EXTRA PAYMENT FOR SHIFTS

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23349, 7 June 1941, Page 3

EXTRA PAYMENT FOR SHIFTS

♦ WOOLLEN WORKERS’ WAGES ACTION FOR COURT OF APPEAL Payment of shift workers in the woollen industrv may be affected by the decision in an action which was moved yesterday by Mr Justice NoTthcroft from the Supreme Court to the Court of Appeal for argument and judgment. The case, which was described as a test, devolves upon an interpretation of the Woollen Mills Labour Legislation Suspension Order of June, 1940. The plaintiff was John Currie Gibson, who from Kaiapoi Woollen Manufacturing Company, Ltd., claimed £26 Bs, being payment for 176 shifts, from June 20, 1940, to February 20, 1941, at 3s a shift, payable to him in addition to his ordinary wages as a male adult worker employed on shiftwork under and by virtue of the provisions of the Woollen Mills Labour Legislation Suspension Order, 1940. Mr K. G. Archer appeared for plaintiff, and Mr F. C. Spratt (Wellington) and with him Mr C. H. Upham, for the company. After evidence was heard, counsel for both sides moved for judgment. The motions were moved by his Honour to the Court of Appeal for argument and judgment. In opening his case, Mr Archer said that it had been agreed among counsel to ask that the case be moved to the Court of Appeal. His Honour replied that whether counsel made the request or not, it was his duty to remove the case to the Full Court or the Court of Appeal. There was nothing more to be dona by the Supreme Court than to take evidence for the purposes of a record and transmit the record to the higher Court.

When later Mr Spratt asked for some direction on the question of the cost of preparing the printed documents for the Appeal Court, his Honour remarked that he would be no doubt wrong in assuming that Gibson was the real plaintiff. Obviously his union was behind the action. Mr Spratt agreed that it was really an action between two large organisations. Plaintiff’s Evidence Gibson, in evidence, said he was a woollen mills employee, of Kaiapoi, and had been an employee of the Kaiapoi Woollen Manufacturing Company, Ltd., from June 20, 1940, to February 20. 1941, when he was employed as a weaver in the weaving flat, and was looking after two looms. His daily hours were from 8 a.m.- to 5 p.m., with one hour off, and during the whole of the period he worked those hours. A night shift worked from 5 p.m. to 1.30 a.m., when another worker operated plaintiff’s looms, doing exactly the same work. During the period, plaintiff worked about 160 shifts. After the emergency order came into force, the night shift workers got 3s a shift extra, but plaintiff did not get any extra. The shifts were not rotated. Plaintiff was on piece work, but earned no more than the award rate, and no extra for shift work. To Mr Spratt plaintiff said that the looms he worked were numbered 2 and 3, and were in that part of the building where most of the company s looms were situated. In another pan of the building was another bank of 18 looms, where weaving was done at night. Some of the time the looms worked by plaintiff were worked at night also, but he could not say when. Edward Clement Harper, an employee of the defendant company, and secretary of the Woollen Mills Employees’ Industrial Union for the Canterbury district, said he was not employed by the company between June 20, 1940, and February 20, 1941, but was well acquainted with the work going on at Kaiapoi and elsewhere, and knew that two shifts were being worked. The night shift was probably smaller than the day shift . The award covered all mills in New Zealand, whether: they ; pypdjiced woven or knitted fabrics or both. William Reynolds Carey, general manager of the company, said that knitted goods and hosiery were made at Radley, woollen and worsted goods at Kaiapoi, and garments at factories in Christchurch. Up.till June, 1940, no extended hours were worked at Kaiapoi, but certain preparatory work was done, because of the heavier weights of the fabrics required for the armed forces. Some weaving was done on a so-called night shift by a small number of workers on a bank of looms set aside for the purpose. Minister’s Request

