MARRIED COUPLES

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXX, 7 October 1936, Page 7

MARRIED COUPLES

WORK ON DAIRY FARMS EFFECT OF NEW LEGISLATION POSITION CLARIFIED -BY MINISTER (United Press Association) WELLINGTON, This Day. A statement clarifying the situation of the wives of dairy-farm employees, as they are affected by the provisions of the Agricultural Workers Act, was made yesterday by the Minister of Labour, the Hon. H. T. Armstrong. He said that from letters he had received it appeared that misunderstanding existed over the position, and that the employment of married couples on farms might be prejudiced if the effect of the Act was not made clear.

Mr Armstrong said that the Act laid down a minimum wage of £2 2s 6d a week, in addition to board- and lodging, for a dairy-farm worker. If free board and lodging were not provided, the wdrker was entitled to £3 a week. In many cases the worker was married, and with his wife was engaged as a married couple, with a free house and foodstuffs provided. The free house and foodstuffs in such cases were not regarded as free board and lodging under the Act, and' could not be taken into account as part of the wages of the worker. The statutory wage and holidays provision applied definitely to the husband, but not ne-, cessarily to the wife. The Minister explained that the situation of the wife was governed by the nature of the work, if any, she was required to perform for •the farmer. If she was engaged wholly on farm work she, too, was entitled to the statutory wage and holidays. If she performed in the main only domestic duties and merely assisted for brief periods each day in farm work,, she should be paid in respect of the latter duties a due proportion of the, statutory wage. It was admissible, in computing the wife’s payment of this proportion, to fake into account the rent value of the free house, and the value of milk, butter, or anything elseprovided by the farmer. If the farm worker’s wife was engaged only on domestic duties, then she was not subject to the legislation and her remuneration was a matter for private arrangement with the employer.

DESIRE TO AVOID DIFFICULTIES “It is not desired by the Government, in its endeavour to put the farm worker on a better footing, to create difficulties in the way of the employment of married couples,” > Mr Armstrong said. “Both employers and employees are recommended to submit to. the' nearest branch of the Labour Department particulars of cases in which they are concerned, and which they ihink require individual consideration. Farmers are particulalry requested' not- to terminate the engagement of married couples until they have made-' sure from the department that their own or their employee’s estimate of new wages due is a correct one. --Farmers need not fear that precipitate action will be taken by the de-. partment to institute proceedings, and certainly no action will be taken while a farmer is awaiting the ruling of the department on a case submitted by him. The department will make every endeavour to meet each case reasonably, and is instructing its inspectors to treat each case on its merits, as it recognises the wide variations in conditions that apply to farm engagements of married couples.”