NO CASH BONUS.

Taranaki Daily News, 17 June 1921, Page 4

NO CASH BONUS.

ARBITRATION COURT’S DECISIONRECONSIDERATION REFUSED. WOULD INCREASE UNEMPLOYMENT By T*legraph.~-Press Association. Palmerston N., Last Night. The judgment of the Arbitration Court in connection with the application for reconsideration of the cost-of-living pronouncement of May 14, 1921, has been given. It states: “We recognise that the withholding of the present cash bonus has been disappointing to workers. Wq realise, however, that we must take a broad national view of the whole question of wages, and we are satisfied to grant a cash bonus at the present time would be disadvantageous to the workers and the community It would at once increase unemployment to an alarming extent and seriously hamper industry. As we stated in our pronouncement, workers at the present rates are now receiving higher wages, measured in purchasing power, than for several months past. Further, when the Court made new awards it had continued it® practice of bringing rate® below the standard up to the presemt standard wherever possible, apart from the question of the bonus. This fact appears to have been lost sight of by those who contend that there has been no improvement in wages and conditions.

“The suggestion that the Court has not adhered to what is regarded as a promise is refuted by the obvious answer that the Court cannot control financial and economic conditions, but can only indicate the policy it wishes to carry out if circumstances permit. Without being unduly pessimistic, we are inclined to the view that the present depression has not yet reached the lowest point, and it behoves us to move warily. We cannot ignore the fact that in Europe and America wages have fallen, and our manufacturers have to face competition from those countries. We are forced to recognise that unemploy, ment is already in evidence in New Zealand, and any increase in labor costs is certain to be reflected in increased unemployment. The granting of even a portion of the withheld bonus would tax many industries beyond peaking point. Numbers of ma-nufacturos and traders are still keeping workers employed though their businesses are not showing a profit. The present application, which is in the nature of a test case, fa accordingly refused for the above reasons, and the Court adhere® to its original pronouncement.”