In 1938, at the request of the Minister for Labour, witness employed certain unskilled men who had before then been on Scheme 13. Their work was done on the special bank of looms which was really being operated as a school for learners. The looms were worked by electricity at night and steam by day. The other looms were worked, by steam, including the ones operattll by Gibson, but steam was not used H night. , ~ The mill was not balanced for double time mainly because the scouring and drying processes prevented extended work. Apart from the Minister’s request there was no reason for starting on night shift in 1938, when there was in fact a steep business recession. The provision in the order covering extra payment for night work would apply only to weavers in the Kaiapoi mill. Whatever the reason, night work was started in 1938 and ever since night workers had been employed, witness said to Mr Archer. The company was not busy in 1938, but it was in 1940, because during the war the company had substantial defence orders. As far as he was aware no other machines than those in the special bank of looms had been used at night. If the company had been able to secure the services of experienced female weavers it could well have done with the product of their work. The number of workers at Kaiapoi had been increased since the war began, but the increase was limited by the number of skilled workers available. Also, before the war the staff was 100 to 150 below standard, but that deficiency had been overtaken and there were now more than 200 more employees than before the war.

Only about half the looms were worked at Kaiapoi before the war, but workers were nevertheless taken _ on at the Government's request. Night work other than weaving was being done at present because the mill was busy. Some night workers were employed before 1940 if a section of the mill happened to be busy. George Greenwood, manager of the company’s Kaiapoi mill, produced a chart showing how the capacity of the scouring and drying machinery limited the whole output of the mill, and showing also the number of male and female workers, and the amount of night work done in every department. Electricity Used ’ Plaintiff worked on looms which were not among the special battery of 18 looms. The 18 looms were driven by electricity, so that there would be no need to run the main steam engine. The looms on which Gibson worked were not worked at night. The 18 looihs were set apart for learners at night, and during the day were worked by skilled female workers, who complained of the state the looms were in when they took them over in the morning. The complaint was met by the payment to the female workers of a higher piece rate, which was not paid to other workers. The learners earned about 38s a week, but were paid the award rate of £4 18s 4d a week. Their work was mainly strong, coarse, and plain, because they could not have been given finer work. For about nine days from February 12. 1941, Gibson worked at night in the woollen spinning department and was paid accordingly. . ~ .. . ~ „ To Mr Archer witness said that the, chart referred to the position as at ■ July 7. 1940, and was made up by witness about a fortnight ago. Sixteen |

learners used tfie bank of 18 machines. They did not arrive in a body, but arrived at different times from 1938 onward. There were no vacant looms available for the learners in the t day time at the time the night work was started. 'At first there was one night shift only, from 5 p.m. till 1.30 a.m., but within two weeks there was a second shift, from ! a.m, till 8.30 a.m. At that time no women were employed at night, but in October, 1940, women were employed at night to work some of the 18 looms. Approximately 40 of the 200 or so extra workers taken on during the war were weavers, but it had not been necessary to work more than the 18 looms at night until recently when another six looms were brought on. At the date of the chart, when some of the 16 men on the special bank of loms had been about two years In the factory, their earnings were only from 38s to £2 a week. They were carrying out work usually done by females, and were not entitled to the 3s extra mentioned in the order. When they became eligible for the allowance, most of them were transferred to other departments. To Mr Upham, witness said that the learners were not constantly with the company. Some of them were freezing workers who applied for work during the off season and left the mill when the freezing works reopened. Martin Rocke O’Shea, of Wellington, co-ordination officer of the New Zealand Woollen Mill Owners’ Association, consisting of all the woollen mills in New Zealand except one, said part of his work was the allocation among the mills of Government contracts. He was told by Mr Moston, Under-Secre-tary for Labour, in June, 1940, that an order on shift work in woollen factories was to be issued by the Government. He was not shown the draft order, but left Mr Moston with no doubt about the mills’ objection. At a conference with the Hon. P. C. Webb later, the position of trainees was discussed and possible anomalies pointed out. To Mr Archer, witness said that the Government asked for the fullest possible production of all goods, but Government orders were for fixed amounts. The mills were busy, and were working night shifts because of the amount' of work in hand.