WORK ON FARMS

Evening Post, Issue 51, 2 March 1931, Page 10

WORK ON FARMS

UNEMPLOYMENT SCHEME

WAGE THREAT SUGGESTED

(By Telegraph.) - < Special to "The Evening Post.") NEW PLYMOUTH, This Day. The opinion that schemo 4a of tho Unemployment Board was one aimed to reduce farm wages throughout New Zealand was expressed by Labour delegates of the Unemployment Committee last night when discussions centred round'applications received for farm workers. "Surely,"- asked Mr. S. Flood, "under scheme 4a this committeo is not going to agree that a married man and his wifo should go on to a farm for 25s a week?" "And iheir keep," added Mr. J. Brown. "And their keep," continued Mr. Flood. "Surely the committee is not going to send a married man on to a farm for 25s a week and expect him to feed and clothe his children? Tha scheme enabled the board to subsidiso wages at the rate of 15s for single men and 25s for married men. The farmer had to provide free board and.lodging or housing whero necessary, and either the means or cos ( t of transport to the farm to start work. The farmer might pay anything ho Jiked in addition to the subsidy." Replying to Mr. Flood, the chairman (Mr. P. E. Stainton) explained that the work under the scheme was purely voluntary. Mr. Flood: "It is not voluntary. You are forcing married men to take work." Mr. R. Fulton: "Supposing you offer ,i man work under this scheme and lie refuses to take it; he is not eligible for work under any unemployment scheme." Mr. H..V. S. Griffiths said that that was not the position. The acceptance of work under this scheme was voluntary. Mr. Fulton: "Well, it may be voluntary at present, but we have no ;guarr antce that it is not going to becomo compulsory." Tho chairman said that they were not there, to deal with tho future. Surely they were not going to prevent a man taking work if he wanted to. Mr. Fulton said he was not going to stop any man, but it was not fair. Mr. Flood maintained that this was only a scheme to reduce farm wages throughout New Zealand. The wages would become sot,at 25s a week. Mr. 11. E. Blyde suggested that tho committeo was not there to discuss a matter that was a policy of the board. Mr. Fulton: "As a committee that administers the policy we should be j able to discuss it." . , I - PERIOD OF REGISTRATION. I Criticism of the provision whereby j the unemployed need to be registered j fourteen days before being granted work was also made. Many men, said Mr. J. Brown, were tramping about New Zealand in search of employment, and when these poor unfortunates arrived at a town they were compelled to wait at least fourteen days \ for work. ■ Meanwhile they wore a | charge on the Charitablo Aid Board, i In his opinion registration any whero i in New Zealand should bo sufficient, I providing the man had paid his unem-j pjoyment levy. The chairman said that if the regis-| tration period were abandoned New, Plymouth would be inundated by men' looking for work. If men stayed in j their home towns they would be looked j after by the local Unemployment Committees. , ! Mr. Flood expressed the opinion, that. tho period should be shortened from I fourteen days to seven. | Mr. J. S. Connett (Tarnnaki County) | moved that no action be taken in tho: matter. The difficulty pointed out by | Mr. Stainton was, he said, a very real one, and if the registration period wero | removed or shortened danger would j arise. . j As an amendment, Mr. Fulton moved I that the registration period be shorten-1 cd from fourteen days to seven. The j unemployment scheme, he said, was a' national one, and it had to be looked i "at from a national point of view. If the registration period were shortened all over' the Dominion then there would be no trouble in tho matt n; The amendment was lost, and the motion carried with three dissenting votes. .