COAL DELIVERIES

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22459, 21 July 1938, Page 9

COAL DELIVERIES

TO THE EDITOR OF T3TB PEESS. Sir, —The comment of the officer of the Labour Department to my last letter in the main is very disappointing. My protest is that coal merchants are not even satisfied with the 44-1 hour week but are continually stretching it to well over 50 hours. This can be verified by a perusal of the timesheets, which are always open for inspection to officers of the department. If it were an exception, I should certainly report the offending firm, butj this encroachment is general in almost all coalyards. I still maintain that coalmen are compelled to expend too much energy in the ordinary hours without having to encroach upon the hours of darkness morning and night. I have just read the report of a speech made at the International Labour Conference at Geneva, by Mr James Thorn, M.P., and this is an extract from it: "Under the Shops and Offices Acts, a 44-hour week was fixed, and overtime was virtually prohibited for both males and females. It is only permitted in special circumstances like stocktaking." Now I»want to know from the department if this statement is correct and, if so, why an attempt has not been made to have it enforced. I also want to know what the term the definite closing time means and why men are compelled to work on after the premises are closed, even though they have completed their 44-hours. The coalmen pay dole and wages tax to minimise the evils of unemployment, and are compelled to work overtime and keep men out of work. What a farce! That a non-perishable commodity like coal should have to be delivered with the speed and urgency of a doctor or ambulance to a dying patient is simply ridiculous. The time is long overdue when a national inquiry should be made into this cumbersome, expensive and obsolete system of coal distribution, which is unnecessarily wearing the lives out of the men, and seriously hampering .the development of the coalmining industry of this country.—Yours, etc., HUMANITY. July 18, 1938. [Commenting on this letter, the Officer in Charge of the Labour Department (Mr R. T. Bailey) said that the legal position was correctly set out in his previous answer. If the correspondent had any definite information to support his allegation the department was prepared to make investigations.]