A WHOLE HOLIDAY LAW.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 768, 17 March 1910, Page 9

A WHOLE HOLIDAY LAW.

IDEAL OF THE WORKERS,

"IMPOSSIBLE" SAT THE EMPLOYERS.

Soino interesting evidence, both from the point of view of the employer, and i'roin that of tho worker, is contained in the report of. the Labour Bills Committee, with reference to My. 'Fisher's Sunday Labour Bill which was before Parliament last session. It will be remembered thit the committee recommended that it be held over until next session, owing to lack of time to deal with it. Previously tho Hon. J. A. Millar, Minister, for Labour, had stated that tlxe Government could not accept Mn Fisher's Bill,'and that he had had a Bill prepared, "and would introduce it. Krom Various remarks which fell from, the Minister during the hearing of evidence before tho committee, it would appear that the scope of his Bill will be somewhat restricted. '-We have to coflsio'er the interests' v-i everyfcod}'/' lie remarked,

"and we do -not see our way clear to ; support the proposition." Afterwards Mr. Millar 1 added"The Bill as first brought down was for a six-day week for everybody, whb.h we considered. to be absolutely impracticable in tome trades."

Present Style: Just Work and Sleep. Among 'the witnesses who - gave evidence before the' committee was Mr. E. J. Carey, secretary of the local Cooes and Waiters' Union, who thought it was time that' steps wero taken to give employees one day's rest a week. Tn franco it was provided (ho said) that no worker should be employed more, than six. days a week, and also, that, the weekly day of rest should consist-of not less than H „ consecutive' hours. - He found that in this country employees belonging to' different classes in an establishment got olf iu rotation, wd included in the list of thoso to whom the day might bo given by rotatim worn employees in hotels, restaurants, hospitals, alms-houses, asylums, . dispensaries, newspaper offices and contractors for ' electric lighting. .In. ordinary employment workers -were" .employed for eight hours per day straight off, but in his trado the employees were required to work at two, three,'or four intervals during the time,'so that they really never had any time for themselves; it was practically nothing but work and sleep. If a measure such as was how under consideration were adopted it would not mean an extra "expenditure of more than £3 per wedk to. any hotel.with a staff of 42 servants,/and the proposal would not meet with opposition from tho proprietors of smaller, establishments.. Six men working on seven days a week did the work of seven men in six days. . ( . Eon. Mr. Millar: How can you say that in houses with thirty employees two men are going to do it?—lt was said when the half-holiday was .brought about that there would be difficulties. The dinner is the main meal, when all the men are required'to be present, and 'it was said .that that would mean extra; employment, but we know that it has not meant extra employment. I'ou would have to have a relieving staff or extra hands kept in each department to enable tho employeos to get their holiday?—l could so arrange it hat even in tho largest hotel tho 'employment of two extra hands would meet the case, and easily allow-of tho six-day week. ■Seamen and Tramwaymen's View. Mr: W. T. Young, representing', tlie Wellington Trades and Labour Council and, the Australasian Federated Seamen's Union, stated that tho recent , labour Conference had endorsed the principle of .the'Bill. There would be a- good deal of contention as to the meaning of the words "work of necessity" and "matter' of mercy." A large number of workers in sNew, Zealand, such: as l , shop assistants, factory hands; and others, received a halfshoMay in each week, and the Sunday in 'addition, but the right was not enjoyed by a very large number of other workers., Nearly all those, workers;'/got 16 .hours' rest out'of the 24, fb'ut.that, privi-, lege was not enjoyed by tho seamen.; It would be very diihcult. for anyone: but ari employer gto say what difference iji'the total wages such a change would occasion. ,Mr.'Arnold:.' Do you object to;'the delivery of milk being exempt from the Bill?—'Yes,-'certainly.' , : - Mr. M'Laren:, Do you agree with the exemption of. domestic, servantsP-rNo; I see no substantial reason why they should be excluded from the proposed concession. Mr. W.'L. Jones, representing the Wellington Tramway Union. stated that his union approved: the principle of the. Bill, but. could, not'go far into.it on account of the laok of machinery.clauses. What they were very. much afraid of .was that in the event'o' fthe Bill becoming law it might bring about a reduction in their wages, and they considered that that was tho main thing to be' guarded against. All the. 1 , men were oh ' duty for three consecutive. Sundays, ' and then on six alternate . Sundays, so that .during, .the' greater . • part of the'year, their Sundays were occupied with work. They were paid by the hour, and they considered that, were it not for the extra emolument for the Sunday labour, the job would not bo worth having. If the tramways ivere exempt it might injure tho chances of the Bill.

