CORRESPONDENCE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 2115, 15 April 1920, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

(To, I lie .Editin’.)

Bir.—While not wishing to trespass. on your space, 1 would like to draw a comparison with the wages paid by the Council to their employees, Let me take the sanitary department. Here the wages -are six pounds per week, and ten shillings extra for an assistant one night per" week, as well ascertain fees for poimdkeeping. His labour is five nights per week. The road department receive 14s and 15s per day, and work what is supposed to be a six day week, which brings their pay up jo £4 10s 0d per week. Now the gas department. The stoker, I believe, receives 12s Lid per day for seven days a week, which makes Ins pay work out at £4 10s 5d per week, and every day a working day, and each day, I understand, ; he starts at 5 a.m., which makes him th’e hardest worked and least paid of all. Yet, when he last applied for an increase there was, if my memory serves me right, a certain amount' of opposition to his getting it. Further’, as a lover of fair play, I ask the powers that be why such difference of treatment should exist as evidenced by the report of the meeting, when dealing with various claims. I ask how Cr. Coley can justify his attitude by wanting to grant more to one, on the one hand, and opposing a lesser, but equally just, claim on the other-. He moved for the roadmen’s increase; why was he not consistent, and see to it that others work and claims should also he recognised. Finally, I write as onb who lias had a fair amount of business with the gas department, and I am merely quoting lire above, which I believe to he correct. Here we have the gas department employee working all holidays, sometimes alt hours, and being paid till' least. As to the rentaiks of one councillor, f think they wen.' entirely out of place and unjustified. and should he withdrawn, otherwise I have no doubt the stoker can lake care of himself. But Ido not wish it thought that 1 am writing on his behalf, far from it. I like fair play and justice. —T am, etc., SQUARE DUAL.

(To (he Editor.) Sir. —Please allow me snare in which (o deal with the slanderous statement made by Cr. Parkin at lasi mooting of the Borough Coinn'il. as reported in your last issue, in which Cr. Parkin is reported to have said “this man will work ail the points imaginable." As this statement has now gone broadcast, my denial is entitled to equal publicity. In the first place, what 1 applied for has always been granted in the pasl. and, further, the temporary assistant was nranted an increase of f.l .10s Od per week during- my absence, and the manager’s absence, without question, so why the quibble by the Councillors? As for being a “pointer,” my record here is sufficient denial. L have been here twelve years, had four jobs, and .never been out of work, and when I look the present position the manager had been a week trying to find a man to take it on. Points, indeed! Is it a “point” slogging day in and day out, winter and summer, from 5 a.m. till you finish? Is it a “point” doing my best for (he-people and having a cowardly attack made upon me hy a Councillor from behind the shell cr iff the council table? Is it a “point" passing an insulting remark about a person and not taking the manly course of combining an atom of (ruth with it ? 1-care not; whether it be a Councillor or nol, I do not intend to let any person attack me without grounds for so doing. Cr. Parkin is but a recent arrival here, and his hostility to me. I have given no cause for, as I have never had any dealings with him. Is it because I always try to belter a job, and uphold the principle of fair play, and demand equal pay Unequal work? I fully intend to proceed further with the matter, as I took the trouble (o find out before penning this denial whether Cr. Parkin had been correctly repovled or not, and I find ho was. On my interviewing Cr. Parkin, lie said he never said a word. Yet he fold a private individual that he “squeaked” a bit at the meeting. I challenge both Cr. Parkin and Cr. Coley to prove one word of truth contained in their insulting remarks. As for Cr. Coley’s endorsement of his confrere’s remarks, while the public may noPplace much reliance on his public utterances as he does himself, lie must be taught that privilege is not license to slander a man. Finally, were it not for the fact that I would have been punishing the consumers, 1 could have taken a line of action that would have brought both these councillors to their senses. When a man has not the moral courage to attack other than from behind the shelter of a public position he should at least give the object of attack a chance of defence. This Councillor is, or was, a representative of official Labour, yet, when anything gomes up affecting Labour wo find him hostile to it. .Does the Labour Party condone such treachery? I think not. 1 want a withdrawal of those remarks by Cr. Parkin, or I will know the reason why, 'As for Cr. Coley, when ho blows the froth off there’s nothing left. —I am, etc., E. G. MAKTIX.