DRIVERS’ AWARD

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLV, Issue 21185, 4 November 1938, Page 11

DRIVERS’ AWARD

DISSATISFACTION EXPRESSED By Telegraph—Press Association WELLINGTON, Novettioef 3. “The award issued by the Court Is very disappointing,” said Mr F. C. Allerby, secretary of the New Zealand Drivers’ Federation, commenting oh the New Zealand Motor and Horse , Drivers’ Award. “By the award a driver has lost his position in respect to wagfes relative to the wages other workers have enjoyed for many years. I fail to understand why the Court could nbt grant a 40-hour week for drivers, for one-third of those engaged in the transport industry to-day are working a 40-hour week. If the court found that it was impracticable to, grant a 40-hour week to all drivers, it should have increased the wages according to the hours worked, as has been done in other awards.” Mr Allerby continued: “Take the illustration of a one-hbrse driver in comparison With a labourer. The labourer works a 40-hour week at a wage for a full week's work of £4/13/4. A one-horse driver receives for a week’s work of 40-hdurs under this award £4/13/-, which is 4d below the wage of the laboured. If he works 44 hours he receives the same wage with no extra payment for the extra hours worked. The previous award expired on October 31, 1937. The Court of Arbitration made its pronouncement increasing the wages of weekly workers by 5/- a week last February, and by the delay in getting this award, and the Court’s not making it retrospective, drivers have lost what benefits of the 5/- a week increase there might be up to to-day.”

Mr Allerby said that the award made no increase in holidays, and by the more exacting nature of driving today compared with driving when the last award was made, December, 1936, drivers should have receive ’ at least an annual holiday of two weeks in the case of town drivers, and three weeks for long distance drivers who were called out at any hour of the day or night. The court granted three weeks in the passenger transport drivers award, issued last June. No consideration had been given to the driver who handled, and was responsible for large amounts of ca- - made up of many individual small payments, such as drivers of bakers’ carts. Drivers could not be blamed if they sought avenues other than the Court of Arbitration to rectify the obvious defects in the award.