FOREIGNERS COME FIRST

NZ Truth, Issue 1191, 27 September 1928, Page 2

FOREIGNERS COME FIRST

Hotelkeeper Throws White Men On To The Pavement (From "N.Z. Truth's*-' Special Wellington Representative.) Beyond a miserable exposition of off-hand injustice; of anaemic patriotism, purblind self-satisfaction and a fore-shortened perspective, there is really nothing remarkable about the narrative Just commencing. Except, perhaps, that Stanley Whiteford, licensee of the Duke of Edinburgh Hotel, Wellington, is likely to regret the sacking of four white cooks ana the substitution of three Chinese.

IT seems strange that a man of Whiteford's experience should blindly throw four men out of work at a time when the number of applicants for a situation is never less than a hundred, when unemployment — if not so serious as it has been m the more recent winter periods of the last six or seven years — is at least uncomfortable m its dimensions; it is incredible that m a moment of pique he should have submerged his sense of duty to fellow-countrymen m straitened circumstances and imported three yellow men from northern towns. If the number of available situations exceeded the labor supply, then Whiteford would have every justification for saying: "It is nothing to do with you. I am the manager of my own domestic affairs and shall employ whom I think fit." | But when there are a large number of married white chefs on the roll of New Zealand's workless — well, that is where the spirit of national protection enters the lists. It may be, of course, that his judgment of humanity and the merits of its individuals is infinitely more acute than that of those who have viewed the same plot of circumstance as Whiteford did, while, on the converse side, it may be that his bullet-headed, stiff-necked attitude towards representatives of "NiZ." Truth" who questioned him is the true assessment of his disposition towards those who see fit to criticize him. The matter of decision is left to the public of New Zealand, who must judge for themselves. About eighteen months ago a chef named Percy R. Workman took charge of the kitchen; at the Duke of Edinburgh. Under his control were the second, third and fourth cooks. Workman is a first-class tradesman, with an excellent record of five years' service at the Royal Oak and a slightly lesser period at the New Commercial,/so there can be no question as to his qualifications. As H. O'Malley, secretary of the

Hotel Workers' Union said to "Truth,' Workman has excellent credentials behind him and there could not be any j suggestion of incompetence relative to the reason for his dismissal. From .a close scrutiny of the situa- ! tion, It seems that Whiteford had no) fault to find with his kitchen staff until about six weeks ago, when he approached the chef, saying he con- j siffered the work could he done by three men instead of four. Workman says he replied that such an alteration would be impossible without overtime work, but that ifi Whiteford would submit a time-sheet, showing how the kitchen could be run with one cook less, then the staff ( would have a shot at the proposed • new arrangement. ''In that case," Whiteford is credited with Baying, "you had better carry on as you are going," and, with that, the matter closed — or seemingly so. On the night of Wednesday, September 12, however, Whiteford .went to the chef and said: "I am going to heve a change m the kitchen, chef." When Workman followed up his: l"Right-oh, Mr. Whiteford," with a question which sought to find a reason for this sudden dismissal, Whiteford merely said: "1 am just making a change, ' that's all," but would not vouchsafe any other explanation. I The men were thereupon paid I the two days' wages, which, under > the award, are due m lieu of notice, and the following morning • the four men were astounded to see three Chinese arrive m their stead. Three days afterwards representations were made to the office of s "N.Z. [Truth," from which inquiries were immediately prosecuted. It appears that Workman has a wife^ and two children to support, one of his" subordinates has a wife and a grown!up family, whilst the two remaining | cooks are single. Two "Truth" representatives inquired at the office of the hotel as to the whereabouts of the licensee and were told that he was m bed — did they wish to see him personally? The woman clerk m the office r was; informed that their business required the personal attention of the licensee and, they were then directed to the bedroom where Whiteford was located. When the two newspapermen had discreetly tapped on the door and been invited by a husky voice to "Come In," they entered the room, closed the door and found themselves confronted by a large screen, which hid the bed from the gaze of anyone who might have entered the room by mistake. - A second invitation to "Come m" encouraged them to walk round the screen and, find the owner of the voice, whose red face and white hands were subsequently picked out from the

array of medicine bottles, soda syphons, blankets, pillows and shaded lights, which seemed to fill the corner m which the bed. Whltefor-d, it appeared, had been m bed since he "fired" his European cooks, either from the sore throat he complained about or else m restful retreat from the scrutiny of outsiders. "I won't say anything," he blustered. "It's nothing to do with 'Truth' or anyone else. I could sack the whole staff if I wanted to — your readers don't want to know that I dismissed four white cooks and put three Chinese m their places." It was suggested to Whiteford that the question of his right to discharge men for incompetence or any other shortcoming was not the object of the interviewers. Rather was it to see whether he was justified m ridding himself of the Europeans and to point out the hardihood of employing Chinese ] when there were so many New Zealanders on the streets. "No, I won't be drawn — and I don't care what people think, either. I was the pioneer of the sixpenny 'nip' and Chinese cooks m Wellington .' . . and I can please myself — it's my affair," he declared, rather pompously. It was then gently intimated to Whiteford that when his actions upset — or were calculated to upset — the provisions of a national policy, the matter then became one of more than domestic moment. At this he fairly exploded with indignation, but although he pleaded justification, he refused to disclose upon what grounds his decision to discharge the four kitchen hands were based. O'Malley, secretary of the Hotel Workers' Union, told "Truth" that it would be impossible to work the Duke of Edinburgh kitchen with three men — without their doing over-time— an opinion which is strongly supported by his fourteen years as secretary of the union, m addition to his own personal experience as a hotel employee

for many years prior to his secretarial appointment. "As a rule," he said, "white men will work only the requisite number of hours, whereas Chinese, who also are under the award, will work time without claiming extra wages for it." „ Is there any significance m the application of this remark to the present workers m the kitchen of the Duke of Edinburgh? O'Malley gave the Chinese cooks credit also for their cleanliness and general excellence as cooks and chefs, but he agreed with "Truth" that the question of their merits as cooks was quite beside the point. . * He said that his union had gone very deeply into the questioa of whether Whiteford had acted fairly m the matter of dismissing Workman and the three others, and it was agreed that the licensee's action was absolutely unwarranted. , "Whiteford told me that his manager had been unable to seoure a su'rtable chef, but, as a matter of fact," declared O'Malley, "I could have got him plenty— dozens of them." A few days afterwards, "Truth" again paid Whiteford a visit, but this time he was found' m the bar, deeply m conversation with another man and pleasantly sipping from a small glass on the bar counter. The object of this second call was to furnish the licensee with an opportunity of tasting- his side of the story, but his attitude was so brusque — and so stubborn — that any efforts to dissuade him from his bullet-headed tactics were absolutely fruitless. "Truth's" representatives were constrained to leave Whiteford to his glass and his companion of the bar. 1 If he still thinks he was justified m Ignoring the cries of workless men, it would be as well to draw a parallel for his blunt consideration. It is this: Supposing he were -a cook working m the kitchen of a Shanghai hotel and was suddenly discharged from his job. How many Chinese hotel-keepers does he imagine would be sitting on his doorstep the following morning, imploring his services? The possibilities are so remote that they are almost laughable m their near - impossibility . Would to heaven that some New Zealanders showed as much consideration to their fellow-countrymen as do the Chinese In their, own country!