THE SANITARY CONTRACTOR.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXV, Issue 1063, 13 February 1913, Page 2

THE SANITARY CONTRACTOR.

CONTINUOUS V. ANNUAL SERVICE.

In accordance with notice previously given, Cr Hannah moved at Monday night’s Council meeting that fresh tenders be called for the uightsoil contract, and that it be let annually. The mover thought it was only right that tenders should be called for this service, as no man should have a monopoly of any ot the borough work. The present man had had the service for about two years, and he thought now that someone else should have a chance of getting it. At the request of the Mayor, the Town Clerk gave a brief resume of the manner .iu which the work had been carried out by the different employees since the inception of the system. No complaints had been received since Mr Gardes was appointed, and iu addition to him only one man —Mr Kirtse —had previously given satisfaction.

Cr Hannah asked, if the present man was getting £5 10s a week for doing the work, why didn’t he pay the man whom he left to do the work while he was in Australia the same amount ?

Cr Chrystall, in seconding the motion, said he was quite satisfied with the way in which Mr Gardes was carrying out his duties, but what they wanted to get at was the proper procedure, and he thought the right thing was to give every man in the town an equal chance ip the Council’s benefits.

Cr Richmond supported the motion. He said that it had been stated that the nightsoil was being buried, but be could assure the Council that this was not so. He had inspected the depot, and it was a perfect disgrace to anybody. Mr Gardes was doing the work well as far as the houses were concerned, but that was all. He agreed with Cr Chrystall that everyone in the borough should have an equal chance of getting employment of this description if they liked to apply. He would like to see a committee appointed to visit the depot. Cr Coley said, although he hadn’t been to the depot for some little time, he had always found everything buried when he had gone there. There had been a great deal of trouble over this service before, and the previous employees had not carried out the work at all, there being dozens of complaints. Since the present man had been appointed there had been no complaints, and he therefore could not support the motion. Cr Whibley said he could not support the motion. He believed every public body should keep their employees so long as they continued to give satisfaction and were willing to remain. He was strongly opposed to the contract system, as it had a tendency to reduce wages, and he believed that a man should be well paid, and he would then do his work better. Gardes was a good man, and was doing the work well —in fact, with the exception of Kirtse, no previous employee had so faithfully attended to his duties. He considered that all employees of the Council, whether it be the Town Clerk, Gas Manager, or labourers, should be kept so long as they were giving satisfaction. Cr Speirs was opposed to the motion, as the work was being done well at present. It was not tendered for previously, but applications were called, and the present man was selected. He didn’t think that fresh applications should be called every year, as the appointment of a new man annually would only cause turmoil.

Cr Adams agreed with Cr Whibley that it was not advisable to have the work of the Council done by contract more than could be helped, as it was not iu the interests of Labour —having a tendency to reduce wages. When he was first elected to the Council the manner in which the work in question was being carried out was a constant source of trouble, aud now they had a good man aud no complaints, he considered it would be a good policy to “let well alone.’’

The Mayor said he could not support the motion. When he first came to the Council table they were deluged with complaints about the manner in which the work was being carried out. Since Gardes was appointed there had been no complaints, and he was satisfied they had never had a man previously that had done the work so well. He agreed with Cr Whibley that when they had a good man they should pay him well, aud provided he continued to carry out his work satisfactorily, not interfere with him.

The motion, on being put, was lost, the voting being For, Crs Hannah, Chrystall and Richmond ; against, Crs Coley, Speirs, Adams, Whibley and the Mayor.