UNEMPLOYMENT

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXX, Issue 20165, 20 July 1935, Page 4

UNEMPLOYMENT

MR BROMLEY ON THE POSITION POLICY OF THE BOARD By Telegraph—Press Association DANNEVIRKE, July 19. Addressing the Rotary Club to-day, Mr W. Bromley, Deputy-Chairman of the Unemployment Board, dealt at length with the problem, and outlined the policy of the Board. Mr Bromley said that less than ten years ago the approved social policy of New Zealand touching unemployment was that every man who lost his employment must rely mainly on his own resources to get another position and to keep himself and his family alive in the meantime. Labour exchanges, operating as clearing houses for employment, were provided by the Government, but, apart from recruiting labour for public works, they were not very effective. To-day, almost five years have passed since the introduction of legislation which accepts unemployment as a national social responsibility; and, by way of contrast, the question of whether the present legislative machinery is adequate to deal satisfactorily with the problem of unemployment is indeed a burning one. Unemployment to-day was regarded as the greatest of our social problems. If the legislation as it is written fell in any way short of expectation, it did not provide for long range planning, all should try and remember the atmosphere in which it was bom. There was not that directness, that confidence, and that determination which characterised the introduction of the Reserve Bank, the Mortgage Corporation, or the Executive Dairy Commission. Any known weaknesses notwithstanding, the present legislation, as a measure designed to deal with the relief of distress arising from seasonal and short-term employment had met the emergency arising from the depression over a wide field, with results comparing more than favourably with any other known administration. The measure of relief granted, admitted to be totally inadequate in itself to meet all the requirements of the recipients, -was on a higher basis than that of any other known unemployment relief administration. No increase in the national indebtedness had been involved; administration costs had been extremely low; and the national expenditure had to a great extent been recovered by the creation of national and public body assets. A Chronic Position. The problem of unemployment today differed widely from the problem as it was understood in 1929. Prom an unemployment problem that * was largely seasonal, the position had changed to a problem of chronic large scale unemployment. "During the same period, and associated with the problem of unemployment, as a country we have emerged from a position as exporters privileged to work on the easy assumption that England offered a bottomless market for our produce at profitable prices, to a position where our export market is being restricted by quotas, and where export prices barely meet production costs. Dependent to the extent we are on the value of our exportable products, the single factor of a sharp drop in export prices would have had a tremendous adverse effect on our general employment position. The difficulty has been greatly accentuated, however, by the introduction of machinery to displace labour.” Whilst the policy of rationalisation went merrily on, there were, as at the end of last month, 53,241 adult males wholly or partially dependent upon the Unemployment Fund. This group, during the past four years, had fluctuated between the minimum of 44,000 and the maximum of 75,246.. This was the picture of the problem to-day: 53,241 of our male adults are either without employment or employed as a condition of assistance given to the industry from the Unemployment Fund; 36,305 are without contract of employment because industry cannot employ them profitably. This number could be reduced to some unknown extent if we made a new definition of who is unemployed, and excluded all those who, through physical or mental infirmity, are unable to qualify as being able and willing to work. To decide whether the legislative machinery was adequate to deal with this problem depended on the results desired. Having regard to the limitations placed upon the Board by the legislation, and for the accepted policy that the field of industry should be left to private enterprise, it might be said that notwithstanding the liberal subsidies provided from the Unemployment Fund for the encouragement of industrial development private enterprise still failed to organise employment for thousands of the workless. Would the creation of public works at present help our unemployment problem in the cities, or would it create a new employment problem in the country? 'During the whole of last summer there were over 150 jobs without workers in Central Otago. As the Board was finding some of the cost, the jobs were reserved at the request of the Board for unemployed city workers. It was alleged that to send men from the cities was breaking up 'the homes, and the strongest support on all sides was given to the men who refused to accept the work when offered. Whilst this was taking place, scores of applications were received from country workers offering to man the jobs. When the summer was drawing to a close, the absolute preference for city workers .was withdrawn, and the jobs were filled immediately. Since then we have heard no complaints from the Public Works, but farmers are complaining that labour cannot be obtained for the essential work of the farm. Apprentices. There are many legacies of this depression in the form of industrial problems that have not as yet been realised by the man in the street. “How many of you have realised that as a result of the recent improved activity in industry, we have to-day the spectacle of overtime being worked because skilled labour is not available, and that in spite of the large numbers of unemployed? An award governing tradesmen provides that an employer may have only one apprentice to each journeyman employed. Under this award a firm prior to the depression regularly employed 40 apprentices, say 8 in the first year of apprenticeship, and 8 with 2,3, 4 and 5 years’ experience respectively. Then came the slump involving the dismissal of journeymen and precluding the possibility of engaging any further apprentices until the number of journeymen were increased. The depression has lasted four whole years, working out the apprentices, and to-day in many of the workshops there are apprentices in their fifth year of indenture and the next apprentice was the one just engaged, and in his first year. The Board had already in one or two cases provided subsidies for the train-

