THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1911. SHEARERS' ACCOMMODATION.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10401, 23 August 1911, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1911. SHEARERS' ACCOMMODATION.

The Shearers' Accommodation Amendment Act, which is mow before Parliament, contains one or two disagreeable features. The .most objectionable clause is that which irequires that all buildings provided for the accommodation of shearers shall jibe not less, than' 150 feet from the ! shearing shed, nor less than 900 feet from any killing yard or piggery, or other building in which aaiy operation o£ an, offensive, nature is carried on. Not only may this entail com■sideraibla expense in the removal of existing buildings; 'but it may land the innocent owner unwittingly into litigation. Whiat, for instance, is the definition of fan "operation, of an offensive nature ?" May this not be construed (to mean anything which offe<nid& the sensitive organs of the shearer? Without some clear .definition, the clause 'may impose enormous and' unnecessary hardship upon the owners. Another objectionable provision is. that a book of instructions on first aid ito the injured, and a proper and sufficiently supplied medicine, chest, shall 'be provided by •every employer for the convenience of 'shearers, tall medicine to be charged for at the nearest town rates, with the cost of carriage added, and in case of accident, medicine ito be .supplied free iby the employer. . One may be pardoned for asking what would be the value of a book of instructions on fiirst aid, without the services of a competent instructor? And what is to be considered ' 'a proper and ,sufficiently supplied medicine chest?" Would any medicine chest Ibe considered sufficiently tsu.pp-' ilied for all reasonable purposes without alcohol and poison? And how (would it Ibe possible, under the Poisons Act and licensing Act, for an owner to sell either of these medicines, even at "the nearest town rates," without laying himself open to a .prosecution? Moreover, why .should .am owner be compelled to provide inoediciine free of charge to la shearer in case of accident, when a .similar concession cannot ibe claimed from any other employer of labour? lne shearer who meets with an accident has his remedy under the Workers' Compensation for Accidents: Act, the same as any other worker. What more does be want? To what more is he equitably entit-

led? The shearer cannot be. blamed ifior (seeking protection against the careless iand selfish employers, of whom there are, fortunately, few in the Dominion. He must mot, however, make unreasonable demands upon, those employers w<ho are striving, by every .legitimate means, to make his work as easy and comfortable as is passible.