THE RAILWAYS

Hokitika Guardian, 23 July 1930, Page 7

THE RAILWAYS

DISMISSAL OF MEN. MINISTERS STAND FIRM. a/ WELLINGTON, July 19. An unsuccessful effort to persuade the Prime Minister the Hon. G. W. Forbes).-'and the Minister of Railways (the Hon. W. A. Veitch) to withdraw the dismissal notices issued to employees hi the railway workshops, and to reinstate those already dismissed, was made-by representatives of the railwayman's- organisations, which waited upon them after the House of RfepresentatdiVes rose last evening. While (expressing regret at the circumstances that had arisen, the Prime Minister' explained that the railways were in a similar position to a commercial enterprise, and that it was uneconomic to run them at a financial loss.-. The present difficulty was purely a financial one. As it was, the Minister for Railways had asked him for close on £2,000,000 to keep the service going. .... The deputation was introduced by the Leader of the Labour Party,' Mr H. E. Holland. The president of the Amalgamated Society! cC Railway Servants, Mr J. Churehouse; said the deputation was there to. ask for. reconsideration of the dismissals .from the railway workshops. " There were; men under notice of dismissal >• for to-night—they .-were there to ask tliaf; 'those' notices he stopped and that,,those men who had already been dismissed be put back until findings had: been made by the Government as to the finance it required for the railway service. hhe Government responsibility did not end when the men were removed from the railway service, for they swelled the ranks of the unemployed. THE HUMANE ASPECT. ; \ . f , • . . There was tlio humane aspect of the position; i 'said Mr .Churchouse. , It seemed that 380'men .were to go' without consideration. “What the Minister for. has done,” he added, ; *),is' to hand the pruhing-kiiife to the immediate superiors of the men, and they: are putting out married men with ifanylies .and retaining single men. I thinly_ thatthafc'is lyroiigMUi!principle. Single; men who have been on only a few months are/beihg kegt.on, while casuals--■with long years of seriee are .being disrtiissbd.SiThe policy in'* the has; beeh:; that the ’ last r man..- put x on should be the'first to go, all things being equalv-;- f These- men with 'dong ; service' are,'gbing. out and .men jvitli (short service are being retained.)’ Mr S.'lngram, secretary of the/Railway Tradesman’s Association, entered an emphatic protest,- against the way the melt ’ had ; been ‘ dismissed; He knew of no previous instance, in which men had ,; beeh“dismissed oh such a' scale,

It appeared to be not so much a question of lack of work as lack of money which lias induced the Government to take the steps it had. Mr Ingram asked that definite satisfaction should be given by the Prime Minister before they left the room. POSITION QUITE OBVIOUS Mr Veiteh said it had been stated ■that he could employ men in the workshops if money were available. The position in the shops was quite obvious. They were large- enough to employ an enormous number of men. However, with the revenue and capital moneys available to him ifor the present year, it was impossible to do more. It was impossible for him to ' consider every dismissal, hut he had 1 promised to deal with cases of proved hardship. He was very anxious to meet the situation, and he had been extremely pained at having to take such drastic' steps. j REPLY BY PRIME MINISTER. Replying to the representations, the Prime Minister said that he hardly j need say that nothing had given trie Minister for 7 Railways greater concern than the necessity for facing the dismissal of a number of men. It was only after the matter- had been very carefully gone into that such a course was deemed necessary. The position was this; The railways had a very formidable competitor in the road ser | vices, and no doubt this had seriously cut into the business of the past so, far as the railways were concerned. < Road transport services had cut down ( the work of the Department;' Mr Forbes said that the matter was undoubtedly a financial one. New workshops had been provided! at an expense of over £2,000,000. That meant labour-saving machinery was in operation and a. consequent reduction in the ‘number of men in the workThe principle of employing men when they could not, be profitably engaged was not sound and would mean the breakdown of anv organisation. It was not now possible to carry the same number of men in the workshops as was the case in the past. SAME AS PRIVATE EMPLOYERS. The Ministers for Railways, stated Mr Forbes, had asked for £1,813,000 to keep the railways going. Money had to be raised by issue of loans, and unless tbe public realised that their rqoney was to be invested in good security they would not invest. “If ' I went to the public and said I want J up to half a million to keep men on j the railways,” said Mr Forbes, “that would not be sound.” “AVe. know the distress that these , :thidgS;imean,” concluded Mr Forbes, “but we are in the same position as private employers. If a factory kept its men on and took no notice of the (economic position it would soon go out of businass. The railways can’t carry men on if the financial position cannot stand it. We have no desire to dismiss men, and the whole thing is to

avoid the dismissal of further mon—that is what is giving us the greatest concern. I am anxious to do anything I can to assist Mr Veitch to avoid any more dismissals."