OVER-WORKING CLERKS.

Evening Post, Volume XIII, Issue 135, 9 June 1876, Page 2

OVER- WORKING CLERKS.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE EVEtfllftJ POST. ' Sir — I wish to bring under your notice ah evil which has been steadily gaining ground ia this city. I allude to the constant night work which is forced upon the clerks in the various banks, merchants', auctioneers', lawyers', and other offices. Almost every night in the week the majority of the busiuess places are lighted up, and. the employees are hard at work. Of course when a press of business comes, or at busy times/such as balancing or stock-taking, no one would object to some night work, but when we see this goes on week after week, and' month after month, we must arrive at one of two conclusions : eithor the clerks are lazy in the day and so require to do their work at night, or they have more work than they can do. If the former be the truth, then the employers may justly complain of being put to the extra expense of gas to enable their clerks to make up at nieht work that should have been done during the dayj if the latter, the employers are to blame fur not having a sufn-> cient staff to do their work. I am inclined to believe the latter to be the true state of the case. As most people are aware, the trade of this place has greatly increased, but competition makes profits smaller than formerly. Our merchants, bankers, &c, therefore strive to do their work with the smallest possible numbsr of hands, and thus there is more work often expected of them than they can accomplish during the day, and they are obliged to work at night. This is an injustice to the clerks, which I trust needs only to be pointed out in order that it may removed. It is scarcely necessary j fur me to mention that when anyone is con* stantiy kept at night work, he is physically, unable to do the same amount of work in the day, which he would do when only at work during the day ; and in course of time, longer or shorter as the case may be, constant work both day and night, must impair his health, and may sometimes unfit him for work alto*' gether. In such a case would his employer l keep him in idleness ? No, he would simply say, he was very sorry indeed, and much regrettedliis loss of health would not allow his keeping' htm any longer, but he must have his work done and would be forced to get someone who could work. But supposing he is still able to go. on working night and day, is it fair and just of any employer to require it ; if his business has increased is it not somewhat owing to the work of his clerks being well and faithfully done?, If true they have been paid for their work/but every employer knows that when the empldveet feel an interest in the " house " their work becomes of much more value than that of those who work without feeling such interest; and when the working night and day is constant^ is it not possible, or rather probable that the weariness of body may and will produce want of tint interest in the welfare of the " house " which, if the employer be wise, he will endeavour to encourage. Trusting you, Mr. Editor,, will use your influence in bringing public opiuion to bear on this matter, ~ - I am, &c., , Stbkl Pbk. '

"Leaves make, capital. bedding.'' Per*,. hapß so. Bat somehow "or other' it isn't always pleasant te leave one's bed.