The Wanganui Chronicle. "Nulla Dies Sine Linea." MONDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1905. PERSECUTED EMPLOYERS AND UNLUCKY WORKERS.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XLIX, Issue 12628, 16 October 1905, Page 4

The Wanganui Chronicle. "Nulla Dies Sine Linea." MONDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1905. PERSECUTED EMPLOYERS AND UNLUCKY WORKERS.

There are many thoughtful people in the colony to-day who contend that the workers as a whole are no better off now, with the higher standard of wages, than they were before the' Arbitration Court came into existence. Some are inclined to go even further, and to assert that, "by reason of the increased cost of living and the restrictions imposed on the workers as well as on their employers, the'condition of the working man is in reality worse than it was before. ■> And those who. reason in this way are certainly not without facts upon which to base their opinions. Only on Saturday, last we heard of the case of an elderly carpenter, a steady, reliable mafiy who, while willing and anxious to v vfork, is debarred from obtaining employment because .those who would willingly employ, him at a wage which in his case would be reasonable and sufficient are prohibited by law from so "doing. The man himself recognises that he is not capalble of doing as much work as a man in 4ue prime, and he would gladly work for 8s; a day. But the award of the Arbitration Court forbids, and consequently the employers are in their'own interests bound to pass him by in favour of other men who acre able to earn the full wage. This man's condition has certainly not been improved. Another case, also a local one, is that of a young man. This young man, we are informed on good authority, is also steady., reliable, and anxious for work. He as capable of doing rough carpentry work, but is not What is known as a competent tradesman' In other words, he ranks, so far as technical ability is concerned, as an " improver," and is not capable of earning the full wage prescribed by the Court. He-recognises this, and is willing to work for a wage, proportionate to his worth. There is work for, liim to. dp, but before he can be employed &j»;3fafcsjb;. p^rfprce fe^jle; ■h,in&e^f r ito ths .jauthprities,.. ;H*S.t-98£? ,tp the Cierk;of>Awaa:ds, Weiiingi^r, It .beirig pointfed -out at;%he 'Same,4jm€ that; the local Oaripeniiers': '^Jniba• ;ha<3 feeeom© defiincL, ~TJie iSplyjoi th<d'{/le<ris •.of, Awards came duly. to l^nd onfgatu;^ day last, and is ti^?follows:— !■ ,-~\~Z* .-"• hMr-, : 1—.V,. :-,-.,■ I:-' ■■■;'■: :■■■"■:■' .'I ; ; ;;, Sirj-nfße Oarpent^rs':A)v^d-;(Cptihtry). I.beg to ■acknowledge ,receipt of "ycurs of yesterday's date. If : .the,-'Wa^gaftiui Employees' Union^is }. defunct.■> I suggest that the workman should odmmiinic&tc - with Mr G. H. Powell, the. Secretary ofthe .. 'Wellington -i Carpent-ers', -and Joiners'- Union (address, Trades'\Hall. Wellington), in order to obtain if pos^ 'sibl^'permksio'n^to 'iy-iork ''for le^1 "tHan 'the- niihimum ''vV'agel;;'!fajling ihls,'1 arid aftev : ailowing ?4";hours r' to' elapse,., 'he, oan take advahta^e^p'f 'the' other; alternative mentipned id Clian^ 5 oT ' ifoe Award and apply to the Stipendiary Magistrate at Wanganui to fii: the wage. ' '. • ' ' "■'..].'. The builder who is willing to give this man work is prepared to pay a wage that the man ihim©&lf recognises to be equivalent to the full value of his services, but before h© can start work he is expected to communicate with the secretary of a Wellington organisation, " in order to obtain if possible permission to work." These two local cases may be supplemented by a number of others which, were instanced by Mr. W. H. Field, the Secretary of the Employers' Association, in the counse of a recent interview with a representative of the "New Zealand Times." MiField dealt more particularly with the hardship of preference, and the illustrations which he supplied (and which we reprint in another column) ought to bo carefully perused by every one of our readers. It is difficult to find even a suggestion of equity in the application of the various- awards to the cases cited by Mr Field. Indeed, it is- not too much to say that the imposition of penalties in the cases cited, although no doubt rendered obligatory by the law, is an outrage upon common sense and a scandalous interference with the rights and liberties of both employers and employees. :