Personal Aggrandisement .... And

Fiji Sugar Industry Report

Personal Aggrandisement ... And Remote Control are Among Problems

The Board set up by the Governor of Fiji in May to inquire into the sugar industry, and particularly sugar-industry wages, laboured for many weeks in the Colony and has now brought forth a recommended rise of 3d per hour. (Sugar workers’ representatives had asked for a rise of 1/7 per hour.)

WITH one member of the fourman Board dissenting, the recommendations published August 1 were for an increase of 3d per

houTon f Semin™rate of ?he

workers involved, and no change in the existing 44-hour working week.

The workers had sought an increase from 1/5 to 3/- per hour and a reduction of hours to 40 — though the latter demand was not strongly o. g. cISS"’ M? E ’p Q K M #hin“' Mr. gatu M K N K M T CF e^M L A LB it set up as the result of a dispute between the employer, Colonial Sugar Refining Company Limited, and one section of the sugar industry workers, Fiji Sugar Industry Employees’ Association.

The Board had no power to fix wages or make any award; its function was simply to make recommendations. Presumably the

Governor will now recommend that both parties again meet and try reach an agreement on the basis of these recommendations.

The^dissenting.vote was cast by Mr. Bhmdi—a company^director^and business man by profession and an Indian by race, who found| increase of Bd., not 3d., was called for. - Vll -_ Hicap-rppment The grounds of h s

pSS

/shed ’ report which occupies 50 it b^ f b 9 hour relations in the history £ ° * Fiji sugar industry, . t L. R i amp Fixing The Blame The Board found that much of th cause of the recent unrest in the sect i on 0 f the industry involved (Over)

—the mill workers—could be at tributed to the Association’s General President, Mr. B. D. Lakshman, whose “motives ... seem to have been personal aggrandisement rather than the advancement and improvement of the conditions and status of the workers”.

But this was only one of several causes, according to the report, not all of which rested with the em ployees. The report says, for ex ample, “. . . Industrial unrest is not likely to be remedied, but rather preserved, if the present remote control from the Company’s Head Office (in Sydney) is not eased.”

One of the principal points of the Association’s submissions demon strating a totally inadequate mini mum wage, was a cost of living figure based on the cost of main taining an Indian prisoner in a local gaol. The Government figures showed this to be £l/6/9 per week.

The Board offered no comment on the validity or otherwise of these Government figures, or the method of arriving at a family rate (mul tiplying it by 4i) but merely points out that evidence was submitted to show that this prison ration was “of higher calorific value than the average worker required”, and re ferred, too, to the evidence of a Medical Department witness that an adequate diet for a family of five could, at the present time, be produced for only £2/16/- per week.

The Board rejected the CSR sub mission that a basic minimum wage for the Colony should be fixed by a Government-appointed committee, and considered that the present wage negotiating machinery was satisfactory under the circum stances existing in Fiji.

The Board rejected the establish ment of any formula for the fixing of wages, with Mr. Bhindi dis senting on this question.

The Board also rejected any pro fit sharing plan: “. . . We feel that no serious thought was given to the difficulties of such a proposal or the negligible results which would follow for the lower paid workers.

In any event it is difficult to see how it could possibly be applied to workers in the Colony ... by a Company which has a wide variety of establishments in Australia and New Zealand besides its interests in Fiji. The system of output bonus which is in operation at the various mills is a simple, easily understood and direct method of rewarding in creased effort.”

Ability to Pay

With Mr. Bhindi again dissent ing, the Board rejected the idea that the basic needs of the worker should have any bearing on the matter of fixing a minimum wage.

(Continued on page 147)

lindi, in giving his reasons int said: “I agree that a >asis would be unduly re but nevertheless my con i fair and reasonable wage , worker should at least be irovide for himself and his •om his wages for a reason tiber of hours.” Mr. Bhindi rom the Universal Declara- Human Right, Articles 23, 6 to support his contention, lindi also presented a num ibles—in some of which his ;ic appears to be slightly in mgh to no important degree, i he set out his calculation ost of maintaining an aver-