LOCAL LABOUR.

Waipa Post, Volume VII, Issue 316, 22 May 1914, Page 2

LOCAL LABOUR.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—Re the report of the Town Board meeting in your last issue, I should like to draw attention to the waterworks report dated 15th May, 1914. In that report there are two remarks that call for public attention. The first is the question of courtesy—or, rather, I should say lack of courtesy —on behalf of the foreman (Mr Wilkins). Now, courtesy costs little, and whatever the difference that may have existed between Mr Rule and Mr Wilkins, such a re- ~ port as handed in by the latter gentleman to the Board is lacking in dignity commensurate to the position he holds. How well it would sound to the public if, for instance, the town clerk were to report as follows:— " Wilkins reported progress of the waterworks." Now, as to the value of ' local labour. The said labour has been allowed! (save the mark) by Mr Wilkins, under the supervision of Mr Rule (to give him his proper' title), to lay the pipe line from the intake to the reservoir, and from there to Pirongia. The said Mr Wilkins has stated in a recent report to the Board that " the pipe line has stood the pressure without one single defect." Such a statement must confirm the fact that the value of local labour represents a high state of efficiency, and reflects credit upon Mr Rule and his men. Surely Mr Wilkins must have been joking, or else he is lacking in foresight, seeing that it has taken him a period of five months to estimate the value of local labour. What does the Board think ? Now, Sir, I note with pleasure and pride that Messrs Battson and Prescott secured a contract for pipe-laying in Te Awamutu against all com-. « ?rs. From private sources I learn that, considering the difficulties contended with, splendid progress has been made, and that local labour reflects great credit on contractors and workmen. We in Te Awamutu know the value of local labour: our town has been practically built with it. In conclusion, it seems rather paradoxical to me that men are dismissed, such action costing the Board £lO. What need was there to dismiss the men, who knew the routine work-of pipe-laying ? Perhaps Mr Rule can throw some light on the question.—l am, etc., Lux. TO THE EDITOR. Slß,—May I claim the indulgence of your valuable paper"to reply., to the unwarranted statement made by Mr Wilkins, foret man of the Te Awamutu water-j works, and as reported by you in ' your edition, 19th May, 1914,' Now, sir, I am reported as having left my employment at 8.30 a.m. on Friday, 15th inst., which is perfectly correct, as a protest against his action in dismissing my men when there were still two days to complete the pipelaying. Briefly, I wish to make the following statement:—On - Thursday morning, 14th inst., Mr Wilkins inspected the work, and informed rue while passing that he would reorganise the working gang, and he did so by practically dismissing the gang. At I p.m. I was sent to the reservoir to set the valves. In the interim Mr Wilkins went to Te Awamutu '

with the expressed intention of

receiving the men's wages to pay them off on his return. Seieng that the reservoir is 3 miles from where the men were working, how could I personally object if I was 1 was not on the spot ? I completed my work at the reservoir for the day when Mr Wilkins arVrived, and there were still two valves to set up, owing to their jambing hard against the concrete. I informed him that it was impossible to carry out his orders and make a satisfactory

job, unless they were disconnected at the flange joints and laid out in the open. Mr Wilkins spoke disparagingly to me, and i his attitude was offensive in the f extreme. Eventually he carried '~ , sout my suggestion before setting up the valves himself. Now, I wish to refer to my assistant, J. Turner, who assisted me with the pipe joints and general work since the commencement of the job. "Without a moments notice he was dismissed. To use Mr Wilkins' expression, " I am cutting him out along with some of the others along the line," no reason being given for this action. Did Mr Wilkins think that I

v could reasonably complete the without the assistance I was allowed throughout the job ? I may say, and Mr Wilkins knows it, the men of my gang gave complete satisf a ction. Fur- ■ ther, I should like to point out that Mr Wilkins disposed of the fhen who had gained a practical knowledge of pipe laying, and, had he done right, he would not have incurred the useless expenditure which the long *■ suffering Te Awamutu ratepayers will have to meet, namely the said £lO. I say emphatically that Mr Wilkins, by his short-sighted policy, is responsible for the expenditure of the £lO. In conclusion, here is the problem for the Town Board and ratepayers alike to solve. —If it cost £lO to instruct a man to lav 50 or 6o pipes in straight going order, what will it cost for the laying of the pipe line from the

intake to Pirongia ? A tradesman would consider the value of the instruction at a lawyer's fee, 6sßd please. I wonder whether that is way near the value of some "of the imported labour.—l am etc. J. Rule, (late foreman pipe-layer, Pirongia end of waterworks.)