SHOP ASSISTANTS' HOURS.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume III, Issue 883, 8 December 1916, Page 11

SHOP ASSISTANTS' HOURS.

LATE NIGHTS IN HOLIDAY WEEK. PROPRIETORS' OFFER. Amongst several resolutions passed by a meeting of shop assistants on Tuesday evening, with regard to drapers* and grocers' shops re- , maining open for two late night? I (Friday and Saturday) in the week , | preceding Christmas Day, was one to ( I the effect that an effort should be ( | made to arrange a conference with ' j the employers. J In reply to a letter from the sec- • retary of the Grocers' Assistants' Union, asking for a conference of | grocers' and drapers' assistants and ; employers, on this matter of hours jin (he Christmas season, Mr F. j Cooper, secretary to the Retail Drapers' Association, has sent the following letter:—"This letter was considered by the Retail Drapers' Association, and I am directed to reply that I as far as that body is concerned it is proposed to observe the following: —December 18. close all day; Friday, December 22, close at 9 p.m.; Saturday, December 23, close at 10 p.m. On Friday. December 22, it will be arranged that the staff shall have time off so that the hours worked j will not exceed an ordinary day. j Fridav. December 29, close at 9 p.m.; ' j Saturday, December 30. close at 1 p.m.; Tuesday, January 2. close all day. The concessions will be found I to cover: December 23. 1 hour, viz., closing 10 n.m. instead of 11 p.m.; , December 30, 9 hours, vi/.. closing 1 p.m. instead of 11 p.m.; Januarv 2, 9 hours, viz., closins all dav. This concession of 19 hours should more than compensate for the keeninr* of shons onen for two consecutive nights before Christmas, especially as the three hours snops are onen on the Friday nieht will not entail anv r>\|rn service on the part of the staffs." BENEFITING THE ASSISTANTS. THE POSITION EXPLAINED. It mav be noted that the hours pronoseH by the Retail Draoers' Association are the hours agreed unon by that body before any objection was received from the assistants' unions. A member of that association pointed out to a Snh representative this morning that the emplovers in both the dranery and the grocery trades are keeping well within the Shops and OTices Act, and the awards in resnect to their nrooosals, so the assistants cannot drum that anvthintr which is illegal is being done. Sneaking of his own trade, he said that in the Christmas and New Year seasons the emnloyers wish to work even shorter hours than the law the awards allow them to work. The ho'irs of shop assistants are limited by the Shons and Offices Act to 52 per week, and nine per day. except on one day in each week, when the employment may be for 11 hours, but the Act contains a provision that nothing in it "shall render it unlawful for the occupier of anv shop to employ his assistants till 11 o'clock at niffht on Christmas Eve and New Year's Fve; or when Christmas Day and N«w Year's Day fall on Monday, then fill II o'clock at niffht on the Saturday preceding those days." "Now." continued the draner, "the employers' oronosals in this case mean that in the week preceding Christmas Day the dranery assistants shall be renuired to work 43 hours, whereas if. as the union's renresenfafives suggested before, Anniversary Dav were kent on the l(!th inst., and there was, therefore, only an half'-holidav on the 18*h, the hours in that week would be 47. In the following week, the emnlovers propose to work 28 hours, instead of the 35 which would otherwise be worked in shons which open at 9 a.m. and the 38 which would be worked in shops that open at 8 a.m. Again, if the unions insisted on the awards and the Shops and Offices Act being adhered to rigidlv, the drapery assistants would lose a whole holiday on January 2. So what have they got to complain about? They complain of two late nights in succession, hut then the hours they will be asked to work on the lirst of those two davs will not exceed those of an ordinary dav. "One of the resolutions of the shop assistants' meeting calls for the reneal of section 5 of the Shops and Offices Act. The employers themselves desire that the Shoos and Offices Act should be simplified and made workable, for if is an exceedingly ill-digested and badly-framed piece of legislation. The employers as a whole do not want the working hours increased, but they do want the Act made plainer. But when the employers, in the past, have sought to have the Act imnroved the unions have objected. The employers. I feel sure, would be glad if section 5 were improved, for it is ambiguous. Some of the employers read it differently from others, some holding that it is not intended to permit two consecutive late nights, but the interpretation that it does permit the two late nights on the Friday and Saturday of Christmas of (his year comes from the Labour Department's headquarters." So far as the grocery trade is concerned another employer pointed out that the grocers' assistants might have to work a few hours more than the drapers' assistants in the season in question, simply to get out the provisions, etc., required bv the public, but the hours would still be with-i in the legal obligation. Me emphasised the fact that the present posi-j lion can arise only once in seven years—i.e., when Christmas Day: falls on a Monday—and that the sue-, cession of Sunday, Christmas Day,; and Boxing' Day makes it necessary i for the public to lay in a larger stock! of provisions than is usually reouir-j ed for Hie two Christmas holidays,; and consequently if the getting out| of all the goods were restricted to! one day with a late night the pres- ; sure on the staff during those working hours would be greater. "By! working the two late nights, withoul increasing the working hours of each assistant more than can be helped, the pressure is reduced propor-j tiouately and the public convenience, is better met," he added.

The Rangiora County Council decided this morning to j>ay all its workmen a war bonus of a shilling per day. His Honour Mr Justice Denniston held a Chamber sitting of the Supreme j Court, to-day, when the following matj ters were dealt with: —In re I'rixcilla | Harper (Mr Williams), a petition for, I leave to sell, the necessary leave was j | granted, the [nice not to exceed £7l*"), | | while costs were ordered to be paid out! !of the estate. In Harvey Brown (Mr! | Slater) v. R. .1. Duncan, leave was j ! granted to exercise a power of sale. On i [ a motion for leave to exercise a power j j of sale in re F. C. Hawley (Mr Malleyl ; *v. John Netting, it was ordered that; j service should be effected on the registered proprietor of the land. The following matters were ordered to stand j over: Large (Mr Johnston) v. Largej land another (in divorce), a motion for' I directions as to service, and in Todd | | (.Mr limit) v. Moore (Mr Thomas), a mot ion for relief under rule L'i'7. It was announced that an agreement had been' arranged between counsel in I'arhan! land others (Mr Wright) v. the Hohonu j j Diamond Terrace Cold Mining Conipanv.' .Ltd., an application for a summons for : discovery.