Untitled

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 1, Issue 169, 10 March 1932, Page 6

"FAIRER GO."

(To the Editor). Sir, — The public of Rotorua are seemingly ignorant of the conditions under which the local unemployed workers exist. These conditions, sir, are purely local and so far as the writer can ascertain apply nowhere else in New Zealand. At the present time an ever-in-creasing number of men are suffering reductions in their so-called sustenanee allowance in spite of the fact that they must work five days per week to earn it. When the five-day week was introduced the men were told that they would be paid the maximum rates of pay allowed by the Unemployment Act, for at least two months. They were informed at the same time that the alternative to the adoption of the five-day week was a large reduction in the district's allocation. Both the Unemployment Committee _ and the men very wisely decided to accept the 40-hour week on those conditions. Now, however, the situation is entirely changed and reductions of from 2s 6d to £1 are being made in the rates of pay, but the time to be worked remains the same. In my humble opinion the old system should be reverted to, and both time and pay rationed, as now more than ever, the men Tequire the extra time in which to look for work to augment their far too meagre in-

comes. In regard to the unfair system of allocating the reductions, referred to by your eorrespondent "Fair Go," may I say that on applying to the postmaster for reasons for the reductions in particular cases the men are told that they are paying little or no rent. And a very good reason, too, were it not for the fact that it does not apply in every case. For instance, in the dosshouse on Whaka Road live about a dozen single men receiving 18s per week for three weeks in the month. Each man pays 10s per week for full board and lodging for three weeks and nothing on the stand-down week. A little mental arithmetic will show that each man has a surplus of 8s pfer week or 24s per month, a much larger surplus, by the way, than can be reckoned on by any married relief worker. On these figures, sir, it must be obvious that no rent is paid by these men, as it is only the culinary economy of the cook that keens thp, nrvfrnal board within those bounds.

While the writer has no wish that these men should lose even part of their allowance, the fact remains that the postmaster's 'rent excuse' does not apply to everybody. In the hope that this letter will excite a little sympathy if not something more practiT O YYl DT O

Rotorua, 9/3/32.