LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1090, 31 March 1911, Page 6

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

~$ RAILWAY FERMENT. . Sir—Passing by the Post Office recently my attention was attracted bv the contents bill of the day's Dominion, which had emblazoned I hereon, in- large, bluu letters, "Railway 'Ferment, the Men and the iMinisler." At the earliest opport unity I scanned my copy of the paper, and therein saw further emblazoned forth in prominent black letter tvpe, "Kailway Ferment—What; Sort of Service?— The Minister and the Men—Something Radically Wrong-Head Office to Blame." J. read Hie article, purporting to be the result of your paper's investigation as to the causes of this so-called railway ferment, and the only information von could apparently gather was that in'the first, place lh» .Department had refused to supply goods shed men with uniforms, and secondly, the "stores oasses" in isolated districts had been abolished. When general charges aro made against Hie railway management, it is, o£ course, very difficult for the public to form an intelligent opinion as to the merits or demerits of the alleged disaffection. Happily, however, in the article above relerred to, wn have definite charges made which can be investigated, and I propose to offer n short exnlanation which may be interesting as serving to enable the public to form an opinion as to whether your drastic condemnation of the Railway Minister and the management, is warranted in the circumstances. Firstly, fhen, let us take the question or. relusal to sunniy uniforms to goods shed men. The practice of the Department is to supply uniforms to sfationlaasters, relieving officers, traffic inspectors, foremen, guards, signalmen, storemen, night watchmen, crossing-keepers, shunters, and passenger porters only, all other cmnloyess being exempted, anil this Has been the rlanding regulation for years. It is not by any means a question, as you have been informed, whether or not the employee is scon bv the public in the execution of his duty, otherwise the platelayers, the maintenance men, th° driver*, firemen, station clerks, anil mainothers _ who either deal direct with, or work in view of the public, would be supplied with unifoims. The question ol supply of uniforms to those members ot the .service who have hitherto not participated is one, first, of necessity; and secondly, ot expense to the country, and the community naturally expects tho Aimister to take cognizance of these factors in determining tho requests of tin, railway employees. In the case of the goods shed men, they are einnloyed merely in loading and unloading of wagonH in the goods sheds, and have no dealing* with the travelling public, therefore, it t is not by any means unreasonable on the part of the Minister that he, bearin- in mind the cost to- the community in tln> supply of uniforms, should hesitate lo «?,, C ,"lf»"\ m lt om - in a ' <lire <=tion not waivanted by the circumstances. Even were the goods shed men supplied with uniforms, there would still be left -Wo thousands ot men having iust as iroo.-i and many with a far greater, claim. It might just as well be argued that bethat al the p osta l clerks and officers should Iw similarly sunplicd, and so on with regard to the whole of the Publio Service, lou can easily see, Mr.- Editor upon a moment's reflection, that this unilorm quesuon is a far-reaching matter, and I contend that whilst every member ughls to ask for uniform, it is grossly unfair, that any refusal on the part of a Jiimscer to further unnecessarily extend he expense shall be held un as a cause for.intense discontent in the railway? or any other Public Service; ' '■ - I ' ol Tho-secowl cause of comnlaint detailed to your correspondent is . that "store Si cd m T Ml . atcd , (list V cts llavo b °" abolished. Just so, but for some reason or other your informant apparently failed to state thai, although tho free, pass had been abolished, the same has been replaced by the "privilege ticket," wlnun costs the employee, oiie-fourlh of e ordinary railway fare. I may explain that the exigencies of tho railway service call for the location here and there, of employees in what are known as "isolalcd places," that is, they have to reside m proximity to the railway line, considerable distances-from stores'and'shopsT' In order to meet the situation it was customary for many years to grant free passes to members and their wives, or housekeepers to enable them to travel once a week (o towns and cities to make their purchases, but owing to the privilege having been abused in various directions the authority was modified to the granting the tree pass to the nearest station at which stores can be purchased. The Department for various reasons has now lound it advisable to abolish the pass and substitute the privilege ticket, which means that allowing seven "miles as tho extreme limit of. distance from an employee s house to the nearest station with a store in the township the return privilege ticket would cost id., a sum of money which, I suppose, many thousands ot workers living m the suburbs of our cities pay every day they travel to and from their work, or to make purchases. A privilege ticket costs 6d. for a return journey of eleven miles, in all twentytwo miles, therefore on the plea oi expense there is little to complain about, the fact of the Department abolishing Ihe store free pass simply places all members upon the same basis, that is, every member of the service can obtain once a-week, a privilege ticket at onefourth of the ordinary, railway fare- for himself, his wife, or his housekeeper. It. was not. until the Department departed from this general application of tho privilege ticket that trouble came about. When it was agreed to give the,free pass to members living in isolated places, a list of such localities was. made up, lint from, the day the concession was granted there has been an incessant demand on the part of the members to further and further extend the list- of "isolated places," the ruling principle apparently being for as many members to endeavour to get under the free.pass'application as possible, with' a minimum appreciation of what -really, constitutes an "isolated place." -The placing of all members upon an. equal footing will remove, a cause of considerable disaffection which cantinually crops up. These then, Mr.-Editor,-are .the matters which have been poured into your ears as. causes for the' intense discontent in the service. May I suggest that so long as the railway employees can get the public press of the country to issue forth in hysterical comment upon such flimsy grounds, so long will the same members refuse to be contented. I wonder does it ever occur to you to ask how far tho public press is responsible for the "seething discontent in the railway service"? Or I might with propriety say "the seething desire to get move and more, and lots of more." No one is going to denounce, the men for asking "more," but I do say that this spirit, of everlastingly holding the Minister and management, up tn ridicule and contempt in the eyes' of the men both on the part of the respective railway journals and the nublic press is bound to undersap the discipline of Hip service to tl'<> great danger of the nublic safety. What, constitutes ine of the leading factors in the demoralisation of the service is tho eximnlc being set by the press, through the stimulus which it, sives to the men not to bo contented, and to look with enntemnt noon the Government, the Minister and the officials of the service, when the whole of f.hei'- overineronsinT demands are not immediately dJScoded to.—l am, etc.. ICONOCLAST. '