WATERSIDE WORK

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 27, 31 July 1936, Page 10

WATERSIDE WORK

40-HOUR WEEK

EMPLOYERS' OBJECTION

MORE OVERTIME PAY

I The application for an amendment of the waterside workers' award to pro- I c < vide for a 40-hour week is being heard by the Arbitration Court today. a Mr. T. O. Bishop appeared for the a employers, and Mr. J. Roberts for the 1 q waterside workers. tl The employers of waterside labour, p said Mr. Bishop, objected to the appli- c cation of the workers on the follow- n ing grounds:— 1. The application was contrary to g the spirit of the legislation, which was designed to give greater leisure to workers at present employed for c periods in excess of 40 hours per week, i 2. It was not a bona fide application c for a shorter working week. x 3. The application did not disclose . its real object. 1 4. If the application was granted it £ would not have the effect intended by s the Legislature, viz., to shorten the j higher working week down to one of , 40 hours, but would, in fact, have no effect upon the hours at present being ' worked. 1 5. It could never have been the in- ' tention of the Legislature that section ' 21 of the I.C. and A. Amendment Act 1 ) should be used on the eve of the i expiry of an award to secure the introi duction into that award of an entirely • new principle which had never previ- : ously been embodied in the award. 6. The award expired on September . 30. Any amendment of the award ■ made could therefore be effective only ; until that date unless the award conl tinued in operation until superseded by [ a new one. > 7. The cancellation of the registra- : tion of the union would prevent the t award continuing in force beyond the I date of its expiry. 8. The terms and conditions of emt ployment on the waterfront would have . to be negotiated between the union and . the employers, and the latter would be r prejudiced in their negotiations by the 1 fixation of hours by the Court at this 1 juncture. t 9. If the application was granted the 1. coastal shipping companies would be j unable to carry on their businesses successfully and profitably, which meant _ that they could not for long carry them t on at all. I 10. With increased costs the com- ± panics could not render the same ser--3 vice to other New Zealand industries as they did at present, therefore their ,1 efficiency, as gauged by the service ren- • dered to other industries, would be . impah'ed. j 11. It would therefore not be pracn ticable to carry on the industry effin ciently under a 40-hour week. s TRANSPORT INDUSTRY. In support of the summary of the ■~ employers' objections, Mr. Bishop said *' the application was different from the ° great majority of those recently heard 5" by the Court in that it was not coupled J with an application made on behalf of the employers for an extension of hours prescribed by the Factories '• Act. The application was made"* 0 under section 21 of the I.C. and ** A. Act, and upon it the provisions of • r the Factories Act had no bearing. The application before the Court was ' c an important one because it was the '* first which had come before the Court 3t referring to a section of the transport 10 industry. It was important because the decision given would undoubtedly ct be used as a precedent in submissions to be made to the Court in reis spect of applications for other sections of the transport industry or in * c negotiations of agreements for other transport workers; and also because c" the transport industry was the conlcl cern of every other industry in New Zealand. Transport in the Dominion was a most important factor in the costs both of production and distribution of the products of all other industries. The cost of transport from the farms in New Zealand to the consumers in overseas markets; the cost {, of transport to New Zealand of imported manufactured goods and raw materials; the cost of distribution of imported and locally produced goods within New Zealand were matters which concerned every employer, worker, and every consumer in the cc country. It was important that those as costs should be kept within reasonable I j s limits. The increase in the cost of h e transport was quite as important as m . the increase in the cost of production. In fact, with many manufactured goods 1( j. the cost of distribution might well e( j exceed the actual cost of production ty because of the difficulties of transar l port, >ie "ANOTHER STRIKING PHASE." "I desire to call the attention of the ' or Court particularly to another strikinj 1 a phase of this application," said Mr a Bishop. "It purports to be an appli rG" cation for a reduction of weekly work ing hours. In effect it is nothing of th( kind. The whole spirit of the recen legislation—the Factories Act, the Arbi tration Act, and the Shops and Office: Act —is to reduce the weekly limit 6 working hours in order (1) to spreac employment over a greater number o workers, and (2) to give the worker; more leisure as part of their share o the benefits accruing to mankind fron tns the improvement in methods of pro ray duction and increased use of machines.

ing grounds;—

The average waterside worker seldom got 40 hours' work in a week, and the wages of waterside workers had been fixed by the Arbitration Court in full recognition of that fact. The waterside woi-ker averaged 25 per cent, less working time than a labourer, and his wage rate had to be increased by a proportionate amount to enable him to earn a living wage.

Mr. Bishop said he would submit evidence to show that the waterside worker was not working 40 hours a week, that every effort had been made to increase the number of his working! hours, and that the text of the unions'! appeal for increased wages in the past had always been that he could not be employed for a satisfactory number of hours a week. It must be clear that the application was not really one for reduced hours. The waterside worker did not need fewer hours of work. He did need more hours of work. If it were possible to so organise the waterside work as to provide the workers with a higher average number of hours' work per week the rank and file members of the union concerned in the application would feel that they had attained somethin" worth while. "

"THE REAL OBJECT.

The application did not disclose how it was desired the limitation of hours should be applied. It simply asked that the hours prescribed in clause 1 should be reduced to 40 per week, or in other words that the overtime hours be increased by four per week. As some work had to be performed after 5 o'clock on practically every working day throughout all the ports of New Zealand, it would be clear that one effect of a reduction so applied would be only to make it necessary to pay overtime for work now performed at ordinary time rates. Although he held that the Court could not increase tha wage rates upon the present application, it appeared that the object of the i application could only have been to

secure such an increase. He submitted that if an increase in the rates of pay was justifiable by the conditions * of waterside work, then it should be sought for on its own merits and not under the disguise of an application for a reduction of hours. Moreover, it should be reserved until the new agreement was negotiated after September 30. when the award would expire in respect to which the application was made. What the additional cost arising out of the 40-hour week might be it was impossible to estimate. With some knowledge of waterside conditions, he feared that it might be very heavy.

Furthermore, it would be acknowledged that if a 40-hour week were provided for in the waterside workers' award it would be a precedent which would be seized upon by the workers on board the ships themselves. All grades of maritime workers, masters and officers, engineers, seamen and firemen, and cooks- and stewards, were provided for by awards or by agreements. If one section ot workers engaged in connection with the shipping industry, the waterside workers, were to secure the provision of a 40-hour week, no matter how inefiective such a provision might be in their case, there could be no doubt that the several unions of maritime workers would seek a similar prov;- < sion. CProcecd'mg.) :