THE CITY'S REFUSE.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1763, 30 May 1913, Page 5

THE CITY'S REFUSE.

DESTRUCTOR MEN'S GRIEVANCES. STATEMENT BY THE CITY J ENGINEER. 1 Tho secretary of tho City Destructor 1 Men's "Onion recently addressed a letter . to tho City Council setting forth a state- , mont of alleged grievances suffered by the : nion at tho destructor. Eeporting to the j council last evening upou tlio conditions of labour obtaining at_ the destructor, ■ the City Engineer (Mr. W. H. ox- , pressed tho opinion that there was no ■ great amount of dissatisfaction at tho 1 destructor, as stated. The number Of men engaged bv tho corporation in doing the work there was in excess of the number of men guaranteed by the makers to do a given quantity of work, and also in excess of the number of men who were employed on tho fires during tho time tho destructor was under test. _ In tho first complete year of the working of tho destructor (ending March 31, 1909), the average number of tons of refuse burnt per day was: Household, 3!!. l tons; trade, 6.18 tons; a total of 38.58 tons. .For the year ending March 31, 11)12, the average qnantity of stuff burnt per day was: Household, 31 tons; trade. 7.4 tons; a total of 38.4 tons. Tho quantity of refuse received .at the destructor had not increa'sed, therefore, between the beginning of 1908 and the present time, and tho same number of men were employed. Tho statement of the secretary of the union that tho number of units which each shift has to look after had increased was incorrect, stated the City Engineer. It was sometimes stated- that, owing to the additional number of ejectors in the drainage system requiring to be kept going, greater work devolved upon the men in tho destructor. This was not so, as the men on the furnaces could only burn the, quantity of refuse winch was available. "The one point whicli I consider unsatisfactory at the destructor, and which makes tho work somewhat unpleasant for the men," said Mr. Morton, "is the ni]' J menso quantity of fish offal which ;s being received. In November, December, January, and February three firms sent in all 119 tons. This should not be. The destructor is not arranged to deal with such largo quantities of fish, coming mostly from the wholesale fisa suppliers. Tho reception of fish offal should 1)0 limited to that which comes from tho' retail shops. The wholesale purveyors should bo rcqnired to make their own arrangements for disposal of the offal out at sea. At the present time, consequent upon tho large amount of material coming from tho wholesale places, the destructor is required to do inoro than it can be reasonably expected to do in the destruction of fish ofFal." In this respect Jill - . Morton considers that the men have a grievance, and he secommended that authority be given to limit tho quantity of fish offal coming to the destructor. The report was adopted.