ARBITATION COURT

Taranaki Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 16904, 29 November 1920, Page 3

ARBITATION COURT

THE NEW BONUS. ' AN IMPORTANT DISCUSSION. Per Press Association. AVELLINGTON, Nov. 29. The Arbitration Court to-day henra argument in reference to the granting of the now’ cost of living bonus, of Js. Great interest was taken m the proceedings, as the decision o£ the couit will affect bonus applications from unions in all parts of New Zealand. The application for the review of the bonus was made by the New Zealand Employers’ Association, which vas iepresented by Afr. Pryor, who stated that the court was asked to decide whether the payment of the bonus voulcL not have a disastrous result upon employers, workers and the community geneifclly and, if so, whether the tune had not come to call a halt in the neverending round of increases of wages and higher prices. Tremendous issues weie at stake and it was not too much to say that upon the decision depended the existence of some industries and whether unemployment • was to be precipitated or not. The attitude of the Employers’ Association was in no sense a qhcillenge to Labour, as suggested, but the action was decided upon after duo ’deliberation in the interest of everybody. . , Air. Pryor opened his general argument with an exhaustive survey of tho financial, industrial and economic situation generally. Unless great care was exercised unemployment would become a serious problem. The position could only be met by boldly facing tho situation and by employers and workers alike recognising that the dominant cry for a further increase in wages would surely lead to unemployment and any further restriction of tho financial situation must be met by a reduction of working expenses to tho utmost limits, which meant in all probability a lower wage scale., There was no question that the lot of Now Zealand workers was better than that of workers in other parts of tho world. ’ Generally speaking wages had been raised by at least as .much per cent, as the cost of living had increased.

WRONG METHOD OF CALCULATION. As to the amount of bonus to be paid Mr. Pryor said he desired to make it perfectly clear that he was not criticising' the department’s methods of compiling statistics. Ho reviewed at length the various tables and announcements from Government Statistician’s office. Hc’contcnded that for the period September, 1919, to March, 1920, only 7s 3d bonus should have been awarded as against 10s 4d; on the increase from the period March, 1920, to September, 1.920, 13s 3d was the correct amount, instead of 19s. If the correct method of computation was adopted the workers were now entitled to only 3s 3d per week, instead of 9s. It appeared that the Government Statistician had acted upon the monthly index numbers instead of the sixmonthly average index numbers, which were agreed upon as the best to adopt for the computation of the bonus. This had resulted in taking the difference between the first month and last month in each period, instead of the average for the period.

- THE EFFECT-ON INDUSTRY. The announcement of tho 9s bonus came as a bombshell to employers. Tho cost-to tho i whole Dominion could not be less than five millions per annum. The Railway Department would ho called upon to find over £1,000,000 to cover tho bonus and that would mean an increase of all rates. The position in regard to the tramways was grave. If the bonus was granted, the services would bo curtailed and fares increased and the ratepayers probably called upon to make up the deficiency. Mr. Pryor dealt with various other industries and then questioned the advisability of awarding any bonus at all. He submitted that it would not bo just or equitable to employers or the general interest to 'amend the awards under the present circumstances. ‘ '

AN ADJOURNMENT ASKED FOR.

Mr. M. J. Reardon, bn behalf of the unions, asked the court to adjourn until Thursday. It was impossible for him or any of his colleagues to meet immediately tho statements made by the Employers’ Association. He drew attention to the fact that the Government Statistician’s figures had been questioned by the employers in a letter jo the Registrar' and they asserted that the statistics published by the Government Statistician did not appear to warrant tho court in awarding the amount of the bonus.

Mr. Reardon suggested that the Statistician should bo asked —(1) Are the figures on which tho court is accustomed to rely correct? (2J Is tho system of calculating prices one that has the endorsement of statistical authorities in other parts of tho world? Mr. M'Corabs also desired to address a question to tho Government Statistician and tho president of the court said lie would pass such questions on to that officer.

Mr. Justice Stringer stated that, after listening to Mr. Pryor’s address, he was more than ever convinced that tho public should be represented in Arbitration Court proceedings. It was admitted that tho employers were quito prepared to concede the bonus so long as they could pass that increase on. It amounted to a combination on the part of employers and workers to rob the general public. Mr. F. Cooper, Canterbury Employ-’ ers’ Association, objected. Ho stated that the employers had protested in court, but until now they did not have a proper basis, upon which they could calculate. When the Gs bonus was announced they had to admit the impossibility of proving a case. The hearing was adjourned till AVodnesday, when witnesses will ho called to substantiate Air. Pryor’s statement.