THAT FIGHT TO A FINISH.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 758, 5 March 1910, Page 3

THAT FIGHT TO A FINISH.

MR.CARF,Y AGAIN . [To tkj Editor.] Sir,—Excepting for the parts haviag reference to myself,-Mr. Palmer's letter in to-day's "Dominion" might" be taken as tlie ontward and written expressions of the feelings of a contrite heart, and the reasonings of a fair and unprejudiced mind. But are those expressions sincere, and' do they reflect the general opinions' of the trade? Tf I could -believe they did, I would drop this • correspondence, and oven be conteut to-let Mr. Palmer's personal remarks anent. myself go quietly by the board. . • ' '

There comes to my mind, however, th« venomous and vindictive attitude of th« Trade to organised labour, as exemplified in- the annual report of the L.V.A., already quoted--from, but not . intended, to reach the public print. Then againthere is the organised opposition of the ■ hotelkeepers to-Mr. Millar's Bill of last session regulating the holidays . and working hours of hotel employees. Thefull extent of that opposition will b4 realised by public the : evi-' dence given by hotel employers before the Labour Bills Committee is published. Finally, - despite ! Mr.. Palmer's and tho Trade's profession' of concern for • their employees, and His: evasion, of, my challenge, "the 65 hours' working week for women' in hotels, and the.-.225. 6(1. ■ per week • for married hotel' workers still .obtains in the Wellington 1 award re the industry. And so it'happens that I and the members of my , union, still doubt the sincerity of Mr. Palmer's expressions, ana incline .'to thebelief that they are more or. less vote-catching utter- • ances meant, to deludo.'thc working/man elector. / .. . ,

Tho dispute has been filed, and even if I were-tempted to do'so, you, Sir,-would 1 not permit of hie writing on the merits! of the ease, even in further illustration) of Mr. Palmer's evasions- and equivocations. Just this; though, ,in answer to. Mr. Palmer's quibbling over the 65 hours business. I want to pin "him down' to .tho point.' Mr. Palmer iuay never :in exact words have said "that 65 hours 'is a fair working' week for i woman." " Such', a. provision is in all;the; awards, . however, and we. quote an old adage, "action* speak louder than words." If Mr.- Palmer maintains-tbat. such a working'week is not a-fair thing; if he is sinoere in his professions; why did. he not on the recent conference, '-straightway .agree -to reduction .of. those.hours,, and not inast on. "tho old award" or nothing?" Further, why:.such: opposition from the. Trade to. Mr. Millar's Bill proposing a 56 hours' working week .for female, hotel-employ-, ccs .' Of! what, avail canting expressions ; why not' practical demonstration -of the: professed .'sincerity? '" ;

Mr. Palmer bewails my "impertinence;" and inferential!?- .takes credit to himselffor. not "sacking"' his employee., who attended at, the abortive conference, The. magnaminity of it! I'm sorry my "make-up".will not:allow of me indulgingin feigned - contrition and penitence" just yet awhile. I am out for improvd con* ditions of : ! labour' in the hotel trade. When Mr. Palmer and' the Trade'drojk "talk" and grant those improvements, -he will-get all the contrition and penitence there remains in me. « - Jnst a few words in reference to-Mr. Palmer's attack on myself. He will da-, port from 'the merits of the case, and at-: tempt ■ Io ' make the "fight" a. personal one.. His latest is that I .acted, against of my fellow and-:am responsible, for-the break up of; the" conference. " If such were the 'case,' how -is it-, that -the representatives .of .tha other-unions chose me and my union' to "fight";, the/ 'battle in Wellington for al?-' of- them!: ; \ The. Conciliation Council sits to. deal with! our, dispute' on ■."March, u next< There's the .Trade's to' fulfil its repeated promises to deal fairly its ■ own employees. I .and: my' fellow, workers anxiously await that fulfilment*". ■'. .• E. J l . V . Secretary. Cooks, and ". - -i. ' Waiters' Union.Wellington, March 3, 1910. .