SATURDAY WORK

Evening Star, Issue 22449, 21 September 1936, Page 9

SATURDAY WORK

MINISTER REPLIES TO UNION SECRETARY STATEMENTS OBJECTED TO * ■ A sharp response was made on Saturday by the Minister for Labour (the Hon. H. T. Armstrong) to statements that he would find it difficult under existing conditions to prevent tradesmen from taking work privately on Saturdays (says the 1 Press '). The statements were made by Mr E. C. Sutcliffe, secretary of the Canterbury branch, of the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners, who said that everything depended on the employer being party to an award or agreement, and that the Minister had not agreed to requests to simplify the method of making all employers parties to an award. “ His remarks are a conglomeration of stupid statements* that I do not understand, and which I am sure he does not understand either,” said Mr Armstrong. The shorter working week was intended to create employment. A man who worked on- the day off he had been given was helping to keep other tradesmen out of work. Men of integrity and honour would not do that sort of thing, and men who were deficient in those qualities would be dealt with. ‘ ‘ The man who seeks to undermine his trade is a traitor to his union, and if Mr Sutcliffe stands for that sort cf thing, I don’t,” Mr Armstrong added. “It is not right that a man, after receiving a week’s wages, should take on private work at rates undercutting his employer. I have discussed this point with many prominent trades unionists, and they all agree with me. Mr Sutcliffe is the only man calling himself a unionist that would not agree.” “ REPROVED, BUT UNREPENTANT.” “ Mr Armstrong has accused me of presenting ‘a conglomeration of stupid statements,’ when presenting an opinion upon his proposed prohibition of private work on Saturday,” said Mr Sutcliffe, in comment on the minister’s remarks. “My interpretation of the law governing this class of work is *based upon the decisions of learned judges, who have administered our industrial laws for many years. The Minister appears to have a wider _ knowledge of those laws than the • judges. I can safely leave the matter to the public ’to decide who knows best—the fudges or Mr Armstrong. “ I accept his reproach, but must confess I am unrepentant,”- said Mr Sutcliffe, in conclusion.