RELIEF LABOUR

Waipukurau Press, Volume XXX, Issue 63, 19 March 1935, Page 5

RELIEF LABOUR

Criticism at Council Table difficulty of finding jobs alleged unsatisfactory SERVICE. It is anticipated that, with an increased number of unemployed during the winter, some difficulty will be experienced in placing the men with local bodies in Central Hawke’s Bay. The local certifying officer (Mr. C. W. Browne) waited on the Borough Council last evening and sought its co-operation. Mr. Browne said that there were at present 50 men on the register. There were 20 with the Borough, 20 with the Waipukurau County Council and 10 with the School Committee. An. increase in registrations was bound to occur during the winter. The School Committee was not able to absorb any more men, because it did not have the work available. The County had not yet demurred about having extra men, but it might do so. The town clerk had intimated that he could not handle any more relief labour at present. It would be seen therefore, that it would be difficult to know where to place the men. In some districts where work was not available men had been placed on sustenance, but that was not agreeable to them as it entailed a reduction in the amount they received and restrictions on their other earnings. The speaker admitted that it was rather difficult in some cases to find work suitable to the Unemployment Board, and also that the question of supervision was rather an obstacle, but he appealed to the Borough to assist if it possibly could.

The Mayor (Mr. I. W. N. Mackie) said that the Council was sympathetic toward the unemployed and was willing to do what it could to assist. However, the Borough had all the unfit men; the works acceptable to the board were very few in the Borough; and, on the score of expense, it was not possible to take on a supervisor. He asked the town clerk (Mr. H. B. Smart) to explain the Borough’s position. "The Borough is anxious to do all it can for the unemployed,” said Mr. Smart, "but a certain responsibility rests on the men, and, if they don’t try to hold their end up a bit, there is little encouragement to help them. Of our 20 men, 10 are probably not fit to do anything and the other 10 are engaged on the main drain. “A sum of £22 a week is paid ant, and, although it’s not very nice to have to say so, I venture to state that we don’t get £2 10/- worth of work done —perhaps because the men are not supervised as they should be.

"I don’t see how, in the interests of the Borough, we can take more men. It is not right that money should be going out, with nothing to show for it. There is plenty of work to be done in the- drain —and will be for some time at the rate we’re going—but unless some more satisfactory arrangement can be made, I don’t think it would be advisable to take on more labour. The rate of progress is very disappointing, to say the least, and I don’t know any means of encouraging the men to do better. I have been down at the drain more frequently the last week, and, although I’m not a navvy, looking at the work done by five men, I guarantee I could have shifted more myself.” He also pointed out that if extra labour were taken on it would be necessary to provide more tools and probably transport. Mr. Browne, replying, said that there were some more or less sick men on relief; they could not be put on county work, so the only place was the Borough. If he sent them up to the hospital they were classed j as fit for light work, otherwise they would become a charge on charitable aid. In regard to the drain work, he suggested that, as was done elsewhere, half a day’s work should be measured out and a man should be given a day to do it. If he failed to do it he could then he dismissed for "loafing.” He would then become a charge on the Charitable Aid Board, which would be reimbursed by the Unemployment Board up to a certain amount. The sum received as charitable aid would not be so large as that on relief work, and if an example were hiade it might have a good effect. Cr. J. McCarthy said that he thought the Council, by adopting what might be termed a piecework scheme, would be committing a graver offence than it had done in put-

ting relief men on a small footpath job and subsidising their wages, for which it had been “rapped over the knuckles.” He asked whether counties were subjected to the same conditions as boroughs in respect to classes of work on which relief labour could be utilised. Would road straightening, for instance, be admissable?

Mr. Browne said that counties were subjected to the same conditions. Road straightening, which would not be done under ordinary circumstances, would be admissable. Cr. McCarthy said that the borough's footpath work would not have been done under ordinary circumstances; it had merely been done because the Council thought it an opportunity of giving the unemployed a few extra shillings. He thought that the Unemployment Board had been unduly harsh in the matter. The Borough’s hands were as clean as those of any local body in the Dominion, so far as abuse of unemployed labour was concerned. The Council had no desire or intention to exploit the scheme. He was of opinion that the sooner local bodies refused to take men under relief schemes, so that they would all be “washed out,” the better.

The Mayor said that he did not think it would be any worse to set the men an amount of work to be done than to appoint a supervisor to see that they did a certain amount of work.

Mr. Browne said that if the Council had any doubt about certain work being permissable, it had only to refer the matter to the board, and he was sure approval would be granted. Cr. McCarthy said that the Unemployment Act had been brought in for the benefit of the unemployed and not for local bodies, but that commendable principle had since been departed from a long way. "However, you could put in a small paper bag all the essential work done by the Borougli,” he went on. "There’s the drain, but had the work been let by contract it would have been much cheaper and would have been done long ago.” A suggestion was made that the unemployed might be engaged on contract at standard wages, subsidised by the Unemployment Board. The clerk said he felt that the men would be better satisfied under such a scheme as they would have something to work for. Cr. G. E. Granger expressed the opinion that supervision should be provided by the Unemployment Board.

In the course of the discussion this Councillor said that some of the relief workers engaged on the main drain appeared to work only when the Mayor was due to pass on his way to town. > Cr. H. A. Martin suggested that a schedule of works in the Borough which might be undertaken by relief labour should be drawn up and submitted to the board for approval. Cr. Brathwaite: If the suggestion is given publicity we may get some good ideas from the ratepayers. After Mr. Browne had withdrawn, it was decided to write to the Unemployment Board stating that the Council did not feel disposed to employ any more relief workers under the present relief conditions, and requesting the board to pay for the services of a supervisor, in which case further works could be undertaken and men employed. It was also decided to try to arrange to have the drain work done by subsidised contract; and to ask one of the members of the Unemployment Board to Visit Waipukurau and discusS a schedule of proposed Borough relief works.