Mr. Glover: Do I tnke.it that, if they too\ Sunday, for the sak>j of argument, on Wednesday, they would desire to get time and a' half for . that patricular Wednesday?— No. ,In the event of their getting the Wednesday off and working the following Sunday,' they consider they should get the usuil wage for Sunday work—time and a half. Mr, Hardy: Ig it the..wish of tiietram. way people that they should get the half-holiday?—l-cannot" say. That was not discussed. I think they would tako it if they could get it. How Employers' Regard It. Mr. W. Pryor, secretary of the Employers' Federation of N<w Zealand, thought the provisions of the Bill were so framed as to be, absolutely impracticable. It would be so impossible to bring such a Bill into operation that tho federation was totally opposed to it. They had not gone verylargely, into it on account of the Shops and Offices Bill over-riding it. Mr. I'isher: Are you aware' that u is the law in Canada, Prance, Italy, and Germany?--! know thht . there arc similar laws m other parts of the world, but the conditions of those other countries would have to be taken into consideration.

Would you suggest that places like Switzerland_ and France, in which the tourist. business is so enormous, could adopt it, and we cannot here?— Those other countries have not got an army ol :inspectors such as we have here Do you think if we passed the iaw it would 1)6 observed ?-Yes, but X think'it is impracticable. j,, 11 " -5 U the _ Bill unworkable, say, M™, i oll ' n Ston, excluding pasand agricultural districts?-Anv-tmng is workablo if expense is no Conmthr™°n,i f i yo " lind in connection one class of business that the figures irot you, and made subJw i j le strictest accountancy, that they would prove that the restriction of one day a week in that business would !™°u V r "" 1 ' solli ething like it Will v™" ® >re ?? r i ( i So oh with it? "11l yqu prove that?—l think *n Df course there, are other objections Hotelkeepers Hostile. t • iMr ' 'I' **««.. president' of tho Licensed Victuallers' Association, contended that it it were right that they buojild bo compelled to give a day's holiday to each employee, it was also right that they should. ho permitted to have a 21-hour hohday as well. The expenses oi running hotels now were very hieli and did not leave any room for in! creases. .

Mr. Poole: Do you think that the omptoyces m tno hotels nro responsible at the present time for the unrest created in the minds of the licensees 'Yes to a great estent. . ' They ate Wnifte rao re troublesome? —JSot tno best of them; thoso who like to get ns much ns they can for as little oS possible.

I g 1? a er, lfe b"™,? JPod number of drifters ?- 'Wasters," I oalbthem. And do yon tliink it is necessary as an employer of labour to utilise the services of your employees for seven days in the weokP-It is absolutely necessary in the hotel business.

And you do not see any possible way of granting the holiday as suggested under the Bill—the term holiday, or other provision?— The quarterly holiday P . . Yes.—l do not raise any strong objection to the quarterly holiday in lieu of the half-holiday, but I do say that. I should have tho right to fix that with tho employee, and that it should be understood to bo fixed so that I can arrange the details of my'business to fit in with it. Workers' Rojoinder. Mr. Tlios. Long, secretary of tho Auckland Hotel and Restaurant Employees' Union, said that, seeing that neariy all other classes of workers, had one day off. in the seven, there could not be any sufficient reason why workers in restaurants, hotels, and boardinghouses should be called upon to work seven days a week. They knew that at the present time their workers were not getting the benefit of the half-holiday to tho extent that they had a right to expect. The half-holiday was so open to abuse that, so far as the Auckland union was concerned, it had decided to go on working nnd agitating all the time until the six •days a week principle was placed on the •Statute-book.. He had token ; back to Auckland- a sub-leader which had appeared in The Dominion, and had read it out to members of his - union. _ It said that their class of- workers in _ other countries were in possession of this oneday holiday in seven, and • that it certainly did not redound to the credit of democratic New Zealand tkat L it was behind the times in that respect. Mr. Poole: We have been told that the hotel business would not Stand ' the increased expense incurred .in this legislation. Do you believe that?—No, I do not. Of, my own knowledge I know that the business is a real good one. Mr. Fraser': You say that the aggregation of holidays was liable to lead to. imposition upon the employee by the employer ?—Yes. _ You would rather they should simply have the half-holiday as they now have than to. have the holidays all together at the end of every three months?— Yes, oertainly, for such a long period as three months. ' • Would a shorter period suit you?— One full day a fortnight would bo better. It is too dangerous a principle to' set up.