BUILDING SUBSIDY

Hokitika Guardian, 24 June 1932, Page 2

BUILDING SUBSIDY

FROM UNEMPLOYMENT BOARD. FOR OWNERS OF NEW HOUSES. (per Press Association— Copyright.) WELLINGTON, Jure. 23. Several anomalies and differences of opinion concerning the operation of -:he scheme for the subsidising of the wages of unemployed workers in thbuilding industry have been adjusted, ■a F - the result of discussions between, representatives of the employers and employees in the bukd*ng industry and Unemployment Board Officers. Mr Coates announced to-day that the Unemployment Board had heard representatives of all concerned, and the anomalies which appeared in the fir-t draft of the scheme had been straightened out.

He said the subsidy is go'ng to be payable to the owner who i-s responsible for putting th e work in hand, :uul not to the builder, although tne certificate of the building contractor as to the amount expended in wages will be necessary.

A feature is that th e rules have been amended to provide that, on l.vig?jobs, where a building contractor will undoubtedly be engaged, the subsidy is to be payable to eighty per ( cent, of the meh engaged on the job. The rate of subsidy is to be- 8s 4-1 per £l, with a maximum of 25s per man per week.

On the smaller jobu, the -subsidy is to remain at 6s 8d in the £1 of the wages paid, with a maximum of 22s 6d for any one man in any on e week. Mr Coates says that the building work should not be considered in any sense as a relief job. Ihe Unemployment Board had jus*- come into it with a subsidy to t give a necessary incentive for work to b 0 gone on with now. being postponed.