TWO ALTERNATIVES

Taranaki Daily News, 16 September 1924, Page 5

TWO ALTERNATIVES

WEEKLY WORKING HOURS. FORTY-EIGHT OR FORTY-FOUR? QUESTION FOR RAILWAYMEN RAILWAY BOARD’S REPORT. ' (By Wire— Parliamentary Reporter.) Wellington, Last Night. A secret ballot of the workshops and works staffs of the railway service is to be taken on the question of whether they will work 48 hours a week or 44, the hourly rates of pay to remain « » present. This recommendation, together with another that the traffic staff should work 48 hours a week, has been made by the majority of the railway inquiry board and has been accepted by the Government. The report of the board, which was Bet up to inquire into the _ rates of pay and conditions of work of radway employees as represented by the A.S.R.S., was issued to-day. MEN ASKED TO DECIDE.

The A.S.R.S. asked that the forty-four week hitherto existing in the service be reinstated without any reduction m the present weekly rates of pay and for payment at rime and a half for all time worked between 6 pan. and 6 a.m. and for all time worked in excess of eight hours between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m.,, these, rates not to b ft taken into consideration when computing the guaranteed weeks pay. The board as a whole was unable to agree on these issues and the following recommendations by the majority of the board have been accepted by the Government :—“Workshops and Works Stans. With one dissentient (Mr. Mason) we recommend that locomotive, signalling, and maintenance workshops employees and works men be given the choice of two alternatives:—(a.) A forty-four-hour week with overtime at rate and a half for all time worked in excess of eight hours on each of the firet five days of the week and four hours on Saturday. The hourly rates of wages to remain as at present, and a guarantee to be given of forty-four hours’ pay weekly; (b.) A forty-eight-hour week, with overtime at rate and a half for all time worked in excess of eight hours and threequarters on each of the first five days of the week and four hours and a quarter on Saturdays. The hourly rates of wages to remain as at present, and a guarantee to be given of forty-eight hours’ pay weekly. We recommend that a secret ballot of the men concerned (excluding apprentices and juniors) be takeai at as early a date as possible. It is recommended that the ballot oe taken under the supervision of the Department of Labour. INCREASE IN OVERTIME RATES. “In these two alternatives we recommend a substantial increase in the overtime rates, and recommend the taking of a ballot, for the following reasons:— ta.) The claim as formulated asks for a forty-four-hour week, with forty-eight hours’ pay. As the majority of tne board cannot recommend an increase in the rates of pay, which is necessarily involved in the claim, it is thought that the men concerned ought to be given an opportunity of saying whether they are still in favour of a forty-four-hour week; (b.) A forty-fou-r-hour week is generally established in New Zealand for tradesmen and their assistants, and, though we recognise that railway conditions differ widely from those obtaining outside the service, we do not desire, in the circumstances, to depart from th'e principle, unless the men agree.” In a minority report Messrs. H. Hunter and M. J. Mack state that they concur with this recommendation so far as it goes, but they are of opinion that in addition to the foregoing these men are entitled to an increase in wages of 62 per cent, as shown by the Government Statistician’s figures, or 7s 3d a week over the basic rate in the railway service in 1914. TRAFFIC AND STORES STAFFS. For the traffic and stores staffs the majority of the board have made the following recommendation, which has been accepted, “(a.) Traffic staff—excluding employees covered by paragraphs (b) and (c) —and Stores staff to work forty-eight hours per week with overtime rates for all | time worked in excess of forty-eight hours , in any week or ten hours on any day. Overtime to be paid for at rate and a half, and any time paid for as overtime over the day not to be taken into account in computing overtime over the week. No night rates to be payable; (b.) Tabletporters to work forty-eight and fifty-six hours as at present, with overtime payment at rate and a half for all time worked in excess of these hours. No night rates to be payable; (c.) Crossing-keepers, bridge-keepeiM, night-watchmen, female waiting-room attendants, and messengers to work same hours as at present, with overtime payment at rate and a half for ail time worked in excess of these hours. No night- rates to be payable.” “In this case we have to enter the strongest possible protest against the decision of a majority of the board,” state Messrs. Hunter and Mack in their minority report. “These men, in common with other employees in the railway service, had their hours extended from forty-four to forty-eight per week with the addition of four hours’ pay at the flat rate. In addition to this the overtime rate after eight hours between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. was withdrawn. A majority of the board has now recommended that the night rate at present existing shall be withdrawn, and overtime at the rate of rate and a half on the schedule rate paid afteY ten hours’ work. This strikes at the very root and principle of the eight-hour day. It may be urged that in a transport industry an eight-hour day is impracticable. We agree that to sopie extent this is true; that is to say, it is impossible to fix the duties in every case at exactly eight hours per day; but, on the other hand, the department has the right to work a member as few or as many hours as it thinks fit on any one day, and as the exigencies of the service may require, and we are of the opinion that under these circumstances any time in excess of eight hours between the hours of 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. should be paid for at overtime rates. This is now the practice in the locomotive running branch, was the practice in the traffic running branch before the dispute, and we can see no reasonable grounds for any alteration or any differential treatment of men doing the same work in the same service.

