LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 691, 16 December 1909, Page 3

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

THE LAUNDRY QUESTION. Sir,-My attention has'been drawn to a sum: , mary appearing in the public pross of certain proposed, amendments in the Factories Act relating to laundries; and, as the matter is of considerable importance, < I trust' you will spacQ , for f ou,e lh °re°o- Tho : P„Zf. am f'«liuenKs are the outcome of anagi,!ri. •■f Ce fK tly -f t on 'foot by the steam laundries of the city, ostensibly for the purpose ?L,?r'? ns ,. tho Chines » laup'dry-keepefof an unduo advantago under the existing law, which )to ,L? 0 - n ? mplo3 " ment ofi f™ l " l * lab 0 1"'; ""itli - «fm^ n C , IOUS ',f?, ves th «'n'ovcr their European a l, « When the; agitation was first fn ™r th , e , E,lr o£*an hand-laundries of the city Jt\f3 ? . ¥?? ? othl >'s ° f and were not conSrwWf?°« ''SK*" the matter obtaining ?™.„S J ' thatT the propose! amendmont ot the law would strike them quite ™„fr r<! i r M lt; lvouW strike- the Chincscnatnolj, to prevent all, males, whether employers or employees, from working during such. Hours as female employees are bv tho existing law prohibited from working. Consequently, a petition was drawn up for prcsenta--tion to^ the Minister, and signed by tho majority ot the hand laundry-keepers, showing that wlWllf amemim cnt would operate to tho beneht of tho steam laundries, but to tho disadvantage of tho European hand laundries, and or tho general public, by,compelling the hand laundries to refuse much personal work . for which they wore better; adapted than tho steam ! aun F le . s ;.. ™ u 's petition was never presented to tho Minister, because, on its-contents becoming known to the promoters, of ; the alleged anti-Chinese movement, ah attempt was made to get the European, laundries to"' present a united tront on the Chinese'question. An agreement was come to on the understanding; that Jiuropoan employers should not bo restricted as to their personal labour, and-to cops with tho . partnership pretence alleged to be put. forward by the Chmese-Hbat not more than two ma(es, j employers or otherwise, should bo allowed to. work extra hours in "any one laundry. Xtvnow appears <that> the agreement come to has been departed from, and that the steam laundry proprietors, having-succeeded in getting ono or two of tho European hand laundry proprietors to form an association with them, have also succeeded in getting the Government to promote the very legislation which the Europoan hand laundries objected to as inimical to their interests; for, in addition to female and l)0T labour boing already' very severely re. stricted, it is now proposed to enact that "no male oyer sixteen years of ago shall be allowed to work more than forty-oight hours a week." By this enactment hand-laundry proprietorswhoso only hope of holding their own as against the :. speed facilities possessed by the steam laundries depends upon their being able to devote their whole time to their work—would not only, bo prevented ■ from employing any nialo labour during extra hours, but would bo dist tmctly prohibited from:.so working themselves. It may perhaps be wntonded-that .'the prohibition is not intended to apply.to employers, but only to employees, inasmuch as in a subsequent part of "tho clause the words "any .such employee" are used: but, if this bo so, why docs the first part of tho section say expressly "No male, over 'sixteen," instead of "No male employee over sixteen"? ftp. ordinarily careful law draftsman would hnvo expressed himself so ambiguously, and I can only conclude that, unless the. wordemployee" has been inadvertently omitted by the press writer from tho first part'of tho section, a very gross and arbitrary infringement of tho rights of employers is intended.I bpeakmg gcnereJly, the restrictions of ; tho ' existing law with regard to female labour have very little effect upon ..the steam laundries. ■ Such, however, is not the case with -the hand laundries. Nearly the whole of the .workers are females, who are practically prohibited from- working overtime, and the experience of the hand-laundry proprietors generally has shown them that, with the existing prices, and rates of pay, thev must " sccuro ■ the largest