THE COAL DEADLOCK

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 285, 21 August 1918, Page 8

THE COAL DEADLOCK

MINERS REPLY TO MINE OWNERS

EARNING OF WORKERS

DISCUSSED

Tho Miners' Federation has issued tho following . reply to tho Coal Owners' statement on August 8:— Tho coal owners' statement of August 8 would not jhave necessitated much answering had it not been for the new table introduced, showing the increased earnings of the mine worker, and tho very looie way ill which they havo quoted our statements.

In the Miners' Federation statement of August 2 wo stressed the point, ro tho average number of days worked by the miner, as compared with tho shiftmen. We stated that the_ coal owners' table of July 20 dealing with the average time worked in the year, was incomplete and .misleading: (1) Because the table does not separate the shift workers and the miners. (2) Because the table only covers half tho coal mines in New Zealand. (3) Because tho number of days that cannot bo worked, as quoted by us, is not deducted.

We asked for tho reason why the miners and the shiftmen were bunched together. No answer is given in tho coal owners' reply to this question. Tho coal owners know, as do all who know anything-of coal mining, that in order to ascertain tho average time that can be worked .in the coal mines by tho miners it is absolutely essential to separate them from tho shiftmen. We malce plain in botli our statements why this is so, and therefore the reason for no mention being made of this aspect of the question by the owners is quite obvious. They nave endeavoured, to answer our second objection, i.e., "that the table only covered half tho mines," by stating the districts in which the mines were situated; but never even mentioning tho names of the mines. We submit that this reply does not. alter the force of our objection. Eight here, we wish to draw the mine owners' attention to the very .loose way in which they quoted our statements. In order that there would be no .misunderstanding in connection with our table showing the average time worked we specifically stated that there wero eighteen days lost on the average, through sickness and accidents, but that the table had been prepared as a basis to show tho yearly income of the miners and-shiftmen. Our statement was as follows: "It will 1)0 noted that there are twelve days on the average in the year lost by the miners through accident, and in order that we would not credit lilm with payment twice over for six days out of the twelve, whicli he is paid for under the Compensation Act, we only credited him with tho six days on which he was not paid."

In the face o£ this explanation nf the tabie, we have the coal owners quoting lis as having estimated twelve, days for accident and sickness, in place of eighteen days. The way m which they have endoavoured to use this Statement is all the more glaring when it is noted that it was used to holster' up their 10 per cent, absenteeism. Even the twelve days given by them also they considered altogether too high an estimate. We want to tell the mine owners4hat the eighteen days quoted by us as being the number of days lost on the average through sickness and accidents is not all estimate, but is lifted from the miners' sick and accident records. Nothing is gained by such loose handling of our statements, especially when they nifi merely used to bolster up their own case. Before leaving that part of the question dealing with., the average days that can be worked in the year, wc might mention that it is significant to note that the coal owners have never challenged tlic days lost, coming under the heading of miscellaneous. It is not ponvenient for the mine owners to challenge tins, in' view of the fact that the mines 011 ilia "West Coast lost 13 days in Juiv owing to.lack of transit, etc. ■ With reference to tli'e output of coal, we are prepared to accept 'the statements made by tlie 'Minister or Mines, and tho Minister of Munitions as quoted by us in our last reply. The new table, which covers less than one quarter of 'the coal mines, and seis out to "show the amounts by which tho mine workers have increased the earnings of ft considerable number during the war period," i& decidedly conflicting with the unions' records. _ In fact, in some cases tho difference in the number of men (not to mention the huge difference between thb wage quoted by the coal owners and.that of the miners' pay tickets), are in some cases 257 and S5 respectively. Tho production of sncli tables by tiie coal owners is made necessary in order to fill up the. gaps that have been made in their case by the Miners' FcderaWe notice that no' attempt has been made to. gather up the scattered fragments of tho very elabornito table which purported to set forth tho probable earnings of 'the miners if they were to accept the "coal owners' bonus." We reiterate our previous statement: "The _ estimate of the yearly incomes of tlio miner, an(l shiftmen, ar'a not commonsurato with the ° With a view of having this statement checked by tho public generally, iwe set out hereunder the budget compiled by tho miners' wives, covering a four-week month, for a man, his wife and three ■children, which is the average family. Budget. Average income earned in 19M—per month—.£ls 9s. (thirteen months) based on an average earning of 18s. 6d. per Jay, less 10 per cent., also based on 240 days in the year. Price of Household C4oods for a Month

