WOMEN IN WOOLLEN MILLS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 93, 16 October 1914, Page 6

WOMEN IN WOOLLEN MILLS.

"Subject to the provisions of this Act, a woman or boy shall not- be employed in or about a factory for more than forty-five hours, excluding meal times, in any one week," states Section 19 of the Factories Act. Then comes Section 20, which gives a special concession to the owners of woollen mills, thus:— "The provisions of the last preceding section are, hereby modified in the case of woollen mills to the extent following, that is to say : Women over the age of eighteen years and boys may be employed therein for not more than forty-eight hours, excluding meal times, in any one week." When this privilege was granted to one industry there was some warrant for that exceptional treatment, because some of the woollen mills, it is said, were struggling hard to establish themselves. The times have changed. The reports of recent years indicate that the industry is flourishing, and therefore it is contended that the business no longer needs the extra weekly three hours of toil by woman. A Bill designed to put those mills on the same basis as other factories, in regard to women's hours of work, was introduced in the House of Representatives by Mr. Wilford, and it was passed. All parties praised the principle, and the workers concerned may have believed that the Bill was almost as good a* law.' Alas, there was an obstacle in the Legislative Council, The proposal found good friends, who strove well for the amendment, but they were outnumbered yesterday by sixteen votes to ten. The elected representatives of the people should not meekly \ submit to this rebuff, which has put theGovernment in a position of embarrassment. The action of tnat majority in the nominated Chamber will cause indignation throughout New Zealand. What answer has the Council to offer? I The case for the majority was put mainly by the Hon. J. Dnthie, who argued that Parliament was not a competent Court of jurisdiction in such a matter, which should be decided Joy the Arbitration Court. "Was Parliament, in cold blood, to break a solemn engagement?" he asked. From this an average readep might deduce that ths Arbitration Court had never had an opportunity to hear evidence on this question. The truth is that the Court has been urged to reduce the hours to forty-five, and has refused. The Court has preferred to retain the maximum permissible under the Factories Act. Mr Duthie should consider the fact thaL, in the first instance' Parliament, gave tho extra three , boui'B to onq uidußU'y_ t a&d what far-

liament gave Parliament can take away. If Parliament was a competent body to decree a week of forty-five hours for women in factories generally, why should not Parliament be competent to act on the same principle in regard to -woollen mills? We know well that 4 fussy interference of a lay body with importand industries can bo seriously mischievous and vexatious, but there are certain broad human principles on which it is fair for the people's representatives to take action. We believe that the sixday week, for example, comes within the legitimate scope of Parliamentary regulation, and we believe also that a forty-five-hour week for women in factories should be arranged by statute, when other procedure has failed.