THE FREEZING AWARD.

Wairarapa Age, 9 March 1927, Page 5

THE FREEZING AWARD.

FARMERS AND THE COURT. (To the Editor.) Sir, — As your leader of to-day remarks, the decision of the Arbitration Court has caused widespread dissatisfaction and Anxiety amongst the farming community. Personally, I feel that responsibility for the present rise ; resrs with the freezing companies. They held a strong hand and played rottenly and let their partners—the farmers—down badly—and that’s that. Now back to the Arbitration Court. It seems nothing less than stupid or cantankerous of the Court to grant a rise of wages when unemployment is prevalent and likely to become much worse this coming winter. It is a good thing for us farmers that the Arbitration Court’s operations have not extended to our permanent farm workers; and we must stand solidly together and fight tooth and nail against its vicious influence. Farm workers, realising the present position of the industry, are accepting a considerable reduction in wages and doing it willingly. The Court has outlived its usefulness. It is biased in favour of the worker. It builds up a standard of living for the employee and throws down the standard of living of the employer or working farmer. It causes the increased wages to be paid out of capital in case of the farmer, and if he has no capital he goes out. It has failed to bring industrial peace. It is openly flouted by the unions, as witness the recent freezing trouble. What is responsible for the parlous position of the timber industry to-day?—The Arbitration Court. What is responsible for the high cost of living?—The Court every time. Who is the Court’s one man?— Mr. Justice Frazer. He has twitted the farmers’ organisations with trying to influence the Court. We know how useless that is; we are out to get rid of it as quickly as passible. Is it fair to criticise our action and make no comment bn the action of the other party to the dispute in defying the award of the Court? Mr. Justice Frazer in an apologetic sort of way emphasised the smallness of the increase on the individual farmer; but I would like to tell him that collectively it would mean a>good many days’ work for the unemployed this winter. What we desire in this country is not highly paid work for a few, but wqrk for everybody. It is borne in on me that Mr. Justice Frazer has no couception of the difficulty that the bulk of the farmers have to make ends meet. Does he realise what a huge extra burden the man on the land is carrying in increased interest on mortgages which have nearly all had to be renewed during the last five years? I say to the Arbitration Court: “Hands off the farming industry,” and to the farmers I say: “Get rid of this encumbrance and menace or it will get rid of most of us.” Trusting I have not encroached too much on your valuable space and thanking you in anticipation.—l am, etc., A. ROSS. Longbush, March 7.