of Four Weeks in 1911. ' £ s. d. 241b.'sugar at 2d. per lb 0 4 0 251b. flour 0 3 0 31b. tea at Is. 6d ' 0 4 G 2 bars soap 0 S lib. candles 0 0 G 2 gallons kerosene 0 2 G 1. dozen matches i... 0 0 9\ 1 tin baking powder 0 0 10J 2lb. currants 0 0 10 21b. raisins 0 0 10 31bs cheese '. 0 2 0 81b. ham "... 0 V S 8 4 tins jam 0 3 0 01b. salt 0 0 6 101J}.' oatmeal 0 2 0 4 tins salmon 0 4 4 121b. butter 0 13 0 Meat 1 6 0 Bread 0 7 j0 Milk 0 0 3 Vegetables (I 16 8 Boots ...•■• 0 10 Clothing 1 2 G Coal (I 10 0 House vent 2 0 0 9 11 5 Explosive?, light, tools,- etc., for 240 days at Is. Sd 20 10 0 Yearly income 201 16 4 Outlay ..: 141 IS 5 ■SITU Erom the abovo it will be seen that the miner's income in 11)14 was J3201 16s. 4d., against an outlay (including? explosives, etc.), of .£144 18s. 5d., leaving him a balance ot .£SO 17s. lid. Average income earned in 1918—per month—,tlß Gs. Bd., based on an average earning of 18s. Gd. per day, with 71 per cent, added (19s. IOSd. per shift); also based on 210 working days per year. Price of Household Goods for a month of four weeks in 1918. ' JD s. d. 241b. sugar at 3d. lb AGO 251b. flour 0 5 0 ■31b. tea 0 6 0 2 bars soap 0 2 10 lib. candles 0 1 2 2 gallons kerosene ft 5 3 1 dozen matches 0 1 10 1 tin linking powder 0 2 '2 21b. currants 0 1 8 2lb. raisins 0 1 8 3lb. cheese 0 3 3 811). ham 0 12 0 4 tins jam 0 4 4 01b. salt 0 1 G 2 bags oatmeal (101b.) 0 3 5 4 tins salmon 0 8 8 121b. butter 1 0 0 Meat 2 'fl 0 Bread 0 12 0 M'flk 0 12 G Vegetables ... 10 0 Boots 1 0 0

Clothing 2 5 'I House rent 2 •! (I Coal, at per month 0 10 0 M 10 3 Explosives, light, tools, etc, for 210 days' work at 2s. Gd. per day 29 0 0 Nearly income 238 13 0 Yearly outlay 219 3 JJI9 9 9 From the above it will thus bo seen that the miner is worse off in 1918 thaii in 1911. In 1918 his income was =£238 135., against an outlay of *£219 3s. 3d. (including explosives, etc.), leaving him a balanco of only .£l9 9s. 9d. to meet all other contingencies. Wo wish it to lie noted that the above budget sets forth the position of tho miner or hewer of coal. Tho shiftman, or day-wage worker, is as already pointed out by us, in a very much worse position than tho miner. Tho average number of days on which the shiftmen work ill tho year is 255, and their average wage is 10s. per day, which gives a yearly income of .£127 10s., providing that every day possible ho worked on, against an outlay as per budget of .£125 So. 5d., Jcaving a balance of .£3 Is. 7d. In 1918 the pay of this section of the mine workers was 12s. per day, which, multiplied, gives them an average yearly income of ,£153, against an outlay of .£l9O 3s. 3d., leaving a de-. ficit of ,£37 3s. 3d. This section of the mino workers are forced, as it will be seen by the budget, to live on a very much reduced standard of living. We are' prepared to hear aiiy objections made by the ooal owners against any of tho itoms contained in this budget. as being excessive. We aro also prepared to ask the coal owners if they think that the items contained in the budget are compatible with a decent standard of civilisation.

We are further anxious for the coal owners to have the prices of the commodities checked in tho various districts, in order to see if they have been exaggerated. If the coal owners fail- to provo that the budget contains anything more than bare upkeep, then they have certainly to admit that there i 6 a justifiable reason for a conference.