ing of adults, but this coqld only be done in certain industries not governed by awards.” New Orientation. The time was opportune for a new orientation of the problem of unemployment. The legislation should be re-designed to place greater emphasis on employment and less on the relief side of unemployment, and for long range planning. The only healthy recovery would be in the direction of greater self-sufficiency brought about by the creation of new secondary industries, improving the balance between primary and secondary industries. "Whose responsibility is it to start new industries? If one may take a line on the criticism that has been levelled at the Unemployment Board during the past four years, it would seem safe to assume that there has been a general expectation that the Board, with a fund of £4,500,000 annually at its disposal, should in some way provide full-time employment at standard wages for all the unemployed.” It was clear that the Board had no legislative authority to become an employer of labour. If it was insisted, that the State should accept the full responsibility for finding suitable standard employment for all those not required in the industries controlled by private enterprise—all must give thought to the question of withdrawing all of the objections previously held aganist the State’s incursion into industry. If all were convinced that for New Zealand the great need was a development of industry policy, and because of the attendant risk from the point of view of the investor nothing happens, he could see them reaching the position where it would become a live question, not of whether the State should enter into industry, but of whether the people could afford the luxury of keeping the State out of industry and leaving the field to private enterprise. Cost of Unemployment. The direct annual cost to the State for relief aid to unemployed to-day was averaging 25/- per week per man, and, whilst deemed to be inadequate, meant £32,500 for a year for each 500 unemployed, not counting administration costs. Were these men in employment averaging £4 per week, they would contribute to the fund for relief of unemployment £4,325 per annum. This amount, added 'to the cost of relief, brought the direct national annual cost to £36,825 for each 500 men, measured in contrast with employment at an average wage of £4 per week. That there was scope for the development of new industries and additions to existing industries was unlikely to be seriously questioned. That industries based on the investment of private oapital would not be established except in confident anticipation of a profit on the capital invested was equally sure. The Board had the power and the will to assist private enterprise with new industries by way of subsidies, grants or loans. The results from this policy had so far been disappointing. Without expansion of our secondary industries, we cannot reduce our unemployment figures below 30,000. The only alternative to making it possible for as many of this number as may be willing and able to work, to earn their living by producing those things that we need but at present buy from overseas, and often from countries that do not reciprocate by purchasing our products, was to sustain them by means of a re-distribution of existing incomes—that was what our relief amounted to. Nor was it wise to assume that the genuine involuntary unemployed worker would for ever be satisfied with a standard of living less than that enjoyed by those in employment. The present legislation did not give powers to the Board to itself engage in the employment of men. In the last analysis the Board for its success in getting men back into employment was dependent on the captains of industry. If the Board was not succeeding, the failure was as much the people’s as it was the Board’s. It was sometimes stated rather disparagingly that the Unemployment Board exists only to take the blame for the Government. It would be nearer the truth to say that the Government and the Board are carrying the blame for the inevitable results of a system all appear afraid to change? It was time to call a halt in complaining because the Unemployment Board cannot make a 5-horse power engine do a job requiring a 20-horse power engine. If there was delay in reaching the top of the hill overlooking the rich valley of prosperity and more equal opportunity for all, all should remember that we will get there quicker if all pull the same way. The main problem of transferring back*to gainful employment all those unemployed able and willing to work, involved revolutionary changes. He felt that some of the suggestions put forward, striking as they do against the roots of principles that have been long regarded as sacred, will not be readily accepted. His mind went involuntarily to the immortal story of the young man who, thinking in terms of long range planning, asked the question of the Great Teacher, “What shall I do to be saved?” It was not that he doubted the advice that caused him to turn sorrowfully away.