BASIC WAGE FOR LABOURERS

Hokitika Guardian, 20 October 1930, Page 2

BASIC WAGE FOR LABOURERS

ARBITRATION COURT POWERS.

CANNOT BE TRANSFERRED TO PARLIAMENT. WELLINGTON, October 16. A request that a basic wage for general labourers should be fixed ; .Y Parliament, in order that they might be assured of a living wage, was made to the Acting-Prime Minister (the Hon. E. A. Ransom) and the Minister ol Labour (the Hon. S. G. Smith) to-day by a deputation representing the General Labourers’ Union. It was urged that owing to the -n----termittent nature of their work general labourers were unable to earn a l'ving wage. While expressing sympathy with tHe lot of the working man, Mr Ransom made it plain that the Government had no intention of transferring to Parliament the powers of the Abritration Court. INTERMITTENT WORK. Mr R. Semple, M.P„ introduced the deputation which, he said, Avould show that the.basic wage was a misnomer so far as the general labourer was concerned. Owing to the intermittent nature of his work the general labourer was on the bread line all the year round, and it was marvellous how be and bis family lived. Mr T. L. Barker, president -of the union, said it was held that the basic wage* was based on a wrong premise, and they wanted to see the wage fixed by statute.

Mr P. Butler, secretary of the union, said'the wage of a labourer in New Zealand did not exceed £3 15s a week. How could a man sustain a home, wile and family on such a miserable wage? There were cases in which,-men on the basic wage were paying £2 7s 6d a week for rent. The principle that 'lie labourer was entitled to a bonus to Counteract the casual nature of Ins work ■ was recognised in Australia, where in most of. the awards a bonus of 20 per cent was included. Mr Butler alleged that tliei;e were numerous contractors who stood over their men and ;when they found they were not doing so much work as they did when they first-were engaged dismissed them. He wished/to impress on the Government the ‘ urgent .need • for a-review of -the position. They made only ' one request, and that was that the labourer should be able, to earn at lesat a basic wage of £4 Os Bd. ,THK LOWER PAID MAN. Replying to 1 the deputation the Min- . istei/ of Labour-, said he hoped the deputation would understand that Ms sympathy avws with the lower paid man. 1 1 have lived the life of the lower paid man,” he said, “and so long as -I am in Parliament I want to do '* y best: to help that man. The question raised by the deputation is a very difficult and a very important one. It is a very difficult matter for the Government to interfere with the • Arbi nation Court. Say, for instance that the Government interfered with an award ol the Court at the request of the employers. Every worker in the country would have a kick.”

Mr W. Nash, M.P.: It has I .cor* done.

The Minister; I am still looking for a precedent. Only the day before yesterday I had a demand from 'he employers in my own district to hove an award reviewed. If anything can he done to assist the lot of the labourer then I will be with you. This question, however, is one for Cabinet.” SUGGESTION OUT OF THE ' QUESTION. The Hon. E. A. Ransom said he quite agreed with his colleague so far as the lot of the general labourer was concerned. The point raised by various speakers opened up a very big question indeed. What their request amounted to was that they should be guaranteed a certain wage irrespective of the quantity of work they did. If Parliiment fixed a definite wage hey could not''expect the employer to find the money. The necessary money would have to be found in other directk :»s, and that would probably mean 'b it the primary producer wou d have to bear the burden. The average dait.V farmer at present was working 3,rg hours and was not earning on au average anything more that the basic wage fixed for labourers. Mr Ransom said he had been impressed by the statement that some workers were paying as much as £i is 6.1 for rent. If that were so it. was nn impossible position and should be .inquired into, Th're suggestion that we should legislate to transfer the pow ws of the Ar-bitration-Court To Riirlia nent'vtould be out of the question at any time,” aid Mr Ransom, “and particularly at t. e present time.” The Government had no intention of taking the duty of fixing wages on to its own shoulders.