44-HOUR WEEK GRANTED

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 254, 23 July 1936, Page 6

44-HOUR WEEK GRANTED

Bakers and Pastrycooks IMPRACTICABLE TO REDUCE WORKING TIME The Arbitration Court has fixed the hours of work for bakers, pastrycooks and their labourers at 44 a week. The judgment of the court .delivered by Mr. Justice Page, states that application was made on behalf of b 39 factory occupiers for an extension to 44 of the weekly hours of work. The price payable by the baker for flour and the price chargeable for bread had been fixed by the Minister of Industries and Commerce under the Board of Trade Act. From the evidence it was/clear that unless the margin between' these two prices were increased it would be impracticable for the industry to be carried on efficiently on a 40-hour week. "There are other considerations,” the judgment continues, “apart from the question of cost. Break-making is carried out on six days of the week, and to compress into the limits of a five-day week the baking of bread sufficient to meet the needs of the public is unworkable. Nor is it practicable to reduce the number of hours a day required to complete the process of turning out a batch of bread. At the end of the day a baking time is required for cleaning up, greasing tins and other jobs. On Saturdays, a double supply must be baked. The court has closely examined the estimates of time necessary to carry out the processes, and has come to the conclusion that to spread a working week of 40 hours over six working days would give insufficient time each day to complete the processes. This difficulty might be met in the case of a few bakeries where large staffs are employed by employing additional labour on the sixth day, but in the case of most bakeries such a system could not be employed. Of the 800 bakeries operating in New Zealand, 85 per cent, manufacture under 2000 loaves a week each, and the employment of an additional man would not be warranted.” The order made by the court for a 44-hour week includes provision for work on Saturay, and will come into force on September 1 and continue until September 1, 1937.

STOREMEN AND PACKERS Employers Oppose Amendment , of Award The New Zealand Storemen and Packers’ Federation applied in the Arbitration Court yesterday for an amendment to that part of their award relating to hours of work. On behalf of wholesale importing Arms, fruit and produce merchants, and manufacturers, Mr. VV. E. Anderson opposed the application, and also applied on behalf of Reid Rubber Mills, Auckland, for an extension of working hours to 44 ' a week. Mr. W. Herbert represented the federation. Mr. Anderson said he proposed to deal separately with the different Classes of firms he represented. Under wholesale importing firms were included drapers, fancy goods shops, grocers, electrical traders and other similar importers. The employers were claiming a 44-hour week with Saturday work, as at present. The duties of storemen and packers were those of receiving, handling, packing and unpacking goods. It was essential for the wholesale establishments to observe the same hours as the retail. Storemen and packers had to be on duty the first thing ip the morning in order to remove covers and set the goods in a tidy state. Telegraphed and telephoned orders had to be packed on the same day as received, so that packers rarely finished on time. The busiest period was undoubtedly Saturday morning. It was then that country travellers made their selections to fill orders, and 75 per cent, of the business of these concerns was secured in this way; under a 40-hour week travellers would be able to spend only three days in their territory. Another factor was that of transport. This wag cheaper by sea than by land, and coastal shipping left Auckland on Saturday mornings. A wait for goods from Friday to Monday was too long for the retailer. Evidence was given in support by Mr. L>. W. Harris, governing director of Bing Harris and Company, Limited; Mr. C. Clabburn, managing director of Makower, Mcßeath and Company, Limited; Mr. W. G. Talbot, secretary of the New Zealand Wholesale Merchants’ Federation;, Mr. C. A. Deuxbury, accountant,' John Burns and Company, Limited; Mr. O. J. Jonas, secretary of Abbott Armstrong and Howie, Limited, Auckland: and Mr. W. J. Charters, factory manager, Ross and Glendining, Limited, Wellington. For the workers, Mr. Herbert said there seemed to be a fear psychology among the employers concerning the 40-hour week. Instead of being detrimental to business it would be a blessing in disguise. In evidence, Mr. J. Tticker, secretary of the Wellington Storemen and Packers’ Union, said the largest employers of store labour in ■ the Dominion, Woolworths, Limited, had no objection to the 40-hour week. He denied that Saturday morning was the busiest period of the week. Mr. Justice Page said the court would consider the case. ' HOURS IN MILK DEPOTS Relation to Wholesale and Retail Price Margin '"A The margin between the price paid to farmer producers for milk and the price charged to the Auckland public will have to be increased before a 40-hour week can be ordered, according to an interim judgment given by Mr. Justice Page in the Arbitration • Court. In the opinion of the court, the industry of milk pasteurising and distributing can be,carried on efficiently on a 40-hour week so far as the mechanical operations are concerned, both as to depot workers and as to roundsmen; but it is manifest that such reduction of the working hours must entail the employment of additional labour, with a consequent increase in working costa. The court considers that the present margin between the price payable to farmers for milk in bulk and the price chargeable to the public on distribution is insufficient to enable the employers to carry on efficiently on a 40hour week.

