THE CITY'S GAS SUPPLY

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3129, 6 July 1917, Page 4

THE CITY'S GAS SUPPLY

It is a quito absurd position that the whole of the City's gas supply should be threatened by the action of 18 men in the Gas Company's employ. The facts set out in our news columns to-day show that since April, 1914, the wages of the. men in question, stokers, fire-cleaners, etc., employed in the retort-house at the Gas Company's works, have been increased by something like 30 per cent., and their hours- of labour lessened. . Twelve of these men during tho past year averaged over £4 a week, the highest as much as £5 2s. 6d., while, tho lowest received £3 13s. 3d. a week.' This the company claims is an exceptionally high •rate for unskilled labour, and indeed it is as stated much higher than is paid in many instances for skilled labour. ' The men base their claim to a further increase on the amounts already conceded by the company on the ground of the increased cost of living. The increase in the cost of- living is so obvious to everyone that it affords a useful peg on which to hang demands or this nature. Unfortunately for the Gas Company's employees, who-are making use of it on the present occasion, the facts of tho position do not fit their case.' Their wages since April, 1914, have already been increased 30 per cent., whereas, according to the Government (statistician's figures just issued and covering tho situation up to the end of May, the increase in the cost ot living in Wellington has been less than 30. per cent. Mr. Frasbr b figures do not err on the side ot understating the position, and they show that in the food groups, groceries, dairy produce, and meat, the increased cost since 19M has been 28.99 per cent, while in the case of rent it has been less. Wo merely mention these facts so that the nion themselves and the public may appreciate that the grounds on which tho claim is based arc unsound. The point of chief concern is, however, that the men shouldseek to throw up their positions at short notice, not only to the injury of their employers, but to. the prejudice and injury of practically the whole community. Even .if they had the justification of feeling that they were smarting under a serious injustice the course they have taken would bo an improper one so long as they have a legitimate means of redress through the Arbitration Court. But in face of the fact that they have already received increases of pay in excess of the increased cost of hvjng their action is utterly indefensible, and savours of an attempt to bludgeon the &as Company into submission to .{heir terms by threatening to deprive the company of its power to meet the needs of the public.