RELIEF WORKS

Hokitika Guardian, 8 November 1929, Page 2

RELIEF WORKS

WAGES AND CONDITIONS

GOVERNMENT'S POLICY CRITICISED.

WELLINGTON, Nov. 5

According to the general secretary of the New Zealand Workers’ Union (Mr A. Cook) the wages earned by men) on unemployment relief works amount to a sum nearer 7s a day than 14s as is supposed. The policy of the Public Works Department is described as tending *to create loafers, while the report that men are leaving farms to go on relief works is scouted, it being stated that farm work is more attractive.

Mr Cook alleged that the Government was fully .exploiting the reliefs work system in order to lower the workers’ standard of living throughout New Zealand, and that men on co-operative contracts found themselves being paid nearer to 7s than 14s per day. The present Public Works policy tended to create an army of loafers and for this state of affairs the men were not blame as they were not allowed to make good , wages. ■ Parties of men on hundreds of occasions had been told to go steady unless they wanted their wages reduced; The Government also had not fulfilled its promise to provide accommodation for the families of married men transferred from works that had been , closed down,

“There is yet another matter by .which the Public Works men are suffering the worst kind of persecution,”. said Mr Cook. ‘‘The New Zealand Workers’ Union hals an agreement with the Public Works Department. This agreement is supposed to cover all men working on wliat is termed standard works. It was referred to by Mr Coates; as a gentleman’s agreement (and it is only fair to say that during the lime Mr Coates was Minister for Public Works and later Prime Minister it was honoured'accordingly). Tnis agreement gives, certain concessions to the andTa 'reward Tor' good, conduct and efficient .service after ; two .years’ cdhtindohs service, ' allows for a fortnight’s.' holiday -. on • pay'- 'Men have : taken !a pride ' in', giving of their best in- order, to qualify, for this privilege, and", are now shocked to find they are being dismissed’ from' standard works and ’ placed' on belief . works, and all the.'agreemeiit; privileges filched from them.”- : '

Mr Cook said’ that,; while, it was admitted that the farm labourer worked long JBours on seven days a week fqr a' sirtall ’wage,. ! liis position was infinitely better than' it could possibly be, on . relief works, and any who did leave to take oh those works would very soon be going back to the farm job, bad as the conditions were. ‘‘Let them pay. a decent .wage to the farm labourer, andhe won’t look for relief works,” he said.

MINISTER’S REPLY TO ALLEGATIONS.

WELLINGTON, Nov. 5

Allegations by the general secretary of tbe New Zealand Workers’ Union (Mr A. Cook) that the wages earned by men on unemployment relief works amounted to a sum nearer 7s a day than, 14s, as was supposed, . and that •the conditions of employment were brutal; - were replied to by .the Minis, te'ri for Public Works (the Hon Mr Rbnsorn)in' the House of' Representatiyes to-day. •/ . ’ The 'rtiatter was' raised by Mr P. ■ Fraser -.‘(Lub;, 'Wellington Central), who asked the Minister whether (T) lie had noticed a newspaper article headed: “Relief Works Policy—GovBrutal System—Strong Clitic-ism by Union Secretary,” and (2) whether he would take steps to have the alleged deplorable conditions remedied ?.

The Minister replied that lie had not had time to peruse the article in question, but he considered the language us'ed- was such as would only come from an official connected with the Workers’ .Union end not from the men. engaged bn the relief works. While he did ncffi take any exception to the statements, in view of the source from which they; came, lie would, have every case of alleged hardship or injustice enquired into. It was. accepted right throughout the Dominion that conditions in the relief camps to-day were better than they had ever been, and that on the average the wages paid were in keeping with the promise given bv the Prime Minister. It was quite impossible under the co-operative system to arrive at a uniform rate of pay. Moreover, it was not desirable that that should he done. He gave an emphatic denial to the statement that the sum earned was nearer 7s a day than 14s. The Government endeavoured to fix a rate which would enable a man working industriously to earn the standard rate of pay and enable him to keep a home. That practice existed right through New Zealand. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Coates) : No, not right- (throughout the country. The Minister said that complaints had been made that when standard .works were completed men had been transferred to relief works, with the consequent danger of losing their privileges. The question was not one of losing privileges, hut one of employment. It was far better for the men to he given relief work than no work at all. The Government was anxious to provide conditions that would meet with the satisfaction of

the men. Complaints had also been made that men had been transferred from Palmerston North to other work. In that case, it had been agreed that the cost of transferring the men should be borne by the Government. Application was then made for the Department to transfer whole families. It was not possible to do that. Very generous treatment had been meted out to the men, and any case of hardship or grievance would he fully investigated. Proceeding the Minister said that the article in question contained a statement concerning the earnings of some of the men which no doubt was correct, although lie had no definite information to that effect. “I can state definitely that he basis on which relief workers are employed is exactly the same as that which has been in force up till now on, standard works and is still in force on these works,” said Mr Ransom. “If at the same price for work under the same conditions one man makes 9s 9d while thousands of others make over 14s, it can only be assumed that there is approximately that amount of difference in the earth-moving capacities of the respective men. The Labour Department’s instructions are to advise all men going on to our works that they will ho paid by results on a basis on which they should with reasonable diligence be able to earn 14s per day. It is entirely incorrect to suggest that the Government is making any effort to reduce the basic standard of earnings. “The question of extending to relief workers the privileges now given to the men on our standard works will receive the serious consideration of the Government, but it must lie understood that the relief works are of purely a temporary nature, merely instituted to tide, over the difficulties of the moment, and as the privileges granted fto iftrfndard workers depend largely on continuous service, they would not in any case accrue- to men who are only employed for a short porißd.”