FLAXMILL ACCOMMODATION.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXV, Issue 1131, 9 August 1913, Page 3

FLAXMILL ACCOMMODATION.

Mr R. T. Bell, of. Raugiotu, writes as follows to the Palmerston Standard “I notice in last evening’s Standard that a deputation from the Manawatu Flaxmill Employees* Union waited on the Premier with regard to the accommodation at flaxmills, etc. It seems to me that the deputation

was quite unnecessary, as most of the millers are now renewing their accommodation as speedily as possible. Apparently the Union considers the charge of fifteen shillings per week is a fair charge, but I will undertake to say no miller can now make ends meet at this rate. The millers have not

kept strictly to the award rate of wages when good prices have been ruling for hemp. The men have had increased pay accordingly. The members of the recent deputation must be aware that the millers have not made the cookhouses pay, and should have shown their good feeling by being silent on this point. The millers have done their part by increased wages, and the least the Union could do was to admit they were getting a ‘square deal’ as far as the cookhouse is concerned.” Mr Gavin Stove, President of the Manawatu Flaxmills Employees’ Union, replies to Mr Bell as follows;—”. ... Mr Bell undertakes to say that no miller can make the cookhouse pay a 1 award rates. Assuming that this is correct, then ninety per cent, of the cooks who are still holding on to their contracts are losing money (Logic, is it not ?) Now, supposing the millers are losing money on their board accounts. When the maximum amount to be charged for board, viz., 15s, was agreed to by the Court of Arbitration as the cost of living at that particular time, the minimum amount to be paid as wages was also assessed, based upon that same cost of living. Now, seeing that it is the law of the country to base all wages on the cost of living, and on Mr Bell’s assurance the cost of living has increased, then it is surely logical to argue that the minimum rate of wages should have increased in ratio. Now, it doesn’t really matter to the worker how much Mr Bell, or any other miller, is losing by boarding his employees ; this fact remains, the employer and employees have entered into an agreement to the effect that so much per hour, or per ton, as the case may be, shall be paid as a minimum wage, and a maximum

amount of so much per man per week shall be charged for board ; so if it is costing the employer a little more to board the employee

thin was anticipated, he is doubly recompensed by the fact that he is ■ employing labour at a lesser rate than that recognised by law. . . Seeing that the millers are endeavouring to raise the price of

board in direct contravention of clause 7 of the’ award, apparently for the purpose of making the worker pay for accommodation that the law says the employer shall provide, I contend that the deputation was well within its rights in pointing the matter out to the powers that be. . , .” The deputation of flaxmill workers to the Premier complained of the accommodation provided at the mills, and also of an increase in the price of board. In the latter connection it is stated that several of the workers at one mill in this district walked into the cookhouse the other morning and demanded ham and eggs for breakfast!