SOLDIERS AND COUNTRY WORK.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17690, 30 July 1919, Page 7

SOLDIERS AND COUNTRY WORK.

TO TILK EDITOR. Sir, I should like to interest the press, tho Repatriation Hoard, the Trades and Labour Council, and tho Returned Soldiers' Association, in a difficulty which is seriously hindering the country employment of partially unlit soldiers, with a view to seeing whether the scope of chances of light country work oannot be widened by somo recognised expansion of present practice aud expectations. There are scores of country places tho owners of which would bo" u value of such work as these soldiers could do, but cannot pay full wages, especially at tho now and greatly advanced figures, for say half a day's work, with probably necessary rests at that. I am aware of tho crude notions held in town that- farmers, notwithstanding tho enormously inflated prices of all they consume., and require, the exceedingly lieavv taxation laid on both their laud and tlieir in-, comes from it, the heavily increased cost of labour, and tho difficulties of work through its shortage, are making liuge profits, and ought easily to afford almost unlimited pecuniary sacrifices to find room tor the men who have fought to keep their properties safe for them. We unfortunately know bettor, but wo have no voices to correct the'idea, and know pretty well that it would not be much use if we liiuL, cry well, let us, for the sake of pursuing ttio principal matter in hand, concede the city view for the moment, and assume any bad motive you like for the hesitation of country employers m sending for aiiinir wldier assistants. The fact of the hesiti ion remains; and if a soldier wants partial employment in the country, and does not get it, ho will not care much whether it is because the farmer won't, or because he ?i m Ai° r the Y ork — the P° iufc to him is that the farmer doesn't. Why? Well the' reason is because the farmer can't (or won't, if you prefer that) accept a burden which in many cases would actually be far more in hard cash than the State itself accepts when, it undertakers to pay the -weekly pension, these men have well earned. Work in tha country is not at all the same as work - in. town. A town resident can employ an unfit man for threo or four hours in his garden, or yard, and pay him for his time. But when a farmer employs a man for four hours he has to find the man board and lodging for twenty-four; and that is a very different tiling. As above mentioned, it in ay moan thaD the cost to the farmer, over and above the value of the labour, is actually more tnan the soldier's pension from the State. It is easy to say, "Well, pay him accord-' i?S y Jpve him what lie would earn for the same work in town." That is just what any of us are absolutely frightened even to suggest; and there is good and solid ground for the fright. We are frightened of what would be said of us

if we incurred the risk. The Trades and Labour Council, for instance, might' sayi look at that callous' skinflint of a farmer, with his enormous riches; he took a poor disabled soldier on his farm, and he's paving him a wretched fifteen or twenty shillings a week-about half the current rate. Post the fellow's name all over the country, and let him be held up to the' execration -lie deserves." Tho papers (some of them) would suggest- that the unfortunate farmer was trading /or his own profit on the fact of tho soldier having a pension for risking life and losing limb at the front Ihe Returned Soldiers' Association might ; \vell have something exceedingly unpleasant to say. Remarks at the Repatriation Board - by some comfortable city member mightbe equally hard to bear. In short, as I • have said, we are absolutely frightened to r;su: it. Wo claim to have done our share . in tiie war, and we don't want our homes and our families and ourselves to be held ■ up now to publio obloquy for alleged ; heartless stinginess in the times of peace—? perhaps by name in the public prints, and perhaps boycott in the recesses of the. offices of official Labour. We might never '/-nt. 1 - . wn ' however innocent. This is greatly restricting the offer of country employment to partially disabled soldiers. It is this fact—and a fact it really is—that la of importance: the neasons forit are much less, so, and if they are thought unworthy or disgraceful, that won't alter' the tact-. It can be got over; but only by-; a frank public recognition, emphatio and early, and as far as possible official, of, the principle of country pay in some kind ot reasonable relation to country work "' performed—we don't suggest an illiberal or closely calculated one: we really are not that sort.

I foresee one objection—quite a reasonable one—to such a recognition— namely.' that it would open the door to real exploitation should such in any Instance bo attempted. If that is a controlling objection, nothing can be done; but one may hope that, notwithstanding the constant gibing m the city, especially in Labour circles, at farmers and their ways, it is not' insuperable. At any rate, if it is, and if : tile frank, clear, and general recognition: here suggested is unattainable, and efficient safeguards against grasping exploitation impracticable, we must, I am afraid, remain as wo are—more than willing, but, as I have said, absolutely frightened, to offer hospitality with . light and healing work adequately paid, to the men to whom we owe so much. And please remember, thatmerely pitching into us about it won't help: the facts, or the men. Smooth assurances that we are mistaken in our fears also wont do. Wo are not mistaken.—l am,' et0 -> COUNTBT EIIPLOYEB.