EXEMPTION PLEA

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19128, 24 September 1936, Page 5

EXEMPTION PLEA

FORTY-HOUR WORK WEEK PRINTING INDUSTRY FIFTY APPLICATIONS COURT RULING RESERVED (Per Press Association.) AUCKLAND, this duy. A case of importance to many nidus tries was heard in the Arbitration Court when applications were heard for an extension to employers who did not apply at the Wellington hearing of an order made by the court in respect of printing, stationery manufacture, f.hotoprocess, engraving, and related industries. The court had declined to lis » 40-hour working week, and fixed the hours at those set out in the various awards and agreements.

The secretary of the Federated Master Printers, Mr. i£. W. Cla.rkson, appeared for the employers. Mr. C. H. Chapman, M.P., and Mr. K. Baxter, president and secretary respectively of the New Zealand Printing and Related Trades' Federation, and Mr. J. Mclnnarney, the local secretaiy, opposed the application on behalf of the employees. The', employers ; wished ' the question to be treated on a Dominion basis, but on the employees' representatives opposing the hearing of 82 southern applications on the ground that there had been insufficient time to consider them, the court ruled that only 50 applications from the northern industrial district should be dealt with. DELAY IN APPLICATIONS Mr. Clarkson said that the occupiers of 172 factories, representing on the basis of output more than two-thirds ol the industry, had applied to the court in Wellington, and since that date 132 further applications had been filed. The delay was due to a misunderstanding ol the formal procedure. Many occupiers understood that, by reason of the arrangement made by the court to hear cases by industries, individual applications were not necessary, since the case on behalf of the industry was being presented by its representative organisations, and they believed that this presentation would be- accepted by the court as being on behalf of every occupier. In fact, it was understood that, in some industries, applications were made and accepted by the court in such teirns that the consequent orders applied, without doubt, to every factory engager] in those industries.

The present application was designed to remove any possibility of doubt regarding the order, and tar, ensure that effect was given to the court's intention, as they understood it to be that the benefits'of the order should apply uniformly, and without exception, to every occupier of a factory throughout the industry. AUTHORITY SOUGHT Since the court had declined the union's application to amend the awards and agreements, the employers now sought authority, under the Factories Amendment Act, 1956, to adhere to the hours' provision set out in the current awards and agreements. Reviewing the information on which the court had held that the 40-hoiu-week would be impracticable, he recalled that its judgment stated that the balance sheets represented seven daily city newspapers, 33 provincial dailies, 29 other newspapers, and 69 printers and manufacturing stationers and photo engravers. Returns to the Government Statistician in respect of newspaper production and commercial printing were presented at the hearing and supplemented by the returns collected by two employers' associations, bringing the official information up to date. From the list of factory occupiers who furnished balance sheets, a return had now been compiled by -tie Government Statistician, giving a, direct comparison for the 1934-35 year between these factories and the whole industry. The figures were: Whole Factories Per industry concerned cent

This was conclusive evidence that, since the balance-sheets represented virtually two-thirds of the industry, the court was fully justified in accepting them as "fairly representative of the whole industry.*' APPLICATIONS OPPOSED Opposing the applications, Mr. Baxter held that the employers had iosi their right to appear under the Factories Amendment Act, 1936, as paragraph 8, clause 3, stated: "This section shall come into force on September 1, 1930." The employers had had over a mouth to exercise their right. Yet about 201 out of 373 printing establishments had not applied. They were apparently indifferent, or reconciled to the 40-hour week. The federation, said Mr. Baxter, intended to contest these applications on every occasion. He quoted a number of firms working shorter hours or five-day weeks. He contended that many of the occupiers who failed to make application for exemption from the 40-hour week before September 1 had considered the reduced hours a foregone conclusion, but still thought it possible to overcome any financial embarrassment. He thought that they also considered this would be in the best interests of the industry as-making for contentment among the workers.

The position now was that a minority of occupiers had approached the court before the Act came into operation, and the majority after the decision had been given. In any case, the federation claimed that the new applicants should be compelled to pay overtime rates for hours worked over 40 since September 3.

In reply, Mr. CLrkson said he had already shown that the court's decision had been given after receiving applications from tbe greater part of the industry. He emphasised that the delay in other cases had been merely a result of a misunderstanding. An entirely wrong interpretation had been placed by the employees on paragraph 8, clause 3, of tho Act. The employers, indeed, considered it operated in exactly the reverse manner. The court reserved its decision.

Value of products 3,758,937 2,417,873 64 Wages 1,513,478 3*2,846 62 Materials 963,628 592,289 62 Expenses 955,403 646,452 68 "Surplus" . 326,428 236,286 75