PRINTING INDUSTRIES

Evening Star, Issue 22452, 24 September 1936, Page 8

PRINTING INDUSTRIES

EXEMPTION FROM FORTY-HOUR WEEK 132 FURTHER APPLICATIONS MISAPPREHENSION CAUSED DELAY AUCKLAND, September 23. A case of importance to many industries was heard in the Arbitration Court to-day, when applications were heard for the extension to employers who did not apply at the Wellington hearing of an order made by the court in respect of printing, stationery manufacture, photo-process engraving, and related industries. The court had declined a 40-hour week and had fixed the hours at those set out in the various awards and agreements. The secretary of the Federated Master Printers, Mr E. W. Clarkson, appeared for the employers, and Mr C. H, Chapman, M.P., and Mr K. Baxter, president and secretary respectively of the New Zealand Printing and Related Trades Federation, and Mr J. M'lnnaruey, the local secretary, opposed the applications on behalf of the employees. The employers wished the question to be treated on a Dominion basis, but on the employees’ representatives opposing the hearing of 82 southern applications on the ground that there had been insufficient time to consider them, the court ruled that only 60 applications from the northern industrial district should be dealt with. Mr Clarkson said that the occupiers of 172 factories, representing on a basis of output more than two-thirds of the industry, had applied to the court in Wellington, and since that date 132 further applications had been filed. The delay was due to a misunderstanding of the formal procedure. Many occupiers understood that by reason of the arrangement made by the court to hear cases by industries, individual applications were not necessary, since the ease on behalf of the industry was being presented by its representative organisations, and they believed that this presentation would be accepted by the court as being on behalf of every occupier. In fact, it was understood that in some industries applications were made and accepted by the court in such terms that the consequent orders applied without doubt to every factory engaged in those industries. The present application was designed to remove any possibility of doubt regarding the order, and to ensure that effect was given to the court’s intention, as they understood it to be, that the benefits of the order should apply uniformly and without exception to every occupier of a factory throughout the industry. Since the court had declined the union’s applications to amend the awards and agreements, the employers now sought authority under the Factories Amendment Act, 1936, to adhere to the hours provision set out in the current awards and agreements. Reviewing the information on which the court had held the 40-hour week to be impracticable, Mr Clarkson recalled that its judgment stated that the balance sheets represented seven daily city newspapers, 33 provincial dailies, '29 other newspapers and papers, and 69 printers, manufacturing stationers, and photo engravers. Returns to the Government Statistician in respect of newspaper production and commercial printing were presented at the hearing and supplemented by returns collected by two employers’ associations, bringing the official information up to date. From a list of factory occupiers who had furnished balance sheets a return had now been compiled by the Government Statistician giving a direct comparison for 1934-35 between these factories and the whole industry. The figures were as follow:

This was conclusive evidence, Mr Clarkson added, that since the balance sheets represented virtually twothirds of the industry the court was fully justified in accepting them as “ fairly representative- of the whole industry.” Mr Baxter, opposing the applications, held that the employers had lost their right to appear under the Factories Amendment Act, 1936, as paragraph 8, clause 3, stated: “This section shall come into force on September 1, 1936.” The employers had had over a month to exercise their right, yet about 201 out of 378 printing establishments had _ not applied. They were apparently indifferent or were reconciled to the 40-hour week. The federation intended to contest these applications on every occasion. He quoted a number of firms working shorter hours or five-day weeks. Fie contended that many of the occupiers who failed to make application for exemption from the 40-hour week before September 1 had considered reduced hours a foregone conclusion, but still thought it possible to overcome any financial embarrassment. He thought they also considered that this would be in the best interests of the industry as making for contentment among the workers. The position now was that a minority of occupiers had approached the court before the Act came into operation, and a majority after a decision had been given. In any case they claimed that the new applicants should be compelled to pay overtime rates for the hours worked over 40 since September 1. In reply, Mr Clarkson said ho had already shown that the court’s decision had been given after receiving applications from the greater part of the industry. He emphasised that the delay in other cases bad been merely the result of a misunderstanding. An entirely wrong interpretation had boon placed by tile employees on paragraph 8, clause 3, of the Act. The employers, indeed, considered that it operated in exactly the reverse manner. The court reserved its decision.

Whole Industrv, Factories Concerned Per £ £ Cent. Value of products ... 3,7r)8,937 2,417,873 (14 Salaries and washes ... 1,513,478 942,840 63 Materials ... 903,628 592,289 G'Z Other cxpen.es ... “ Surplu*’ M ... ... ... 955,403 040,452 68 ... 320,428 236,280 75