THE FACTORY ACT. TO THE EDITOR.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 9343, 6 February 1892, Page 6 (Supplement)

THE FACTORY ACT. TO THE EDITOR.

Sir, —Like many others I have read but not fully understood the new Factory Act. But I venture the opinion that your reply to a correspondent re dressmakers' apprentices not counting is a mistake (see Section 4-9). Again, many persons seem to think registration of factories means approval. I don't think so. I respectfully submit that if they do not already exist regulations should be made to determine what floor and cubic space shall be allotted to, each worker. And in order to elicit some opinions on the matter I would suggest 7x7 = 49ft floor space, by 9ft in height = about 4-00 cubic feet. Then again employers would do well to give the maximum number employed, so that proper arrangements could be made and thus prevent their being called upon (in the busy season) to make alterations in factory buildings.—l am, &c, Dunedin, February 3. Old Clicker. [In replying to a previous correspondent, we did not say that dressmakers' apprentices did not count. The question put to us was, "If a dressmaker employs two apprentices who receive no remuneration except instruction in the business, does her shop come within the act?" The act provides that the minimum number of persons employed shall be three, and a workroom where a smaller number than three were employed would not come within the scope of the act. It is' not necessary that apprentices shall be paid wages. Clause 49 is quite clear on that point.—Ed. 0. D. T.]