Truth CASE OF THE CHRISTCHURCH CURRIERS.

NZ Truth, Issue 114, 24 August 1907, Page 4

Truth

CASE OF THE CHRISTCHURCH CURRIERS.

Published every Saturday mobning at Luke's Lane (off mannersstreet), Wellington, N.Z. SUBSCRIPTION (IN ADVANCE), 13S. PER ANNUM.

SATURDAY, AUGUST 24, 1907.

HOW THE PRESS HAVE BEEN HOODWINKED. A' matter of considerable interest to unionists all over New Zealand is the case of the curriers recently, dismissed from Messrs Bowron Bros' tannery at Woolston. The trouble arose over a matter of wages, and to put the case shortly it may be stated thus : The men were receiving; a weekly wage of £2 10s (an extremely poor wage, by the way. for any tradesman) and Bowron Bros, considered that they wer,e not earning; their money, and said that an alteration was desirable. Naturally the men resented this, as it practically meant that they were accused of loafing. Bowron then proposed that they should go on task work, and be paid according to results. This, to the uninitiated, would seem fair enough, but the men rejected the proposal (on what good prrounds we will Dresently sho\^ and told Bowron that they would not work at the rates offered. The upshot was that Bowron Sros gave the men two days' notice to get. The men, of course, had no option, and have been idle ever since. One member of the firm told them plainly that it was no use their going to the Arbitration Court, for if he could not run the show on the lines set down he would close the place up. *, * * When- the men were dismissed both the Christchurch papers. "The Times" and "The Press" came out m strong denunciation of the men, and upholding the action of this gigantic leather monopolising firm. That the good old Tory "Press" should take the side of capital against labor is not to be wondered at, but the workers had at least a ri.ght to expect that "The Times," an organ supported by workers, and allegedly published m the interests of liberalism, should have given them a fair deal, and pointed out to the public the manifest injustice of the new conditions which Messrs Bowron Bros, wanted to impose. But, instead of doing so, "The Times" listened to the Bowron side of the story, and slated the men for their want of consideration. The reason why "The Times" should have sided with Bowron Bros, raav be found iji its advertising columns. Bowron Bros, are a wealthy firm of much influence and with much boodle to spend. Why 'then, should the common working man pet a hearing when they take the flcor ? But just ]et "Truth" explain why the men are right and Bowron Bros, and the phitish press of Christchurch wrong. Bowrons proposed piece-work -to the men, and asked them to accept the same rate that pertained m the old days, when there was little or no machinery to contend with. At that time a currier, working on the log that Bowrons now propose could make a good wage, probably a good deal more than £2 10s per week, but with the altered conditions "brought about by machinery, it is impossible for them ,to make a decent wage at all. Let us give two examples. When harness was hand-stripped a currier could single-handed put through as much as 20 pair a day without killing himself. At lOd a pair a man could, make good wages at this work. But what is the position with the drum-stuffed rubbish that the modern appliances of Bowron Bros, turn out ? The sides are put into the drum, and it bangs the crease into them, irrespective of quality ; any old rubbishy fat or muck can be fed into the machine, and it drums it into the hides, with the result that each side when it comes out has increas&d by about 3 or 4 lbs. All this is the proprietors' profit, quick work, cheap grease, and increased weight-, but where does the currier come" m ? It is, well-known m. the "trade" that before these hides can be seasoned, the muck must be scoured out of them, and this entails nearly three times the labor that the old method of hand-stripping required. And yet Bowron Bros, haye 1 the gall to ask the men to take it on at the old rate. They couldn't make salt at it. But let us give another instance. In the matter of whiting and graining, according to the old system, on which, be it remembered, the prices were fixed on which the men are now asked to work, a man could brush up and clean almost 20 pair m 1£ hours. But now that the machines • are at work, they knock so much d>irt into the hides that 20 pairs is a good | four hours' work. These are only . two instances. There are dozens of others, all showing that the present day work is not to be Comnared with that for which the prices the curriers are asked to accept was drawn un. It wasn't expected that the daily press should know of these technicalities, but it would have been easy enough to have interviewed some of the aggrieved men and found out. But it was ever the way with the slavish daily press— take the word of capital every, time. Bowron Bros', word \ was good enough for "The Times" : damn the workers. * * * Now, what does this precious firm of teetotallers and otherwise— very much otherwise — mean by this action of sacking this body of men, with no other excuse than that they won't work at a rate that is manifestly below the requirements of a living wage? Is this sort of conduct to be tolerated on the part of employer any more than a strike of employees would be tolerated if they struck for an exorbitant increase of wages ? T o ••Truth" the action of Bowron Bros, can be called by no other namo.than •'lock out," and this paper would like to know wha>t Hi? member for the district is doin.o; that he hasn't brought Ihn matter before the House, and forced some action to bring this monopolistic conceta to its bear,--

ino;s. Little by little Bowron Bros, have brought the tanning industry of Christchurch under their control, until now they dominate practically the whole of the Canterbury trade. They have built huge factories and tanneries and have m their emplo y hundreds of workmen, but they haven't increased wages, nor have they given the public the benefit of either" cheaper or better footwear. But as to their methods of working and the quality of their products, we do not propose to deal m this article ; that will be left for a future issue. We confine ourselves here to the grievances of the curriers' and the scurvy treatment they have received. ' They have been asked to accept a ridiculous rate of pay, and because they have refused they have been dismissed— locked out. Is this a breach of our industrial law or is it not ? Technically, it may not be, but it is so close to it that the workers are quite within their rights if they demand that their representatives m Parliament have the matter brought before the notice of the House. l There is a principle involved that not only affects the leather worker, but it affects every worker m the colony. It is a matter that every union m New Zealand should voice a protest over, and every rignt-thinking man condemn. It is the thin edge of the sweaters' wedge m a trade already shockingly, under-paid, and it behoves every worker when buying his boots and shoes to remember this, and do his best to protect his own. These callous, cold-blooded coin-grabbing concerns are fast becoming the curse of New Zealand, and the sooner they are forced to pay decent wages or shut up shop the better. The empty, silly threat of closing down needn't alarm the men. Somebody else will quioklv start, and probably offer them conditions that will amply compensate them for their fiorht with the capitalistic concern— the far-reaching firm of Bowron Bros.