P. AND T. UNREST.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3505, 7 June 1920, Page 2

P. AND T. UNREST.

‘ STATELWENT BY POSTl\lAS’l‘]3]Rl G'l:‘l\' ER AL. I .-'~\l,'(‘l\:l.-\..\il)’ June .I._ f 'l'llre.~:t in the _l’o.<t anal '[,‘(\l¢‘\‘;-1--‘»_},‘., {Department was the ..~:ul)ject of 5(_,1-mt :I'Cll)a!‘l{.\' by the Postznaster-Genernl, :He said that the otiici-.ll.<’_ claims ‘would be dealt with as soon as mmisidcration of the railwaynlcn's case ‘had been concluded. Referring mom ,particularly to the demand by many Imenibers of the P. and T. Se;-V-‘me who went to the war as active coinbattants to be placed on‘ an equal footing‘ with others who joined the postal and signalling corps, and in consequence lreceived( {half civilian pay, the Minister said he sympathised with those who had not received Jhalf-pay. It was a very unfair thing to make this difference, and obviously the grant of half-pay’ to one section of the service and not to l the other should not have been made. ‘>"lt, was done, and thel'e is an end of it, so far as I am concerned,"'s-aid Mr Coates. “I would be pleased to ‘place all men on an equal footing, but the Government has considered ‘the matter on several occasions, and the position is that we cannot make the concession. Personally_, I would certainly like to see those men who fought in the ranks get half civil pay, because I think they deserve it more than the men who went away with_ the Postal Corps—that is, having regard to the difference in their duties. I say this as a matter of principle, not that I agree with the granting‘ of civil pay‘ in the first instance.”