MINIMUM WAGE IN FACTORY

Evening Star, Issue 22343, 20 May 1936, Page 7

MINIMUM WAGE IN FACTORY

PROVISION DEEMED RESTRICTIVE MINISTER ADAMANT PROTECTION IN TIMES OF HARDSHIP (From Our Parliamentary Reporter.] WELLINGTON, May 19. The clause in the Factories Amendment Bill dealing with minimum wages in factories sets out that, for the purpose of determining the rate of payment there shall be taken into account all the periods of a person’s employment in any factory, whether before or after the commencement of the Act. The member for Kaipara (Mr Ooates) pointed out that an injustice might he done boys and girls under the Bill, because they might find that work in one class of factory was uncongenial to them, and in seeking work in another factory an employer would have to take into consideration the time they had worked elsewhere, and therefore they might not be engaged, as they would not be starting at the minimum rate. This would prevent young people who wanted a change of occupation that would be more satisfactory to them from being engaged. He moved an amendment to the effect that service in one factory should not be computed when an employee was transferred to another factory, except when the person was under 17 years of age. Mr Hamilton (former Minister of Labour) admitted-that there might be 10 per cent, in the Bill that could be supported. The particular clause under discussion would be more restrictive than perhaps anything else in the measure. It would prevent many young people from getting work. Once a hoy was employed in a factory it would be almost impossible for him to change to another. An employer would not pay 27s a week when he could put on a hand at 15s. The Minister of Labour (Mr Armstrong) replied that boys under the age of 16 years would have to obtain a permit. “ This will not be as easy as in the past, because they should be in school,” he said. "We are going, as far as possible, to make the starting time 16 years.” The circumstances would have to be exceptional for that rule to be overlooked. A boy of 16 years was worth more than a hoy of 14 years of age, and one of 18 more than a youth of 16. The Minister said he had met an employer who had informed him that he put girls to work at 15s a week when he could pay 10s. His reply was that the employer could not get girls at 10s a week.

“ The employer will have to pay boys and girls more than 15s a week to get them at all,” said Mr Armstrong. “ They are facing up to that now they find that they cannot get them.” The increases laid down in the Bill would have to be paid. An irreducible minimum was set out in the legislation. For years the Arbitration Court had been awarding more than the minimum laid down under the Shops and Offices Act and the Factories Act.

It further explained by the Minister that the reason for the clause was to protect factory workers in times of hardship or depression. It was necessary to guard against exploitation. In reply to an interjection by Mr Coates, the Minister said that persons were employed because a profit was made out of them by the employer. Mr Coates: That is an ungenerous explanation. The Minister: It is a fact. Yon do not think they are in business for their health. Do they employ people because they are public benefactors?

Mr Coates said tl>at he had sent letters asking employers to take boys on, and many people had complied to give boys a chance.

The Minister said if all those employing labour were Christian people there would be no need for the Bill. There was an employer here and there who would not comply with conditions, and the worker had to be protected. The average employer of labour desired to see wages fixed so that he could compete against the less scrupulous employer.

On a division the amendment was lost by 45 votes to 10, and the clause retained, and the Bill, having passed the committee stage, is awaiting its third reading.