WORKING WEEK OF SIX DAYS

Dominion, Volume 31, Issue 105, 28 January 1938, Page 12

WORKING WEEK OF SIX DAYS

Action Of Dunedin Company DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR OPPOSES PRACTICE By Telegraph—Press Association. Dunedin, January 27. Tlie action of the Kaikorai Tramway Company, Dunedin, in spreading the prescribed 40-hour week over six days without payment of overtime was the subject of a case iu the Magistrates’ Court, Dunedin, to-day, when the Department of Labour proceeded against the company on behalf of one of its own employees, claiming the sum of £37/10/4 for overtime pay covering a period of 30 weeks. Mr. G. F. Grieve represented the department and Mr. A. C. Stephens appeared for the defendant company. Prior to the introduction of the 40hour week, said Mr. Grieve, the men employed by defendant company were working 48 hours a week, six days of eight hours each. When the Court of Arbitration reduced working hours to 40 it gave the right to employers to work their men on Saturdays without payment of overtime. Defendant company took the view that it was entitled to spread the 40 hours over six days and consequently reduced the working time from Saturday to Monday inclusive to six and two-thirds hours daily. The company’s right to do this was challenged by the union and the matter was referred to the Court of Arbitration, which in its judgment drew attention to the peculiar wording of the industrial agreement and stated that the 40 hours must be worked in days of eight hours each and that the court had no power to alter the daily maximum of hours to spread the 40 hours over six days in this particular case. Between the time of the introduction of the 40-hour week and the issue of the court’s ruling iu tlie matter in question 39 weeks had elapsed. The department claimed on behalf of the worker that a week’s pay should be given for tlie first five days worked and that a further day’s pay should be made to him for the sixth day. Mr. Stephens mentioned that Mr. Justice Page had heard the case but that it was Mr. Justice O’Regan who had given judgment as he had been appointed to the vacancy after Mr. Justice Page’s death. He submitted lengthy legal argument in defence of the company’s action. The Magistrate reserved his decision.