RESTRICTION OF OVERTIME.

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20910, 18 July 1933, Page 10

RESTRICTION OF OVERTIME.

THE COUNCIL'S ATTITUDE

AFFIRMATION OF GENERAL PRINCIPLE. Although it agreed to the principle of discouraging overtime among its employees, the Christchurch City Council, at its meeting last evening, decided against a set of conditions to govern compensation for overtime submitted in a motion from Cr. T. Andrews. In discussion it was maintained by Labour councillors that the conditions proposed would mean that employees would be victimised, and that they were contrary to the principles of awards of the Arbitration Court. In accordance with his notice of motion, Cr. T. Andrews moved:— "That all overtime with the Christchurch City Counoil employees be discouraged. "That all overtime be compensated by taking the equivalent time off during ordinary working hours. "That any employee working under an award of the court is to have time off equal to the award rate, e.g., two hours overtime at time and a half rates to be equal to three hours of! in ordinary time, and so on. "That all overtime be adjusted and finalised each calendar month and not to accumulate. "That no overtime is to be part of any annual leave. "That the average ordinary week's work is not to exceed 44 hours, except where an awexd alters the hours. "Should the above conflict with any award of the court, a variation of the award to be sought in terms of the above. "That any employee receiving a salary of £260 per annum (or over) is not to be included in the above, and is not entitled to any adjustment or payment for overtime."

Distributing Work. Explaining his motion, Cr. Andrews said he desired to have the hours of labour more evenly distributed. The world's leaders Jiad recently been speaking in favour of shorter hours of labour. He contended that there was need to consider the human aspect. No man at the present time had the right to work more than 44 hours a week, and if he did he should be given that time off, and should not be paid for it. This principle should apply to the employees of the council. Referring to the last clause of his motion, proposing that employees receiving a salary of £260 a year or more should not be entitled to any adjustment or payment for overtime, Cr. T. Andrews said he had investigated the number of council employees receiving this wage. He had found that 37 inside workers and 74 outside workers received between £260 and £299 a year, while 67 inside workers and 30 outside workers received more than £3OO a year. This meant that 208 employees received more than £5 a week. Cr. E. H. Andrews said that not many of these inside workers received overtime payment. Possibilities of Scheme.

Cr. J. Beanland seconded the motion. The works committee had frequently been reproached with the amount of the council's overtime payments, but unfortunately certain work had to be done at hours which necessitated such payments. There were difficulties, but it might be possible to make some arrange]..onts by which time oft in the day could be given instead of overtime pay. If the difficulties could be overcome, the council could be saved about £7OO a year. The Mayor (Mr D. G. Sullivan, M.P.): But this motion would make it possible to work a man eight hours over a spread of 14 hours. Cr. Beanland: I don't think that is intended, though the present wording might make it possible. The best thing would be for the works committee and other committees concerned to consider the proposals, and to see if something workable could be devised. Cr. M. E. Lyons said that the general principle of discouraging overtime had been affirmed by the council before, I but the details needed considerable care in drafting, and should, he thought, be referred to the works committee. Dividing the .Motion. Cr. A. E. Armstrong said that it was to be hoped that these clauses did not mean that employees would be made to do in 44 hours the work at present done in those hours plus overtime.

The first part of the motion, "That all overtime with Christchurch City Council employees be discouraged," was put separately and was carried. The Mayor said he was entirely opposed to the remaining clauses, as they were against the principles of all awards. Cr. Lyons moved that the remaining clauses should be referred to the works committee, with the addition of the chairmen of the reserves committee and the electricity committee, for a report. Crs. J. S. Barnett and Mabel Hov/ard opposed this motion, claiming that the purpose behind these clauses was contrary to all awards of the court. Their adoption would mean exactly the opposite of making for more humane conditions, for they would make it possible to work a man any hours at all with compensation at the convenience of employers. Cr. F. T. Evans said that the whole ground had been gone over before. He thought it would be waste of time to refer the remaining clauses to the committee. The motion, when put, was lost on the voices.