NIGHT RATES UNALTERED. “As regards the night rate of rate and a quarter between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m., we are of the opinion that this should remain as at present and be based upon the schedule hourly rat? of pay. In so far as the hours are concerned, we consider that these men should be given the right, by ballot, under the same conditions as recommended for the to jfceid* m

to whether they desire to return to the forty-four-hour week or not. We are atoo of the opinion that these men are entitled to a 62-per cent, increase in wagge, or 7s 3d per week, over the baric /ate in the railway service in 1914. Summarised, we recommend a -return to the condition existing prior to the strike, with the exception that the penal rate of one-quarter be paid on the achedule hourly rata, plqg an increase in wages of 7e 3d per week as set out above.” For line and relaying gangs 48 hours a week at the present rate of pay was recommended by th© majority of the board and accepted by the Government. Messre. Mack and Hunter state that they concur in thia recommendation so far as it goeft, but can see no reason why these men should not be allowed to decide by ballot in exactly the same way as recommended for the workshops men as to whether they desire to return to the forty-four-hour week or otherwise. In this case also they are of the opinion that these men are entitled to an increase of 62 per cent, ts shown by the Government Statistician’:, figures, or 7s 3d per week, over the basiq rate in the railway service in 1914. 48 HOURS NECESSARY. In some general comments on the hour* , question, the majority of the board state: “We are of the opinion that forty-riglrt-hour week is necessary to ensure efficiency in the branches of the railway service coming withi n the scope of our inquiry, with the possible exception of the workshops and works staffs. Mr. Mason is of 2a opinion that even this exception should not. be made, and accordingly does not subscribe to it. The Court of Arbitration foe several years past has prescribed a forty-, four hours week for workers in trades in* which the work is of a continuously strtn-. uous nature, more particularly the skilted trades, and a forty-eight-hours week forother workers. Outside of the workshops and works staffs the railway employees with whose conditions of work we «re concerned come within the latter category. “We are further of the opinion that payment of overtime rates in respect of all time on duty in excess of eight hours 5n any day is unwarranted. The provisfon of a forty-eight-hours week, with overtime rates for all time worked in excess of ten hours in any dfty Or of forty-eight hours i n any week, safeguards the employee against being required to work without overrime-payment longer than an average of eight hours daily, and tends to restrict the maximum daily hours of woric to a number approximately to that average. It may be mentioned, in pwritig, that in many industries there is no drily limit Of hours, the pfovision of a weekly limit of forty-eight hours meeting all requirements. An exact eight-hours day is unworkable in a transport service such as the railway service, and necessarily involves a largely increased wagebill disguised as overtime. It may be taken as wriomsrio that a fair and reasonable daily nr Weekly number of hours of work, ascertained by reference to the nature and conditions of the particular employment nd by comparison with available standards, should be paid for at ordinary rates of wages, and time worked in excess of that number of hours should be paid for at overtime rates.

MANY ADVANTAGES. “We have recommended the discontinuance of the payment of a special night rate. It is not customary to pay owrtime rates to workers outside the railway service for shift-work that has necessarily to be performed all round the clock. The wage fixed for these workers covers an allowance "or the necessary conditions of their employment. We have, however, recommended an increase of the general overtime rate from rat? and a quarter on 44/48ths of the schedule rates of pay tn rate and a half on the full schedule rsies of pay. This is i n accordance with the usual practice prevailing outside the railway service, and is a compensation to the men for the withdrawal of the night rate.’* Commenting on wages and condition* generally the majority report adds:— “We have had an opportunity of comparing the wages and conditions of the New Zealand railways employees with those of the employees of the Australian railways system, and are satisfied that the comparison i* ail in favour of New Zealand. A comparison of New Zealand railways wage* and conditions with those obtaining in industries in New Zealand in which similar classes of workers are employed is also in favour of the New Zealand railways employee. No body of hourly or drily workers outside the railway service posseoeea such advantage® as payment for pubUo holidays on which no work is done, an-% nual leave on full pay, free passes, privilege tickets, free carriage of provisions to isolated stations, a liberal superannuation) scheme, and, above all, conrinuity of em* ployment and a guaranteed week’s paja each week. All these advantages are enjoyed by the railwa” workers, many of whom also have the benefit of cheap bousing, while few workers outside the service i have even one of these advantages. These ’ all have a definite money value. “The actual money wages paid to raffway employees have been brought into conformity with the increased cost of living. Tlie present minimum rate of le 9 34/44d per hour represents an increase of 61.2 per cent, over the minimum rata payable i n 1914, and the value of improved conditions and other concession* granted since. 1914 places the railway worker on a better standard than i n prewar years. The weekly wage rates show a similar increase, for the present weekly* hours ar? in no case longer than thus4| worked in 1914.”