"STANDARD OF LIVING "

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 104, 27 January 1920, Page 8

"STANDARD OF LIVING "

HINT OF NEW UNION POLICY. B7 releffraoh—Press AiiocUtton.. Ch,ristchurch, January 26;' The "cost of living" argument is likely. ' to bo hugely replaced by argument relating to tho "standard of living" in subsequent proceedings before the Arbitration Court. An indication of this was ' given at to-day's sitting of the Conciliation Council during the-liearing of an application for a new award brought by the Christchurchi Plumbers' and Gasfitters' Union. \ . The union asked for a t.ew scale of rages based on 25. Gd. per hour., Mr. C. Benn'(for tho union) said that it did. not consider the demands of 2s. Gd. per hour extravagant. !A Magistrate- had Tecently made a pronouncement that the purchasing pwer of the sovereign was now about 103. Mr. IV Cooper (agent for the employers) remarked that the current statement issued by the Government. Statistician showed the sovereign to bo worfh 13s. Id. Mr. Eenn: Those figures relate to certain commodities. Tho union -suggests that a fair estimate to meet all conditions -would be from 10j. te lb _ U the matter were looked at in this light, it would be seen that proposed wages would not compare favourably with those paid three or fout'years ago. ' Mr. J. D. Colville (one of the employers' representatives) interposed that the Arbitration Court had already decided on the matter.in granting increases during the .previous month. Mr. Eenn: It made increases to awards with certain reservations." It added the comment that tho increases would give some Telief until the question. oFwages •was submitted for revision. The union * now 'asked that wages' should bo based on- an- entirely new scale, apart altogether from the "cost of Jiving" provisions of the War Regulations. Mr. Cooper: Then you »re dropping the "cost of living" and are asking for ■wages on the "standard of living." Mr. Eenn: "That is so." He added . that he .believed that tlie "standard of living" had gone back. A worker could ' not now afford the things that he could' •afford a.few years ago.. The proposed wage would not-entirely compensate for 1 - the decline in the "standard of living." Ho himself had to go without many things that, he previously could afford. It was intended to ask the Court'to make some attempt to catch up with the leeway in the "standard of living."' Mr. Colville said that the Post Office Savings Bank returns showed that thou- ' Bands of new accounts had been opened ■ in .recent years, and that there had been large increases in tho amount of deposits. It appeared that the working man something "under tho clock" on tlu? present scale of wages. It'was subsequently suggested by Mr. . Cooper that as the wage desired by the union was based on a "standard of living," the Arbitration Cburt should be asked to decide the question.