THE FORTY-HOUR WEEK

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24639, 21 June 1941, Page 11

THE FORTY-HOUR WEEK

TO THE EDITOR

Sir,—ln answer to “ Prudence’s ” contention that a 44-hour week would not mean greater profit to the builders, let me cite two examples:—First, in regard to the cost of production of the sawn timber: A sawmill, employing 20 men. cut a tally of 6,000 super feet per day of eight hours, making a tally of 30,000 feet per 40-hour week. The cost of labour is approximately £1 per day per man. making a total of £IOO per week for labour, The selling price of this timber is approximately £1 per 100 super feet, making a total of £3OO. The running expenses of the mill are (we shall say) £IOO per week, leaving a profit of £IOO per week. If the hours are increased to 44, the tally should be increased by 3000 feet, and the running

expenses by £lO per week. If the 44 hours are to be worked “ on the same wage level as the 40-hour week,” and the price of timber left as it is now, the sawmill owner stands to gain £2O per week by this, arrangement. Secondly, as regards the builder. His undertakings should be speeded up by the same percentage as the sawmiller’s. if. his men maintain their standard of work for the extra four hours, his running expenses should be 10 per cent, greater, and his profits should be on the same level as the sawmiller’s. In regard to “ Prudence’s ” statement that " this does not mean greater profits to the builder, for competition takes care of this," if there is already so great a shortage of labour that it is necessary to suspend the 40-hour week (from experience in the sawmilling industry I will grant the labour shortage). it necessarily follows that builders are behind with their contracts, therefore competition is also necessarily eliminated, and the costs to the people of this Dominion would not be reduced by the suspension. If the employers’ one objective in their present Domin-ion-wide agitation for the suspension of the 40-hour week is purely a greater “war effort,” as they are so loudly stressing, and if thev are not merely making our “ war effort" a pretext for achieving their own selfish ends, let them offer to the country, about which they claim to be so concerned, all profits derived from the extra production of those extra hours. If thev have the selflessness to do this, very few of the workers of New Zealand will object to working those extra hours. If thev have not, let them maintain a discreet silence.—l am. etc., All in Together. June 18, 1941.