P. AND T. SALARIES.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16790, 20 July 1922, Page 9

P. AND T. SALARIES.

REPLY TO MINISTER. A reply was made on Tuesday afternoon by Mr H. E. Combs, secretary of the Post and Telegraph Association, to the statement issued on Monday by the Hon J. G. Coates. Postmaster-General, regarding the expenditure side of the Post and Telegraph Department. ‘‘ In his general statement regarding the increase of expenditure for the Post and Telegraph service, the Post-master-General makes due reference to the increase under the heading of salaries, and leaves it to be understood that the salaries were fairly allotted in 1914-15,” said Air Combs. ** This was so far from being the ease that the Postmaster-General of 1918 (Sir Joseph Ward) put through legislation in 1918 authorising a reclassification of the Service to put matters right- How far the department had fallen behind in the allotment of salaries can bo best gauged from examples, two of which T can give you from the 1914-15 Classification List. The first relates to nine sorters who, that year, were granted increments of LTO each, yet whose average salary (including such increments) was only £l3O per annum. These officers had an average length of service (including telegraph messenger service) of ten years, and their ages ranged from 23 years 4 months to 29 years 7 months, while the average ago was 26 years 3 months. “Having regard to the fact that in 3.919 a special committee set up by the Government fixed the basic wage for 1914 at £165 per annum, and this has been accepted by the Government as a fair basis for th© purpose of assessing cost of living increases since April, 1920, it will lie seen what a tremendous leeway the Post and Telegraph Department had to make up iu reasonable and decent remuneration to those whom it employed. The other * xample has reference to postmen-—a familiar post office figure in the life of the community. On page 1717 of the same classification list will be found a group of seven postmen ail granted a £lO increase, yet whose average salary (including such increase) was only £l4O per annum. Their average service was 7 years 5 months. These postmen did similar work in all respects to postmen classified at the top of the then, for them, salary seal© (£IBO per annum), and were interchangeable in every particuwith them. Such poor payments cried out for adjustment, whether the cost of living increases were added or not. and in putting them right the department had necessarily to expect that the. ratio ol' salaries to revenue would be altered. The fact that, with and cost of living increases added together, the ratio of •a bin to revenue has only risen from 56 per cent in 1914-15 to 57 per cent in 1922-23 should be regarded as most satisfactory even by the Welfare 3.eague, whose criticism has evidently tilled forth the Postmaster-General’s