FLAXMILLS DISPUTE

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 237, 1 July 1919, Page 8

FLAXMILLS DISPUTE

Sir —On my recent return from Franco I was very pleased to see that there was a | disposition, amongst thoughtful enl E'®s" ers and workers to come together. Mr. Harkness, in particu.ar, stressed the necessity of a better understanding to avert disaster, such as is threatening m all lands. 'How, then, can we reconcile the«e sentiments with the action of: tne flaxmillers in seeking to reduce their lowest-paid men's wages? The union is standing firm on the principle that li=a dav in the flax industry is barely a living wage. Would it not be moie reasonable on the employers part to continue paying this rate, pending an appeal to the Arbitration Court? Remember the unexpected, undeserved, colossal net profits of these employers during the war. The trend of world-thought emphasises the need of the worker getting a fairer share of his labour. We say that tho selling price of hemp permits the worker still getting his (former minimum (145.). Tho shipping ring (tho real cause oi the trouble) must reduce their rates and it would look better if the fl^millers, stead of visiting the sins of that on to their employees, .were to manfully declare a crusade which would soon become Do-minion-wide. But, Sir, my mam object ■in writing this was to suggest a reuied) which 'limv appear inapplicable at hr»t si"ht. We know that the Government has expended very large su"ms ni. backing i returned soldiers who wish to go into bSs or on to the land. The kernel | of my idea is that it is quite 's to advocate action in the line °f purchasing these mi'.ls on behalf of the workers In this industry. And those who say it can't be done, or that it is imp l .®®,; ticable, bad better "take another think. What the workers complain of concerning our Government is that when it wants to do anything it does not consider expense, but if it is Xm'l at a loss for arguments. I hope .others will elaborate my plan, which is not even sketched here. Pending f ments the Government could older tne owners to open the mills at the minimum and agree to indemnify them for any loss. There will be no less. There is some excuse 'for the Foxton mill-tw tiers in view of the royalties they hue to nay. The middleman again! For every penny that it costs to produce a ton of l\emp which is paid away to thei it takes ton times that amount to satisy these royalty receivers and shippm D peop'.e.—l am, etc., p KING