TRANSPORT DRIVERS

Evening Post, Volume CXXV, Issue 80, 5 April 1938, Page 13

TRANSPORT DRIVERS

HOURS AND WAGES

DOMINION DISPUTE

ARBITRATION HEARING

The hearing of the industrial dispute between the New Zealand Passenger Transport^ Drivers' Union*and the employers commenced today in the Second Court of Arbitration before Mr. Justice .Hunter and Messrs. V. Duff (employers' representative) and A. W. Croskery (employees' representative). Mr. H/J. Bishop appeared for the employers and Mr. F. C. Allerby for the employees. Mr. Allerby stated that the first Do ; minion award covering workers in the passenger transport industry was made in 1926, when the industry was in a state of development, and subject to uncontrolled competition. The terms Would not be acceptable today. Though the Transport Licensing Act was passed in 1932, the employees in the industry had not yet derived any benefits. It was agreed that the "award should be j divided into parts covering drivers of town and; suburban passenger omnibuses, service-car drivers, and* general provisions applicable to all workers covered by the other parts. \ Consideration of hours of work involved not only the aggregate hours per week, but the daily hours and ,the manner in which they should be wprked. On December 21, 1936, the Arbitration Court reduced the hours of omnibus drivers from 96 to 80 ■■per; fortnight, and of ser.vice.car drivers to 88 hours. Lack of sympathetic organisation on the part of the employers had prevented the drivers from receiving the benefit anticipated. When the longer hours were in force the men s ordinary, hours averaged eight per day on twelve days per fortnight. Under the shorter hours, omnibus drivers, instead of working an average of .eight hours a day on ten days a fortnight, were being-worked on an average 6hr 40min a day on twelve days of the fortnight. ' "The men were thus on call for practically the sanfe length of time as, formerly. ;/;.\- '?.":.:!,■""' , "

FORTY-HOUR WEEK.

"It is hard to understand why the men cannot-be worked an average.o£ eight hours per day as formerly,'1 said Mr Allerby. "The buses are running the same hours as previously, and^additional drivers have been employed. Instead of using the additional, workers to give the -drivers an extra day's freedom from duty, the -week's. work is still being spread over six days, and the men' are being deprived of most of the benefit of the reduced hours. A 40-hour week to be worked on five days of eight hours each,! could be worked without in any way' impairing thejifflliciency of the service. ~,;., .?*hel^ c any logical reason why these 40 hours could not be'worked in shifts averaging eight hours as previously and com- | pleted in five days,, instep of being (worked iri shifts averaging 6hr 40min extending over sixdaysrr;,. , . ' .The existing. span of thirteen .hours irr which the daily hours might »c worked was altogether too ( great, and permitted of a driver being on. call for too long a period. Drivers were also permitted to be booked .off twice an a day, exclusive of meal 'intervals. This, clused drivers to be.on calllonger than necessary; The union considered that proper organisation would reduce the daily span of hours and, permit the working' of a five-day, week. .The; existing award ' provided for/ broken .to straight shifts in the ratio of 4 to 12, based on a period of twelve shifts per fortnight. . The union asked that the proportion should be 3 to, 10- ~ The union also asked that the limit bf time worked without a. meal inter-val-should be five, hours, and^. that booking off for meals should not occur at intervals of less .than four hours. It was the practice of "some .employers to book a.driver off within an hour or so of his commencing, the shift, and deem it a meal interval. To prevent this, the union asked that a driver^ should not be booked off within three hours, ofthis signing on., > >, ; .;• . ;.; INCREASED RESPONSIBILITY.

The union asked, that the -wages should be increased to £6 per week. The present level was that, of 1926, and between that date and the present.day the degree of responsibility of passenger transport drivers had, increased considerably. The Court should award an-increase greater than the average of lls because of,the Increased responsibility, the greaier carrying> capacity of vehicles, and increased number or fares to be handled. . ■; . , The highly efficient manner in which the workers in ■ this industry were carrying out their duties was.shown by the record of accidents per, million miles travelled, recently compiled by the Department of Transport. The figures were:-r-Service cars and buses, 1.4 commercial vehicles, 2.1; private cars, 3.5; taxicabs, 6.1; .motor-cycles^ 11.2. In the interests of public safety, this high standard of efficiency, must be maintained, and. ■ this could only be done by making the calling, sufficiently remunerative to attract the best men. The rapidly-increasing number of Vehicles on the road called for _ increased skill and vigilance. The: driver had a responsibility for the, safety of passengers and property, and also_to every other user of the road, me work was detrimental to health because of nervous strain and irregular hours. There was .also a loss : of opportunity for social life. . ■ ■•:

GENERAL OVERTIME.

For general overtime, the union asked for time and a half for the first two hours, and thereafter double time. It it was the general practice of the Court to award time and a half for the first four hours, and thereafter double time, the. union was prepared to accept this. The 'union claimed, for extra pay for work on Sundays and certain holidays. Extra rates' were paid by railways and tramways for Sunday and holiday work. The claim was strengthened by the congestion of traffic on the main highways on such days, on which occur the major portion of the road accidents. The union asked for extra payment lor drivers of vehicles with a'seating capacity of mow than nine passengers. , _ Casual rates should be at least 20 per cent.' above the weekly, rates. The union opposed the proposal of the employers that workers employed for less than 30. hours per tfeek should be paid at casual.rates, The union asked that payment be made weekly, that leave should be granted at six-monthly periods, and that payment of wages should be retrospective from October 1, 1937. : . Evidence was given, for the workers by George Edward, Wells, . omnibus' driver employed by the New Zealand Kailways Road Motor Services,' and Frederick James Reed, omnibus driver employed by the Eastbourne Borough Council.

(Proceeding.).