HOURS OF WORK

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22524, 15 September 1936, Page 11

HOURS OF WORK

building trades j OPERATIONS IN COUNTRY TIME RESTRICTION QUESTION COURT'S DECISION SOUGHT Representatives of building trades unions, of the inspector of awards and o f"tbe employers appeared before the Arbitration Court yesterday to ask it to determine whether the fixing of the 40-hour week applies to all country work in these trades. In the past it has been usijal to allow the ordinary hbors fixed to be exceeded on country jobs when both parties are agreed that this should be done. The proceedings took the form of an application by the inspector of awards for an interpretation of the painters and decorators' award. The inspector 0 f awards was represented by Mr. G. f\ Grieve, and Mr. W. E. Anderson appeared for the employers. Jlr. Grieve said the purpose of the application was to obtain the Court's puidauce in the interpretation of all the building trades awards in tho district, "for they all contained similar clauses. In the past there was provision in awards for work on countryjobs to be in excess of ordinary award hours by agreement between tho parties. There were cases in which workers in the country found time on their hands, but the employers could not pay overtime for longer hours. > Convenience of Longer Hours It suited the workers to work longer hours, for they were away from home for a shorter period and they obtained higher weekly earnings, said Mr. Grieve. Employers on their part had the job completed in shorter time with fewer workers and had reduced payments for board and lodging. Mr. Grieve said the question before the Court involved interpretation of clauses 20 and 21 of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Act. Section 20 appeared to make jt mandatory for the Court to fix at

not more than 40 the maximum number of weekly hours, exclusive of overtime, ' except where that would make it impracticable to carry on efficiently. To allow more than 40 hours on coun-

try jobs would appear to be contrary to this. It might be that the Court would hold that the country work clause was a special condition relating to a special class of work and did not come within the requirements of sections 20 and 21. If that were so they were still faced with some difficulty in reward to the clause of the award that gave the employer the right to employ-a man who applied on the job without payment of country worker's Allowances. Saturday Work Opposed The secretaj-y of the Painters' Union, Mr. H. Campbell, said tho painters' award wafc a 181)5 one, alid the union was standing on the law and on the Court's recent judgment that the 40 hours fixed wero to lie worked on five days of the week.. The painters had reached an agreement with the employers that double time should lie {laid for any work done on Saturdays as, well as on Sundays. It had been dsfihiteJv laid down that the 40-hour week was intended to provide more work: He contended that section 20 applied to country work just as much as to-any other kind of work. \ ; Mr. K. Simpson said the view of the electrical workers was that the 40-hour.:week applied to country work just as much as it did to town work. The same view Mas expressed on behalf of the Carpenters' Union by Mr. J. G. jKenrierley, who said his union would not agree to Saturday work-in the country under, any conditions. • 'Mr. A. H. Penny, for the Auckland Guild of Master Painters, referring to the recent agreement, said the clause relating to Saturday work was confusing and they would like the Court to clear ut up. * Jlr. W. C. Prime, employers' assessor on the Court: You had better find

out what you agreed to before you ask the Court tt> tell you what you meant by it. * Mr., Penny*'said he took the agreement to mean that country work would be cut out entirely because double time payment required. Employers' Interpretation Mr. Anderson said he saw no difficulty in interpreting the award as altered; The Court had always fixed the hours in the building trades, and most of the awards had contained a clause allowing for longer daily or weekly hours' where both parties were •greed. The Court had now fixed shorter hours, and lie took it that was merely an amendment to the hours clause, leaving longer hours to be worked by agreement as before. It was only fair and common sense that the parties should have that right. The employers' costs were higher for country work, and from the employees' point of view they were anxious to finish the country job as soon as possible, so that they could return to their homes. The country work clause had generally wen agreed to by the unions as a desirable thitig. It had been included the newly-made plumbers' award. The. Court reserved its decision.