BY MAIL PRINTING INDUSTRY

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 74, 24 September 1936, Page 17

BY MAIL

PRINTING INDUSTRY

QUESTION OF HOURS

EXTENSION SOUGHT

FIFTY FIRMS IN THE NORTH

(By Telegraph.—Press Association.) AUCKLAND. September 23. A case of importance to many industries was heard in the Arbitration Court today, when applications were heard for an extension to employers who did not apply at the Wellington, hearing of an order made by the Court in respect of the printing, stationery manufacture, photo-process engraving, and related industries. The Court had declined a 40-hour week and fixed hours at those set out in the various awards and agreements. The secretary of the Federated Master Printers, Mr. E. W. Clarkson, appeared for the employers. Mr. C. H. Chapman, M.P., and Mr. K. Baxter, president and secretary respectively of the New Zealand Printing and Related Trades Federation, and Mr. J. Mclnnarney, local secretary, opposed the applications on behalf 01 the employees. The employers wished the question to be treated on a Dominion basis, but on the employees' representatives opposing the hearing of 82 southern applications on the ground that there had been insufficient time to consider them, the Court ruled that only 50 applications from the northern industrial district should be dealt with. EXPLANATION OF DELAY. Mr. Clarkson said that the occupiers of 172 factories, representing on a basis of output more than two-thirdi of the industry, had applied to the Court in Wellington, and since that date 132 further applications had been filed. The delay was due to misunderstanding of the formal procedure. Many occupiers understood that by reason of the arrangement made by the Court to hear cases by industries, individual applications were not necessary, since the case on behalf of the industry was being presented by its representative organisations and they believed that this presentation would be accepted by the Court as being on behalf of every ■ occupier. In fact, it was • understood that in some industries applications were made and accepted by the Court in 'such terms that the consequent orders applied without doubt to every factory engaged in those industries. The present application was designed to remove any possibility of doubt regarding the order and to ensure that effect was given to the Court's intention as they understood it to be, and that the benefits of the order should apply uniformly and without exception to every occupier of a factory throughout the industry. Since the Court had declined the union's application to amend the awards and agreements, the employers now sought authority under the Factories Amendment Act, 1936, to adhere to the hours provision set out in the current awards and agreements. PRODUCTION RETURNS. Reviewing the information on which the Court had held a 40-hour week to be, impracticable, he recalled that its judgment stated that the balancesheets represented seven daily city newspapers, 33 provincial dailies, 29 other newspapers, and 6iJ printers, manufacturing stationers 'and photoengravers. Returns to the Government Statistician in respect of newspaper production and commercial printing were presented at the hearing and supplemented by the returns collected by the two employers' associations, bringing the official information up to date. From the list of factory occupiers who furnished the balance-sheets, a return had now been compiled by the Government Statistician giving a direct comparison for 1934-35 between these factories and the whole industry. The figures were:— Factories. Per cent. valu# Whole Industry, concerned, of products. £ . £ 3,758,937 2,417,8-3 64 , Salaries and Wages. ' 1,513,478 942.546 61 Materials. 963,628 592,289 « Other Expenses. 955,403 646,452 M "Surplus." 326,428 236.256 75 This was conclusive evidence that, since the balance-sheets represented virtually two-thirds of the industry, the Court was fully justified in accepting them as "fairly representative of tha whole industry." DECISION RESERVED. Opposing the applications, Mr. Baxter held that the employers had lost their right to appear under the Factories Amendment Act, 1936, as paragraph 8, clause 3, stated: "This section shall come into force on September 1, 1936.** The employers had had over a month to exercise their right, yet about 201 out of the 373 printing establishments had not applied. They were apparently indifferent or reconciled to the 40-hour week. The federation intended to contest these applications on every occasion. He quoted.a number of firms working shorter hours or five-day weeks, and contended that many of the occupiers who failed to make an application for exemption from the 40-hour week before September. 1 had considered tha reduced hours a foregone conclusion, but still thought it possible to overcome any financial embarrassment. He said he thought they also considered this would be in the best interests of the industry as making for contentment among the workers. The position now was that a minority of the occupiers , had approached the Court before the Act came into operation and a majority after the decision had been given. In any case they claimed that the new applicants should be compelled to pay overtime rates for the hours worked over 40 since September 1. In reply Mr. Clarkson said he had already shown that the Court's decision had been given after receiving application from the greater part of the industry. He emphasised that the delay in the other cases had been merely the result of misunderstanding.: An entirely wrong interpretation had been placed by the employees on paragraph 8, clause 3, of the Act. The employers, indeed, considered it operated in exactly the reverse manner. ' The Court reserved its decision. . • >