The coal owners' assumption that thero was no mandate from the unions for tho demand made on January 10 last for increased wages is, to say the least, very,, ingenious, m viow of tho fact that they implied a few weeks ago that even the unions wero not asking any increase, and then proceeded to formulate a bonut scheme to meet a demand which they said did not exist. Tho coai owners now know that the unions affiliated to the Federation from ono end of Now Zealand to the othor, havo turned down the ttoal Owners' Association proposal, i.e., "to meet the local unions iiv conference." '

Wo want to assure the coal"'ownors that tho demand for ail increase in wages oame in tho usual representative way, that is, from delegates acting under instructions from their unions. However, such objections are petty and altogether contrary to the spirit of the times. ■ Vb have endeavoured to pljcc our case before 'tho public in tho simple way, consistently reasoning from ono basis, while the employers, by quoting numbers in place of mines, by quoting a few mines .here and a few somewhere else, have contradicted their own contentions and figures. \ "We submit that a careful analysis of the coal owners' caso shows that they havo not proved ono of tho points they get out to prove. Their attempt to prove absenteeism has completely broken down. Their endeavour to prove a decreased output has, in view of the statements of tho Minister of Mines and the Minister of Munitions, aud tho variation in the difficulties of extracting coal according to the nature of the work proceeding, melted into nothingness. Their refusal to compare the index figures relating to Grey for the three combined food groups, ul' the March quarter, 19U, with the May quarter, 1918, is at least consistent with their controversial methods.

Their endeavour, to hide their profits has not deceived anyone.

Their attempt to mislead the public as to the federation wanting to break .existing agreements fails because of the fact that we are asking only for a readjustment in wages to meet the ivcreased cost of living, and that they themselves want to alter the body of tho agreements by introducing, the "encouragement bonus" and speeding-up. The ooal owners' bogey that tho present demand conies from the federation officials and not from the unions has been finally laid to rest by tlie fact that every coal miners' 11111011 in New Zealand has refused to meet the coal owners locally, and demand that the dispute 6'hall be settled between the national organisations. Wo again reiterate our willingness io a conference, believing such course to be the most rational and public-spirited, and in keeping with a policy of due regard for national welfare and the general public, as against that of "Everybody for himself and the devil take the biwjjnost."—(Sgd.) W. E. Parry, secretary; P.. O'Rourke, president; B. Somple, agent. STATEMENT BY'SIR JAMES ALLEN IF MINERS STRIKE THEY WILL BE LIABLE TO PENALTIES. By Telegraph.—Press Association.' August '10. Sir .Tames Allen stated " to-day that Cabinet was considering tlie coal question from the point of view of the cost of. the coal from tho time the miner hewed it until it got' to the eoal-sollor or consumer. Cabinet had not considered the question of State control, and did not see how that would help. He added tllat if the miners struck they would be liable to penalties under tlie lav, and they understood the law perfectly. Any man who came out on strike would forfeit tlie exemption ho might have obtained by reason of his calling. AUSTRALIAN MINES 1917 AGREEMENT UNDER DISCUSSION. Recently- the Australasian Coal and Shale Employees' Federation forwarded a claim to ail tho employers in the coal, shale, and coke industry in the States of New South Wales, Queensland, 'Victoria, ami .Tasmania for a minimum daily and weekly wage, and preference of employment. The Northern, Southern, and Western Colliery Proprietors' Associations liavo forwarded a letter, in reply to Mr. A. C, Willis, general secretary of the Australasian Coal and Shalo Employees' Federation. The proprietors point out- that Mr. Justice Edmunds, by orders under the War Precautions Act, set out the rates and conditions upon which the coalmining industry should be conducted, and that representatives of the men's federation agreed with representatives of tho employers that the terms and conditions contained therein should govern the industry for a period of three wars and such further, time, if any, as. tho present European war may continue, unless aitered or rescinded by His Honour Mr. Justice Edmunds. Tlie men's representatives. it is pointed out, also agreed with His Honour tlmt upon tho enforcement of,the said terms and conditions by ordei's under tho War Precautions Act there was to be a period of industrial peace in tho industry throughout tin- Commonwealth for three years from' January 1, 1917. and such further time as tlie* European war may continue. Theso orders, have, it is stated, been in. operation from December !, 1916. "The imposition of tlie conditions in- your claim would bring disaster- to the industry," the proprietors state, "and this was recognised by His Honour Mr. .Tustico Edmunds, who, when approached by your body, declined some demands 011 similar liiics to those which you are now seeking to apply. Tll view of the foregoing, my members fail to see wliv a conference should be ren"<-sted fl'r altered conditions demnniM. Tliov are therefore, unebie to accede to either of your requests."