HOURS UNALTERED

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19106, 29 August 1936, Page 16

HOURS UNALTERED

PRINTING INDUSTRY APP LI CATIONS REFUSED DECISION 01-' COURT Holding that the imposition of a 40-hour week would mean the .financial embarrassment of many firms and the annihilation of some, the Court of Arbitration in a reserved decision given on Thursday, refused applications to amend awards governing workers in tho printing and related trades. “The court is .divided over this case, and the judgment that follows represents the view of the majority of the court,” stated the president, Mr. Justice Page. “The activities covered by the present applications may he described in general terms as the printing industry. They embrace the printing and publishing of newspapers, general commercial printing, stationery manufacturing and photo process engraving. . . The weekly hours of work prescribed by the various awards and agreements at present in force are as follows : For typographers, 42 hours; for linotype mechanics and handtype and jobbing workers, printers’ machinists, "lithographers, bookbinders, etc, day workers, 44 hours; night workers, 42 hours; for photo process engravers, day workers, 44 hours; night workers, 40 hours; for stationery manufacturing workers, 44 hours. “The Legislature has given some consideration to the position of newspapers by providing that newspaper offices are not subject to the closing hours fixed by the Shops and Offices Act, and that the printing offices in which the printing and publishing operations are conducted, though generally subject to the Factories Act, are exempted from certain restrictions relating to holidays and half-holi-days prescribed in respect of other industries.

“ l ’R A OTIC Al. 1)11’F I C U LT.I.ES ’ ’ “The evidence before us is that a reduction of hours to 40 per week would give insufficient time each clay for the work required to be done,” (he judgment read, after reference had been made to ihe time factor in the publication of newspapers. “In the case of the larger city dailies this difficulty might he met if further machinery were installed. In the case of many of the country newspapers, however, whore smaller staffs are employed, such a solution would not be a practicable one, and the result would he that the time lost by the imposition of a 40-hour week would have to be made up by working the existing staffs overtime. Insofar, therefore, as the printing and publishing of daily newspapers is concerned, there appear to he some practical working difficulties in carrying on the inchistrv efficiently on a 40-hour week.

“In the case of general commercial printing these difficulties do not exist to the same extent, though the evidence is that much of that work is urgent work and even with the present spread of hours a considerable amount of overtime is incurred and paid for.” FIN ANCIA l, A SPECT The court reviewed the financial aspect as disclosed by the balance-sheets for the last three financial years which were examined. “These show that while some individual firms are in a sound position a large number have been and are experiencing financial difficulty and many have been and are carrying on at a Joss,” the judgment proceeded. “Substantial increases in working costs already have been effected by the restoration of the 1931 scale of wages, the increase of minimum rates of pay under the Factories Act and the provision for payment for extra holidays. The imposition of a 40-hour week would mean the financial embarrassment of many firms and the annihilation of some.

“We have come to the conclusion that, viewing this industry as a whole, it is impracticable under present conditions for it to be carried on efficiently on a 40liour week. The applications to amend the awards by reducing the hours to 40 per week must therefore be refused. Corresponding orders will, on September 1. 1936. be issued under the Factories Amendment Act, 1936, in respect of the factories concerned in these applications fixing the hours at those set out- in the respective awards and agreements.’’ Giving a. dissenting opinion, Mr. A. L. Monteith, workers’ assessor, stated that he was strongly of the opinion that a 40lionr week should have been awarded. “In view of the fact that some firms tilready work a five-day week, and in view of the returns for the whole industry, 1 believe a 40-hour five-day week in printpry establishments, and a 40-hour six-day week in publishing offices, should have been awarded,” he stated.