Further consideration of tne case is adjourned until August 24 in order to enable the Auckland Milk Council and others interested to go into the question of prices if they deem it desirable. The application was for a reduction to 40 a week of the working hours of. Auckland milk roundsmen, and an application by four occupiers of pasteurising and dis-

tributing depots for a 44-hour working week was heard conjointly. A point raised at the hearing was the milk pasteurising depots came within the definition "dairy factories, including creameries,” which class of factory is exempt from the statutory limit of working hours. The judgment of the court is that the premises in question are not dairy factories, but the separator room is a “creamery” within the meaning of the section. The dominant activity of the employers concerned, states the judgment, is that of distributing milk and cream. Supplies are both purchased from the farmers and drawn from dairy farms owned by the concerns. For nine months of the year there is usually a surplus of milk above requirements, which is separated on the premises and the cream eent to a butter factory. Accordingly if any male workers are employed exclusively therein, they are exempt from the statutory limit to working hours. At the hearing Mr. W. E. Anderson appeared for the employers, and Messrs. J. P. John and J. Purtell for the workers. BRICK MANUFACTURERS Application Withdrawn By agreement the application of certain brick manufacturers for an extension of hours of work to 44 a week has been withdrawn from the Arbitration Court. The special case of Winstone’s Tile Company, Limited, stands adjourned to the Auckland sitting of the court in order to give the parties an opportunity to agree. ' The case of the Otago and Southland brickmakers is adjourned sine die. Clerks and cashiers in newspaper offices and clerks in laundry depots will have their hours fixed at the Christchurch sitting. The case of the Auckland Gas Company clerks and Auckland cleaners, caretakers and liftmen will be heard at Auckland. EXTENSION ASKED FOR Seed Cleaning and' Dressing The Arbitration Court yesterday heard an application from companies engaged in seed cleaning and dressing for an extension of worsing hours to 44 a week, with a period of cont.nuous between meals of five hours. Several firms, hau previously withdrawn their applications. Mr. Justice Page presided, and had with him Mr. W., Cecil Prime (employers’ as; sessor) and Mr. A. L. Monteith (workers assessor). Appearing for the employers, Mr. D. 1. Macdonald, secretary of the Canterbury Employers’ Association, said the application covered employees engaged in work both preliminary and subsequent to the actual machine-dressing and cleaning of seed. In the majority of cases the cleaning plants were run in conjunction with grain stores. The work was seasonal, and could not be spread over the whole of the year, as the seed had to be dressed in time for autumn and winter sowing, and for shipment to Australia or England. Australian orders must be delivered before March, and English orders before November. Most of the seed was harvested and delivered by the growers from March to June. In the case of Canterbury, the harvest coincided with the sowing season in the north and in Australia, and consequently the busy months were February to May. Mr. Macdonald said that Saturday morning work was essential. That day had become throughout New Zealand a farmers’ day in town, and it was then that seed was brought to the stores. It was often necessary also to deliver seed to farmers on Saturdays and Mondays. With respect to the application for a five-hour period of continuous work, the main objection to a 4-j-hour period was the necessity for stopping the machines. The five-hour stretch was not objected to by the men. Witnesses called were Mr. G. Bishop, manager of J. Watson and Company, Limited, Gore; Mr. L. S. K. Stevens, Christchurch, manager for A. S. Paterson and Company, Limited, representing North Canterbury firms; Mr. C. McCullough, of F. M. Winstone, Limited, Auckland; Mr. R. W. Tates, a director of Arthur Yates and Company, Limited. Auckland. „ „ , . For the workers, Mr. W. Herbert, secretary of the Dunedin .Storemen and Packers’ Union, said the employers could be assured of the workers’ willingness to meet, them in case of hardship. ’There was nothing to prevent the machinists, most of whom were shift workers, from working a 40-hour week. He advised the employers to instal new machinery to make up for any loss of output. Mr. Macdonald: We have had evidence to show the cost of hew machinery is prohibitive, and that in any case it would lie idle for a part of the year. His Honour: Mr. Herbert, you must not make statements that are contrary to evidence given in the court. Decision was reserved.