SHORTER WEEK?

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 272, 16 November 1936, Page 9

SHORTER WEEK?

FREEZING INDUSTRY. CASE FOR THE EMPLOYERS. COURT RESERVES DECISION. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) < WELLINGTON, Sunday. The hearing of the Dominion freezing workers' industrial dispute was continued in the Arbitration Court on Saturday, when the case for the emplovers was submitted to the Court. Outlining the general cRSe for the employers, Mr. C. G. Wilkins said that a 40-hour week would be inimical to the interests of the industry and the farming community generally. Parliament had recognised the special circumstances surrounding the industry in all branches by granting exemption from the hours provision of the Factories Amendment Act, and the Court had already granted extensions of hours to certain other industries, such as bacon factories, tanners and fellmongers. The disadvantages that the meat feezing industry would be under in disposing of its products overseas, in competition with other countries which were not involved in higher costs consequent upon a compulsory shorter working week, were obvious. The reaction would be felt not only by the freezing companies, but a.lso by the farming industry generally, Mr. Wilkins said. It would undoubtedly be faced with a relatively lower price for livestock as a result of increased costs of freezing and fellmongering. Increased Costs. Already the industry was faced with heavy additional costs under the new industrial legislation in the payment of workers for statutory holidays, the reversion to 1931 wage levels, the proposed basic wage and other factors, he continued. If the union's claim for a 40-hour week were successful, the direct increase in wage costs would be upward of £450,000, equivalent 011 the yearly output to an increase of |d per lb 011 all meat. A 40-hour week would mean delay in killing lambs in the rush season, and loss 011 condition in stock, especially fat lambs, he said. The loss would be a serious one. Any delay in killing lambs due to their being held over the week-end would involve a loss of at least 2/0 a head, and the position was aggravated by a certain amount of mortality in the holding yards. Expedition was also required in killing cattle for boning purposes, and in slaughtering bobby calves. Mr. Sill said the onus was 011 the employers to prove that a 40-hour week could not be worked in the industry. He submitted that the point liad not been proved, as both the prepared statement of Mr. Wilkins and the supporting evidence showed that 40 hours was exceeded only for a few weeks during the season. If the 1931 wage rate were not applied to the industry, it would be in danger of losing its position 011 the wages schedule of the Dominion. The Court reserved its decision.