FREEZING WORKS

Press, Volume LXXXI, Issue 24742, 6 December 1945, Page 4

FREEZING WORKS

Provision for 40 Hour Week

KEEN DISCUSSION ON BILL

(From Our Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, Dec. 5.

Opposition members vigorously criticised some of the provisions of the Factories Amendment Bill in the House of Representatives this evening, but the bill was passed without a division. The Government claimed that employees of freezing works and dairy factories should have the five-day week like other workers. The Opposition, however, contended that this legislation should, not be introduced after the freezing works' season had started, that it was impracticable to work a 40-hour. week at some times of the year in these factories, and that information should be given how the extra cost, estimated at £650,000 a year, was to be met. Moving the second reading of the bill, the Acting-Minister of Labour (the Hon. J. O'Brien) said that 13,000 of the 18,000 workers not enjoying a 40-hour week were in the freezing industry. Consideration had been given the question whether the industry could carry on, and this had given the Government some concern. The Government had discussed the matter.with representatives of the workers and the industry, and then asked them to talk it over among themselves, but unfortunately the employers said they did not want to talk about it, and that the 40-hour week would not work. It had been said that the industry had not been given an opportunity .to consider the legislation, but he did not believe there was an employer who did not consider that the bill would be introduced. He had been assured that in times of crisis slaughtermen would work on Saturday mornings if they were asked to, although they had actualy not done so- for a long time. An Opposition member: Then the bill is simply to increase wages. Mr O'Brien said if a freezing worker worked the same hours as he did now his extra pay would be 6s a week, and that might be adjusted. Mr M. H. Oram (Opposition, Manawatu): How will it be adjusted? Mr O'Brien said if employers liked to approach the Arbitration Court they might get an adjustment.

"Immense Cost" The Hon. A. Hamilton (Opposition, Wallace) said the bill would so disrupt one of the most important industries in New Zealand that it would take some time to get. over the bill's effects, and would cost the country an immense amount of money. Production and the quality of stock would be reduced. An ordinary factory could close at 5 p.m. on Friday and nothing would suffer, but that could not be done in a freezing works. A good number of men had to work on Saturdays. The Government just did not seem to care how much it disrupted the industry. If the Minister supported the 40-hour week why did he not make it universal, and include farm workers?

There would be great difficulty in getting fat lambs into the freezing works, and if milk lambs particularly could not be killed when ready tner" would be a distinct loss. For the Minister to come along with this bill after the season had begun meant that great difficulties would have ,to be overcome.

Mr Hamilton said the freezing companies estimated the cost of the bill would be an additional £664,000 a year, and the Stabilisation Commission estimated up to £750,000 a year. The Labour Department's estimate was £300,000. If all the work was done on five days a week, who was going to find that extra amount? The freezing companies could not find it because they were already receiving a subsidy of £900,000 a year. Wculd the farmers find the extra cost? Organisation of Industry Mr C. H. Chapman (Government, Wellington North) said the industry should be organised to make provision for a 40-hour week. The industry could be so organised that Saturday morning work could be reduced to a minimum.

The Prime Minister (the Rt. Hon. P. Fraser): Not in the rush of the season.

Mr Chapman: I understand the men themselves have undertaken to work on Saturday mornings in rush seasons. Mr Fraser That is right. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr S. G. Holland) said the bill's purpose was twofold. First, it sought to establish in certain industries a five-day week; second, in those industries where Saturday morning work was unavoidable, there would be an increase of something like 40 per cent, in the wages of those working in those industries on Saturday morning. Mr Holland protested that a measure, haying far-reaching repercussion* on primary industry should not be forced through the House by weight of numbers, without any time being given for the measure to be considered by branch organisations of both workers and employers, as was desirable. HoUa nd said the completion of 40 hours merely marked a point beyond which workers must receive a ?v! gh !£ ,5 ate of remuneration. When the 40-hour week was introduced it was designed to spread work and reduce unemployment, but to-day when there was a shortage of workers its object was to increase the reward of those already in employment. -Mr Holland said if the five-day week were insisted on it would be an utter disaster for the primary, industry of the Dominion, because it was a physical impossibility for existing works to handle all the stock in five days. If a five-day week were \observed less stock would be killed. Inducement to Workers Mr Fraser said that if any industry deserved special terms and a special inducement to workers it was the freezing industry. The whole question was a serious and'important one, but it could not be disposed of by rampaging speeches on the one hand and unfounded optimism on the other. The Opposition said they favoured a 40hour week and adequate wages. When adequate wages were given to the mass of workers what inducement was there to workers to go into disagreeable occupations such as the freezing industry. If workers were not retained in the freezing works the country would face ruin. Mr Fraser said on the evidence he had he did not think the industry could run satisfactorily at its peak on a 40-hour week, particularly when milk lambs were coming forward, but he believed there would not be great difficulty otherwise. Freezing workers had done a good job during the war. Was it unnatural that they aspired to th: same conditions as obtained in other industries. If they could not work a short week, how else could It be made up to them except by overtime.

The Opposition claimed that under the bill workers in the industry were to get the same money for a 40-hour week as they now received for 44 hours, but the bill did not say that. It rested with the Court whether workers received it or not, after taking all factors into consideration. It was impossible to have certain industrieo isolated and handicapped in comparison with other industries.

Mr W. J. Poison (Opposition, Stratford) said he hoped the Prime Minister was right in saying that slaughtermen would kill on Saturdays—it would be a solution, though a costly one—but all the evidence was against it. Slaughtermen said they would not work overtime, and they regarded 40 hours as sufficient. Members of'the Government appeared to enjoy the embarrassment of farmers. Was it their deliberate intention to make it impossible to carry on the farming operations of the country. , Mr O'Brien, replying, said that if no increase in wage rates were granted the extra cost of overtime on Saturday morning would, according to the estimates of both the Labour Department and the Stabilisation Commission, be only between £IOO,OOO and £IIO,OOO. He was satisfied that the bill would not cause any inconvenience of any consequence to the industry.