DRIVERS' HOLIDAYS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1074, 13 March 1911, Page 3

DRIVERS' HOLIDAYS.

I.YJ'EIiI'RETATIOX OF AWARD. An important interpretation of the Wellington Drivers' Award has been issued by the Court of Arbitration, though the Clerk of Awards (Mr. E. Sleeker). Clause la of the award reads: "Except where otherwise provided, i7l hours shall constitute a week's work, exclusive of time occupied in necessary attendance to horses. The said hours shall include the time properly occupied in going from and returning to the stable. The working hours shall be regulated by each employer, according to the special requirements of his business; provided that any time worked before 7 a.m. or after 7 p.m. shall be considered overtime." The question asked of the Court referred to those parties to the award who are also occupiers of shops within the meaning of the Shops and Offices Act, IJIOS, and are required thereby to observe a half-holiday in each week. "Are such employees (it was asked) entitled to employ drivers on the usual half-holiday without payment of overtime, when a whole holiday is given (luring the same week ?" The Court replied: "Where an employer arranges in advance the- hours of work for his drivers so that a half-holi-day is to be observed on one day of the week, he is not entitled to work his drivers on that half-holiday without paying them overtime. The hours of work, when fixed by an employer, become the hours prescribed for the purposes of Clause 0 of the award, and any work done' Outside those hours must be paid for as overtime, although the total hours of work for the week may not have exceeded 471. The fact that the half-holiday occurs in a week in which a whole holiday has been observed does not make any difference in the matter, and the provisions of Section 19 of the Shops and Offices Act, 190S, do not alter the rights and obligations of the parties. These provisions, deal with the closing of shops, not with the working hours of drivers. There are employers bound 'by the award who are not the occupiers of shops within the meaning of the Act. These employers, it is clear, must pay their drivers overtime, if they are required to work on the half-holiday, and there is no reason for holding that other employers bound by the award are in a different position because they happen to be occupiers of shops. The award deals with the employers who are bound thereby as employers of drivers and not as the occupiers of shops. The Shops and Offirrs Act does not profess to deal with the subject matter of the award, and its provisions cannot be used to alter what is the plain meaning of the award. So far, the Court has assumed that the employer arranges his hours nf work so that there shall be a half-holiday in ovnrv week. It may be desirable to ndtl that it is clear t.h" decision of Hie Court in tho case nf tli» Dnnedin and Suburban Carters v. Mai Fie. that it is not comnetent for an employer to arrange h's hours of work so that his. drivers shall be required to work, without nayment of overtime, on the usual ha'lf-h"Kda.v in nnv wvek in whicli one of the hn'idevs prescribed in the award happens to be."