Counsel Tells Why Men Are Paid More

Chronicle (Levin), 16 February 1949, Page 5

Counsel Tells Why Men Are Paid More

WELLINGTON, Fel. 15. i Whether women should receive equal pay with men for equal work, was argued hefore the Court of Arhitration when the New Zealand Clerical Work- 1 ers' Association asked that one minimum scale of wages should" hpply to both male and female workers under the clerical workers' award. Mr. Justice Tyndall, president of the Court, commented that he was not sure whether men should he discussing this subject when at home wives were ex-( pected to work uniimited hours without equal pay.

Mr. A. >S. Ilerring, advocate for the clerical workers, said in the cJerieal industry men and women perfonned the same work with the. saiue degree of skili and .yet awards for clerical workers in the past had preseribed two scales ot miniiruiin rates of wages based not 011 the* job content but on whether the worker was male or female. I'lider the present award provisions men and women competed for one job not on ability but 011 dilferent miniiiiuin rates of wages. This was wrong in principle* Mr. Ilerring alleged that the e.m plovers sougiit to retain Ihe lower award miiiimuiii rates for the female gvoup so as to have a pool l'rom wliich to draw cheap ollice Jabour. Based 011 Needs. Mr. J. Ti. Hurdon, for the emplovers, said the Arbitration t'ourts of bot.li Xew Zealand and Australia based male wage rates 011 social rather than on economic grounds to begin with and added margins for skill and other factors. The base rate was tixed primarily not 011 the value of the work dorie by the average "unskilled" worker but on the minimum needs oi' a worker and his family 011 a social basis. if that statemept were substantially correct, to give women sinular rates of wages to those payable to men, wotild mean tliat women would be receivingj wages based 011 a fal.se assuinption. Women workers generally had not families to mahitahi. Men had either family responsiuilities or potential family responsi bilities. It had been argued hefore this Court that atthough it might not requii'e the adult male rate to keep

a single man in a reasonable standard of comfort, the Court should treat him as being required to put aside savings to enable him to undertake marriage. If the Court and legisiature were to j iguore Ihe extra social responsi bilities | of men and provide equal wage rates, j they would do an injustice to men bej cause of their actual or probable fam- | ily responsi bilities. Most female workers worked fewer years in industry than men. Mr. Hurdon added that most left work just before or just after marriage. Family life was the foundation of the national wellbeing and it was not in the best interests Of the country to make work mucli more attractive for female workers. Tlie union • -ild not denv that nature deeided tlu. ' women should be the mothers of the race nor that the olrligations attaching to the support of mothers and their children belonged to the male. It was realised, too, that women were enlitled to take up careers alter their motherhood but it was submitted that "career women" were a small minority of the female popula-

tion and probably did not remain emploved under the clerical workers award. His Honour said he did not know whether men should discuss this problem when men at bnme expected uniimited hours of work to be done by their wives. 11c wondored how many were prepared to earry this equai pay busines: into the home. In his general subinissions to the Court, Mr. J. R. Hanlon, for the emplovers, suggested that the Court had alreadv settled the position of clerical' workers in relation to certain other groups of workers and that the fixing of clerical workers' rates under the new award should not present any new difficulties. Wage rates, overtiine, hours of work, holidays and casual workers' pay were among Ihe principal points in (tispute between the parties ahd which the Court was asked to settle. The Court will continue its sitting tomorrow.