WHAT IS WRONG WITH LABOUR?

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 10279, 14 May 1919, Page 6

WHAT IS WRONG WITH LABOUR?

To the Editor “N.Z. Times." Sj r> —Two correspondents have replied to my strictures on the “stopwork” meeting as a method of watersidera’ warfare. As the lessor is covered by the greater, I will refer to the latter. Mr James Hoherts’s arguments may bo divided into direct and indirect —arguments and mere reflections. To clear the latter from the field of vision, and begin with the tu quoque, I cannot find any reference in my letter to warrant his remarks, and will dismiss it with the reply, “Let the galled jade wince, my withers are unwrung. My reference to the lady at the Opera House was used as a living instance of the selfish blindness which promises a never-ending struggle between community interests and wharf labour.’ That lady was tortured with tho piercing cold, and when it came to the third infliction on her generous na ture, the conductor should have como forward and said: “Ladies and gentlemen, have-a heart!” and then proceeded with the next instrumental item, and saved her from further ordeal.

The Apache and knuckle-duster—ls it not a fact that men ivho do very little work themselves worm themselves about amongst the workers, promoting false ideas and discontent? What would happen to a man who went ou the wharf to work while opposing this doctrine of falseness and discontent r"

The point to be arrived at is the "efficiency Mage-." The Rtop-worlc mealing is a bludgeon, and the point aimed at can never he reached by its use. The matter is not a. personal one —it is a community interest. Tho shippers and merchants they think thoy are hitting are not boing hurt at all. Every uujust infliction by wntersiders hits and hurts the community, because every extra charge is passed on, and always will be. Tho efficiency wage is tho medium between what is too high and what is too low. Over and above the efficiency wage is a double loss to the community—there is the direct loss of the disbursement

and the indirect loss by depreciation of labour-capacity. There may bo 12.01 K) attend a stop-work meeting instead of 1200; the number does not matter, it is the argument that counts. As to the claim that everyone has the right to speak, one only has to read Mr James Roberts's letter carefully to read the writing on the wall for those who exorcised that right in opposition to the views of the "bosses." HENRY BODLEY.

RECEPTION OF RETURNED

SOLDIERS

To the Editor "N.Z. Times."

Sir,—An unpleasant occurrence has arisen with respect to a reception to he given to one of two returned soldiers. Why should any difference have been made in the form of reception? Both have done their duty to their country—and both should have received the same reception.

SAMBO—"EQUALITY AND THE RIG'HTS OF MAN."