FACTORIES LAW

Gisborne Times, Volume LXXXIV, Issue 12865, 20 May 1936, Page 7

FACTORIES LAW

BILL FURTHER DISCUSSED. WHAT GOVERNMENT IS CONSIDERING. PRICES AS WELL AS WAGES TO BE FIXED. (Press Association!. WELLINGTON, May 19. The House resumed consideration of the Factories Amendment Bill in committee. On Clause f>, Mr. Armstrong said the Government was considering the question of fixing prices and was firmly of the opinion that price fixation was just as necessary as wage fixation. Mr Hamilton (0.) moved an amendment to Clause 7, providing that the burden of proving that the dismissal 1 of an employee was not due to the reduced, working hours should he decided by the Arbitration Court and the onus not placed on the employer. Mr. Holland (0.) said that even since the introduction of the Bill there had been retraction in the amount of employment. He thought tho provision could be got round and the employer, if' he wished to reduce tho number of his employees, would only have to allege efficiency on the part of employees. He thought it wrong that the employee should be branded as inefficient. The amendment was lost on the voices The clause was challenged, but was retained by 50 to 12.

1 ‘BACKYARD’ ’ FACTOR IES

Speaking on Clause 10 Mr. Holland (0.) asked if provision preventing factories passing out work to be done in “backyard” factories could not be extended to cover large drapery and other shops that gave out work to be . done at home. The Opposition, he said, agreed with the principle, but said the clause was not wide enough. Mr. Armstrong, in reply, said that such a provision could not be made in factories. He had investigated the suggestion, but found many difficulties in the way and, if it were made broad enough, it would even prevent a wife giving out a dress to be made. An amendment was moved to Clause 11, the effect of which would bo to enable the employer to pay more than the minimum wage without having to add annual increments. Another amendment, sought to reduce the amount of increments by making them five shillings per week yearly, instead of four shillings pei week half yearly. ' . Q Both amendments were lost b> no to 12. ' AGE FOR STARTING WORK. Mr. Coates moved a further amendmeat, providing that an employee s term of service in one factory would count on his transfer to another factory only if the employee was more than 17 years of age. In support lie said the clause as it stood would prevent young people changing more congenial employment as, it previous service in another iactoiy had to be counted, another employei would not.' engage him. ■ Mr. Armstrong said the Government would, as far as possiWe, make the a<m of starting work 16 and no younger, unless . under exceptional circumstances. If a boy staitcd woi v at 14, he would have to secure a special permit and those permits would not be as easily obtainable m future as in the past, iiecanse those boys should be still at school He said the provision was to fix the mini mum wage and to prevent an employer exploiting hoy labour in times of depression. He contended that a boy oi ‘lB was worth a few shillings mo e than a boy of sixteen and should be paid more. Provision was needed to [■over an employer here and there who was competing with a more scrupulous m< Tho amendment was lost by to to 10

question of holiday pay

Mr Hamilton (O.) -moved an amend-ment-to‘tadiise-13, providing that holiday pay shall be payable only by the last employer by whom the worker was engaged. He explained the amendment was to safeguard a worker possibly' being paid for a holiday by two employers. Mr. Armstrong said the intention or tho clause was to make sure that the worker was paid for holidays, but it was not intended that he should be naid more than once for the same holiday. He undertook to look into the' position and see that some provisibn was made in the Legislative Council- to overcome the nosition. Mr. . Hamilton (0.) withdrew' the amendment. * ■ . =

WORK ON SUNDAYS. Some discussion took place on an amendment by the Minister deleting the provision that the clause was subject to the provisions of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act. Mr. Hamilton said that those persons who had to work on Sundays would receive double pay. This Bill, when passed, would override awards. Mr .Wright (I.) raised the point of morning newspapers whose employees worked on Sundays for Monday morning's papers. Would they have to he paid double time and in the case of piece workers would they have to be paid double rates. It seemed to him that some provision should be made to cover newspapers. Mr. Armstrong said newspapermen were working under awards which provided for double time for Sundays. The newspaper people were to see him regarding the matter, but discovered that it was not worth their while seeing him, because, if they were not bound under that Act, they would be bound under the award. The amendment was agreed to and the committee stages were completed and the Bill reported to the House with amendments.