The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1911. RAILWAYMEN.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 64, 6 September 1911, Page 4

The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1911. RAILWAYMEN.

The grievances, real ami alleged, of tin; railwaymen of New Zealand will shortly be considered by Parliament, and will perhaps obtain greater consideration on account of the violent railway disturbances that have been so marked a feature, of the British industrial disturbances. It will be granted that the railway-men's work is absolutely essential to the comfort of the people of New Zealand. It will be conceded that position for position, grading the (nullifications of individuals, that the railwayman is as important a public servant as any other serving the State. It will be allowed that there are dissatisfied elements in tho railway service that would have been unaware of the disabilities of the service liad not acute comrades drawn pointed attention to them. Indeed, there is ample evidence that the unthinking railway servant would still have contented himself with the prevailing conditions bad not his more thoughtful colleagues put in the "spadework" for him. At the moment, therefore, the railway service generally is disturbed. There is no question that the .belief that individuals and the general collection of railwaymen that they are badly treated is general, and that the public suffers for the discontent. Xo man who is discontented is equal to his "job." F.xaminatiou o' the heads of the petition which will come before the Petitions Committee of the House of Representatives shows that one of the chief reasons for dissatisfaction (and a very natural reason, too), is that railwaymen are not paid, on promotion, at the same rate as the officer whose place was filled. The railwaymen show that exceptionally large reductions have been made in this respect. Perhaps the chief reason for the discontent is that officers in the Railway Department are not paid at the same rate as are the officers of the Post and Telegraph Department. The railwaymen compare the salaries of men of eacli department, showing how great is their own disadvantage. Specific, comparisons between men of both departments, however, are hardly a criterion. "We are not; sure whether the railwayman is competent to insist that, say, a post and telegraph engineer is not worth more salary than a Railway Department engineer, or vice versa. The fact that a telegraph engineer in a certain district gets £llOO a year while a Railway Department engineer obtains f.")2.'i is no proof that the latter is underpaid. Indeed, it is merely "beating the air" to drag in the higher salaried officials, who do not bother what price butter and meat and bread are as ammunition. We do not know exactly how the official mind regards, say, a stationinaster and a postmaster, whether, for instance, the authorities regard the postmaster as the

more important official. It seems evident that the authorities which pay n j postmaster £315 a year and the station- I master £225 believe that the former | holds the more responsible position. This is merely it matter for examination and , proof. The reasons for the larger j salaries paid to the Post and Telegraph I officials may be easy to explain, but at | anyrate the action of the railwaymcn in voicing specific grievances is commendable if only for the fact that it gives the heads of the railway department and the flovernment food for explanation. The point that railwaymcn engage in ari arduous and frequently dangerous occupation has, of course, to be considered, but' it is unfortunate that in no line of life is the dangerous task the most'highly remunerated. Any suggestion that because of the inadequate remuneration the men of the railway service might be disposed to be careless is to be deprecated, for wc still believe the precautions taken in the service to secure good men and the rigor of the discipline is sufficient to minimise any risk in this direction. Much of the discontent is probably perfectly justified from the point of view of the lesser paid and hard-worked members of the railway service. If it is found that it is necessary for the efficiency of the people's service and for the safety of the public that the conditions be improved, it is the duty of the flovernment to meet the requests of the great body of men who are so essential to the comfort and convenience of the public. Tn tlie meantime the comparisons between two distinct classes of public servants—the railwaymcn and the post and ifccScgmph men —is hardly revelant.