WAGES OF TRAMWAYMEN

Taranaki Daily News, 23 November 1932, Page 3

WAGES OF TRAMWAYMEN

PROPOSALS FOR REDUCTION CONCILIATION COUNCIL SITTING. NO AGREEMENT YET REACHED. Proposed new rates of wages for New Plymouth tramway employees were discussed by representatives of the Tramway Employers’ Union and the New Plymouth Borough Council before the Conciliation Commissioner, Mr. E. W. F. Gohns, at New Plymouth yesterday. No settlement was reached and the council adjourned. In the meantime the union will submit the employers’ claims to its members in the light of the argument advanced yesterday. The employers agreed to add a preference clause on tiie understanding that the men give serious consideration to the adoption of the employers’ demands. . Messrs. H. V. S. Griffiths, P. E. Stainton and J. W. Darby were assessors and Mr. V. Duff agent for the council, and Messrs. V. George, J. Liddell and L. Vercoe assessors and W. H. S. Taylor agent for the employees. The schedule of wages proposed by the borough council was: Motormen, first year* Is 7Jd per hour, second year Is Bid; conductors, first year Is 6|d, second year Is 7d; motor bus drivers and motor mechanics, first year Is 7 Id, second year Is B|d; car-cleaners, day Is 7d, night Is 7d; car examiners, day Is Bd, night Is 8d; car shed labourers, day Is 7d, night Is 7d; fitters, Is 9Jd; blacksmiths, Is 9Jd; motor drivers, drivers’ award rates; trackmen, £4 per week; permanent way repairers, Is 8d; labourers, Is 7d; linesmen, Is BJd. Both parties agreed that motormen operating one-man cars should receive 2d per hour extra over the motorman rate.

Counter-proposals made by the union coincided, with one or two exceptions, with the rates fixed in the former award, less the 10 per cent, reduction, which made the men’s present wages as follows: Motormen, first year Is Bld, second year Is 9 3-sd; conductors, first year Is 7 7-20 d, second year Is BJd; bus drivers, first year Is 8 7-10 d, second year Is 9 3-sd; motor mechanics, Is lOJd; car cleaners, day Is 7 7-20 d, night Is 7 4-sd; car examiners, day Is 8 7-10 d, night Is 9 3-20 d; car shed labourers, day Is 7 7-20 d, night Is 7 4-sd; car painters, Is 11 2-sd; fitters Is 11 2-sd; blacksmiths, Is 11 2-sd; trackmen, £4 5s 6d per week; permanent way men Is BJd; linesmen Is 7Ad. EMPLOYERS’ PROPOSALS.

The proposals of the employers and the employees also contained differences of opinion over hours of work, holidays, broken. shifts, disputes committee and preference to unionists. Mr. Stainton, chairman of the tramways committee of the council, in explanation of the council’s point of view in seeking reductions in the wages said the committee had met the men twice already. In previous years they had got along all right, arriving at amicable agreements, but this year the accumulated losses on the working of the tramways were'such that the council instructed the tramways committee that the trams had in some way to come into line and reduce their expenditure somewhere in line with the system's capacity to pay. The tramways had been losing £6OOO to £7OOO per year. The position was that the borough rates were - staggering and almost crippling the people of the town, so that expenses had to be cut in every possible way. But they could only go to a certain point as far as reducing the service was concerned. The men’s assessors would agree that in the past the council >had done everything possible and the men, he knew, had done their best” to help the system. The circumstances were such, however, that neither side had much control oyer things as they were. No-one regretted having to reduce wages more than the council, and it was an unenviable task for its representatives, dealing as they were with men whose good service was appreciated? to have to seek reductions in wages. . The council had done everything possible before taking the present action.. Overhead costs were cut down to a minimum, but the position was forced on the council by reduced revenue, which the council was unable to arrest and which was not singular to this particular service. The council had come to a point where it felt convinced it had not cut its garment according to the cloth. In preparing its claims the committee set out with the desire of instructing the manager to go to the maximum that the council could possibly afford to pay. The committee honestly and conscientiously did its best to meet the position at the present time. CASE PRESENTED FOR MEN. Presenting the case for the employees, Mr. Liddell agreed that throughout New Zealand tramway concerns were showing, a loss in every case and, looking for avenues to meet that loss, were appealing to the ratepayers. The Auckland Transport Board, though it showed a heavy loss, had at first not taken full advantage of . the general 10 per cent, cut and had reduced wages by only 6j per cent, until recently. Auckland did not go as far as New Plymouth wished to go. The whole thing, he thought, was a vicious circle. It w,as wrong to reduce the workers’ wages to such a level that it amounted to a sacrifice of their right to live decent lives.

The council paid £9OOO in interest and sinking fund out of a revenue of £15,000 each year, he was informed. The council was endeavouring to get the employee to meet this deficiency to a great extent, but many employees had their own liabilities to meet and many were being forced to give up their homes, not being in a position to strike a rate. The introduction of the tram service helped the town considerably. It was an asset, and even considering the rates paid to help the system—about 5s per ratepayer each year—the citizens had the benefit of something fairly cheap. The one avenue of relief that must be found, he suggested, was a reduction of interest.

Mr. Stainton replied that he could not agree with the comparison of the New Plymouth tram system with that of Wellington or Auckland. New Plymouth had a much smaller turnover and a smaller area from which to draw its revenue. The point was that New Plymouth had to depend on local residents for its revenue and they were badly hit by the unemployed position. There was a large number of people who could not pay their rates, yet they were the employers of the tramwaymen, though they were not earning what the tramwaymen asked. He suggested most seriously that the position had to be met. Under the new agreement it was computed that motormen and busmen would earn £4 18s per week, less superannuation, on the average. Mr. Liddell pointed out that the wage would be made by working on Sundays and at overtime rates. The men could not demand more than eight hours work a day though they might be required to do more than that. The working man, Mr. Stainton continued, was the one who had used the trams regularly, but to-day in many instances he could no longer afford it. The committee spent many hours trying ‘to avoid ths necessily for waga

duction, but it could only spend the money it had. He realised that the cuts would mean some hardship, but many of the ratepayers were facing even greater hardships as the result of unemployment, short time, or less business in their shops. He was sure that the good judgment of the men would enable them to realise that what he said was correct.

Mr. George quoted figures to show that for the fortnight ending November 9, 22 men had drawn £249 16s, an average of £ll 7s Id each, but with deductions for superannuation and tax £lO 10s. The overtime for that period had averaged 10 hours 45 minutes per man. Under the new proposals a gross amount of £192 19s 8d in the fortnight would mean a gross average per man of £8 15s 3d, while he anticipated that overtime would be about, 145 hours or 6 hours 35 minutes per man. With the traffic men the cut, including the 10 per cent, one already suffered, would amount to 33 per cent, when everything was considered.

Mr. Stainton reminded the council that the introduction of one-man cars had meant that the staff could be rediiced by three but the council felt that the fairest way was for the men to remain on so that the same saving could be made by an all round reduction of costs. The discussion of rates of pay occupied the greater part of the time, no agreement being arrived at. At the close of the sitting a vote of thanks to the commissioner for the able way in which he presided was carried on the motion of l Mn, Stainton, seconded by Ma. Lidddh