CITY COUNCIL AND THE BONUS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16740, 23 May 1922, Page 7

CITY COUNCIL AND THE BONUS.

TO THE KDITOH. Sir,—The action of the alleged friends ol' the workers on the City Council in carrying a resolution not to reduce the wages of the council’s employees in accordance with the Arbitration Court’s pronouncement, is decidedly unfair to other workers who have had to suffer the cut. If the Labour councillors think that their action will bo applauded by the workers, who have voted them into office, they will find they have made <a great mistake. All the Government servants have had their wages reduced by a minimum of 6s a week and other workers affected by Arbitration Court awards hove had to suffer the 5s bonus cut. Why, then, should the City Council employees be specially, selected for favoured treatment? As long as this sort of tiling happens how can the cost of living be reduced as *it should be. The council employees have all along been well treated, and rightly so, but when it comes to a general reduction in wages affecting the whole community, it is obviously wrong for the champions of labour to take the stand they did last night. It would have been much better if the cut in wages had been made and the money thus * saved used to provide employment for additional men. thus relieving the unemployment situation . Xo one can deny that the cost of living has come down. and wages should come down too. Then rents will he cheaper, clothing will ho cheaper a>id the profits of butchers and grocers will be reduced by the advent of competition. T notice that one councillor was not present at last night’s meeting, so I suggest that the discussion be re-open-ed by means of a notice of motion. Perhaps by that time, Councillors Hervev and Herbert will have seen the mistake they have made. T am, etc., WORKER.