HEAVY LOSSES.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 20173, 27 February 1931, Page 7

HEAVY LOSSES.

BRITISH RAILWAYS. CLAIM FOR WAGES REDUCTION. (raoit cub own corbesfondent.) LONDON, January 20. ,Figures illustrating the losses of the British railways Bince 1928 were brought before the National Wages Board in support of the companies' claim for wage reductions and altered working conditions estimated to save £9,500,000. Last year, said Mr W. E. 0. Lazenby, for the companies, railway revenue was £13,750,000 below the standard fixed by the Railway Rates Tribunal in 1928. This year, it was estimated, it would bo almost £10,500,000 below the standard. "The crux, of the situation," he said, ('is to found in the fact that railway charges are between 5Q and 60 per cent. above the pre-war level, with a wages bill of no less than 143 per cent, abovp' pre-war level." The general economic position of the country was unsatisfactory, said Mr Lazenby. Trade; was poor, snd the output of 'many industries had .diminished. This was specially true of the great industries—qoal, iron, and'steel, engineering, shipbuilding, textiles, etc.—which accounted for a large proportion of railway freight traffic. ?A similar position existed in . .fggard,,Jto passenger , traffic, and as., a S of -these -conditions. „ther« had .been a serious diminution in railway traffic receipts. The railways, ■ nidreovor. had to contend against keen and growing competition by road, which J? prepQftion " *pf a*teduced ttital of traffic. ' In meeting ' the position thus created the railWays were pampered by the burden of 'an excessive labour cost and by undue u .rigidity qf. conditions of eerviie. The railway companies submitted that a reduction in , the level of railway wages could be justified from the - facts:— - - • The 'increase over pre-wair in the cost .'V 9' living waa 55 per cent. ' The- increase in the wage level of " railway salaried staff- was about „ 100. per cent., and of railway con- . filiation grades over 120 per % cjtat. " The increase in the total railway wage bill (including the effect' of in- ' . creased numbers due to reduction ' t f qf hours and improved condi- ( " tiijns), was 143 per cent. (£67,- < - qoo,*)QO). ' The volume of traffic was alarmingly |e§»lthan before the; war. Palling Receipts. ' J£f jW« "fr. Wood, in a financial state- - rionjpaniea, said that in . was j» decrease in traffic receipts fox 'the four companies of £lO,compared with 1929. It yas estimate,d that in 1931 there would be 1 9 fnrthey '. fittl of at least £2,600,000, making total .decrease of about £13,-; : 000,000, compared with 1929. • v Against -this it was thought that in tyilwiy working expenses by staff reduptions, short-time working.in shops, rigorous, flurtailmeni of; desirable but unessential outlay, in Working facilities, and lower prices in TeßpcctfOf some items of material purchases. ' Considerable proportions of the aavfygft in . 1930 represented postponement* of expenditure which could not maintained in 1981;. - Railway net 'receipts in 193} would, it was estimated, bp 'aoout £8,200,000 less than the net 'receipts in 1929. < • K Com fpr the National Union. JSx J. Marchbank, opening the opposition case on behalf of the National Union of Bailwayjnen, said that the Union maintained' that the economic position -of the v rsHwfty- industry was tat t6 make it essential for any in'the present rates pi- pay Oils, 'worsening of conditions of employment generally. The Union _ took the view that' the first, call upon industry was the payment' of adequate salaries and wageß and the maintenance of conditions of employment' consistent ■With economic needs, and commensurate with the work and respqnsibility undertaken by the staff involved. The suggestion that the rates'of pay were out of line with the cost of living was not accepted by the Union. The com* panies' case was to recover £11,000,000 spread ovor the employees in order to establish a standard revenue fixed for 1928, which, when fixed by the Railway Rates! Tribunal, was fknown to be impossible of attainment. 'Mr Marchbank contended that all the savings. consequent on the grouping of the companies had not "yet been realised.' Railwaymen were confident that the companies could, supply' all the rolling stock necessary to meet the , requirements of trade and commerce without privatflLirmai having their waggons running on the, railways. The saving in the boat of haulage and shunting would bo enormous. .