possible output if they would; mako even" a treasonable living. To secure this they , find it essential that the day-staff not bo at any time kept waiting for work, but be fully employed. Thus a great deal of work,' preliminary and otherwise, ;must bo; done,: at other than the ordinary working hours, and by tho'employer or employers, malo- or female, and bv such male help as may be obtainable. IS some ; hand-laundries,; owing to the absence of male' ' ■m^l ir 't a i Kl , 10 wstrictioiis .upon the employe ment of female labour, bdth tho" washers" and ' divi^ OU t?: s "T- Mb; parted of-each dar duimg tho ordinary working hours; thusnot only causing pecuniary loss both to the'worker and tho employer, but also. in . the matter of wE "pi a!c s satisfactory condition, of the vroik; The restriction.of hours imposed by the - 'w! n i laW "Po^^alo'labour was so iraposed to protect the weak;-'.but now, it anpears, adult male labour-in.: thelaundry business alone, however-% tobc similarly ret T 'ti %'rt c . d ' *» .order, professedly nrdlv tl,r v ? f ? UMtt WjAs'shWiflThS? hardly the existing ..restrictions of the law press upon the.female worker, I may mention that, n necessitous cases, whore an employer has found an occasional day's'work for women only casually employed, the latter' prevented from obtaining -, tho full benefit of rL t?? 1 ' S ° rC ?' in ««d: of all: tho money they couh earn, because.they must not work in prohibited. hours.-I am, etc., >■. •"■■■•■ ...JAS. CAKSOK (For-Mrs. James's laundry.) NEW ZEALAND'S FINANCES, 'Tn^nr'w 1 ? 6KINIOK has mildl ? ; advised Sir J P^„ ; J a T d ' on ™W, occasions, to,take a pull and slow down, or else {it hinted) he Tsir Joseph) m,ght possibly,get. into troubled 4at' ers. I, on. the other hand,- spoko straieht o«V w n « I "f S! ! ld , ,;h 5 t , h0 ' w " not%Sy"™ g danger '™L ¥ \ lad 'i ro «Elit New.ZeMnd:to g the '■' Hm e „V f ( A a - nk ? lptc i v - -' New at the tune that Sir Joseph made his spasmodic and , outrageous oifer of two, or even four" millions" i!S ey a v. S a i ßift Britain, and vJSi-f' W up, i TWs ''as been proved beyond the.shadow of a> doubt by tho enormous' increase m taxation. -At thaftime the Gov' crnment authorised a.paltry. loan of JE3OO to a struggling little towriihip 'in'the KngCoun" c r „ y f n ? n f tho , fatll of"WhicTi the, Town S 'Board called for tenders'for-.-worljs up to the full , amount of the promised-loan. A tender was , accepted, and the work'completed, and so far ;■ as I know- the board-in question have done ,- their best to get the money. Tho Departmental , answer has always forward money ' IL? t7 da 5- s - Audyet in the face of the fact ~ that.tho country has no money to meet such ; engagements, tho Government has impudently . squeezed into the..Estimates pi sum- of -,£«lo'a p year for a financial adviser. Ward's - Follv , would be a good .name for tho 'Dreadnought - i am, etc., ' ~.,.-; ~,., .~. .? I ,; .-'.' OLD;NEW.. ZEALANDER NEW ZEALANp 'SOCIETY OF ACCOUNT- '.-.■: :,v.-.:-.. ;'ants. ;■••■;•.•.■.' '..:';■;'.,- /:: > i ? i i r 'r T l ha fi fst nieoting-of tho council was held Inst week, and much; to tho surprise of I • tho • members the office of. secretary was presented to Mr. E. -W; Hunt." Now, sir, I pro- i . tot, against this modo' : of "conducting' business, iho position should have been "open to every] member of. the society; applications "should have been invited, and tho appointment made on tho merits of the applicants. Tho whole'! thing was evidently cut and dried, and I am ' informed that Mr. Hunt; was present.in an'i adjoining room, and as soon as tho council ■! hxed up the appointment, ho was. called in i and installed into office. " It, was commonly I reported before the meeting ".that Mr. .Hunt ' ■. would bo appointed, but.it was' never expected > that such an important- office" would' be disposed 1 of in such a mender. "Much abuse (most of it • undeserved) has been heaped upon tho Eegisi tratiou Board for the manner in 1 which it J dealtwiththebusiness entrusted to it, but the » action of tho council in this; matter at its first ! meoting deserves the gravest. censure. The members are entitled.to some explanation from ' thq council for their action—l am, etc.,- | fc '■.'.■.""'•■ '.".EEQISTE.RED. j : '. December 11, 1909./, r ■-..-"•'■"I