FORTY-HOUR WEEK

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 55, Issue 3929, 21 July 1937, Page 8

FORTY-HOUR WEEK

ADOPTION IN AUSTRALIA. AN ARBITRATOR’S VIEW. Melbourne, July 1. Claims made by the combined Federal Public Service organisations for the introduction of a 40-hour working week in the service were rejected today in a determination by the Commonwealth Public Service Arbitrator (Mr. J ,C. Westhoven). Mr. Westhoven said that, in the circumstances, he thought it wise to leave the initiative in this matter to Parliament, where it rightly belonged. “As an individual,” said Mr. Westhoven, “I strongly hold the view that, in present-day conditions, the adoption of the 40-hour week is warranted. At the same time, lam also convinced that it is not a proper exercise of the powers vested in the Public Service Arbitrator to venture into the field of social reform of the community as a whole, and prescribe a reduction of hours of duty in Commonwealth employ as a measure of relief for the social unrest of the community.” In a separate determination, a 44hour week was granted to all Commonwealth employees, with the exception of sleeping-car employees, dining-car employees, and watchmen. About 100 employees will benefit by the determination. It had been shown at the inquiry, Mr. Westhoven said, that there were about 16,400 Commonwealth Public Service employees whose hours of duty were now 40 a week, and about 29,046 whose working week was in excess of 40 hours. Of these, 23,544 were in departments coming under the Commonwealth Public Service Act, principally in the Postmaster-Gen-eral’s Department. Except in a few instances, their present hours of duty did not exceed 44 a week. “In Australia,” said Mr. Westhoven, “while there is a substantial body of public opinion in favour of the 40hour week, it has not yet been put into operation, except in a few limited and comparatively unimportant industrial concerns. Because of its magnitude, its wide ramifications, and the large number of its employees, the Commonwealth holds a natural position of leadership among employers, both on its own account and as an example in the industrial and economic field. But, in the present circumstances, is it the proper function of this tribunal to say that the Commonwealth will give its employees a 40hour week as partial remedy for a social ill?” Mr. Westhoven said that the reduction of working hours to 40 per week in the case of those service employees whose hours of duty were now in excess of 40 was not necessary because of any hardship, physical, or other disability resulting from present conditions. Mr. Westhoven commented on the fact that, in the Commonwealth Public Service, the proportion of youths to adults was now at an extraordinarily low figure.