WAR AND THE 40-HOUR WEEK.

Evening Star, Issue 23679, 12 September 1940, Page 13

WAR AND THE 40-HOUR WEEK.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —A number of letters have appeared in the Press of late attacking the Government for adhering to the 40hour week, with war conditions as they are to-day. Have the writers, however, taken the trouble to listen-in carefully to the many broadcast talks of Ministers of the Crown, especially those of the Hon, R. Semple? If they have, they will know that the Ministers in general, and Mr Semple in particular, have pledged themselves over and over again that this country will put every ounce of effort into its war work in the war zone and also on the home front, in factory, field, mine, or on the waterfront. They have, however, pointed out that in England it was found necessary to reduce the working hours in munition factories from the 84 per week, to which Mr Bevin raised them for a short period, to 72 hours and in some cases even lower than that. I will admit that it is a long call from 84 hours a week to 40 hours, but in view of the Government’s assurances that the maximum effort consistent with the maintenance of reasonable health would be made, it is clear that the Government, utilising the knowledge at its disposal through the Health Department, has ascertained that the average New Zealander cannot safely work more than 40 hours a week without his health suffering and the quality of his work deteriorating. In the face of the information at its disposal can the Government at present wisely adopt any other policy than the one it is following? Is the attack of the Government’s critics not directed on it from the wrong angle? Should it not be assailed from one end of New Zealand to another for its failure to throw itself with sufficient energy into a campaign to restore to New Zealanders a fair standard of health? We know that, even during war time, New Zealanders consume a greater quantity of meat, butter, sugar, bread, and alcohol per head than the people of almost any other place on earth, so that it is obviously nob lack of quantity to eat. but something defective in our national diet, which is responsible for the extraordinary loss of stamina which is afflicting the country. Too much stress cannot be laid on the importance to our national welfare of this subject, and no effort on the part of the Government can be too great if its result is to restore to the people of this country a capacity to work hard and efficiently for more than'4o hours per week.—l am, etc., Health First. September 10. ■