INTERESTING CASE

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVII, Issue 182, 3 July 1937, Page 2

INTERESTING CASE

PETROL DRIVERS’ HOURS.

HEARING AT CHRISTCHURCH. Per Press Association. CHRISTCHURCH, July 3, In the form of a prosecution by the Inspector of Awards at Christchurch against the Vacuum Oil Co., the petrol wagon drivers’ dispute with the employers, which- occasioned the shortlived strike at Auckland last week, came before the Arbitration Court this morning. Two breaches of the Motor and Horse Drivers' Award were alleged against the company, which was represented by Mr Vv. J. Mountjoy. One was that petrol wagon drivers were employed 44 hours a week without the payment of overtime; the other was that the drivers were employed during the meal hour without the payment of overtime. “Although this case is brought against the Vacuum Oil Co. in Christchurch, it affects oil companies throughout the Dominion and I suggest that the Court consider it on

On the first charge, Mr Bailey (for the inspector) said that the relevant clause in the award was: “Except where otherwise provided the week’s work shall not exceed 44 hours, exclusive of time 1 1 juired for the necessary attention to horses and vehicles, provided that in the case of drivers employed in industries or by establishments where any lesser number of hours per week -is in operation, by order of the Court or by the operation of the Legislature, the weekly hours of tliese drivers shall lie such lesser number of lioitrs, hut with the right to work on Saturdays when necessary so long as the number of hours is not exceeded.”

The premises of the defendant company were, said Mr Bailey, registered under the Factories Act and by the 1936 amendment hours of work had been reduced to 40 a week. The Arbitration Court had made an order in which the maximum number of hours, exclusive of overtime, to he worked in any week hv drivers in factories occupied by oil companies were fixed at 40, to he worked on five days a week, with the exception that work might he performed on the morning of a statutory half-holiday where it was found necessary to load or unload products, provided the number of workers so employed should not exceed the number required. It was also provided that, where necessary for the loading or unloading of products, workers might lie employed for not more than 5 hours without an interval of threequarters of an hour for a meal.

“No doubt it will Ik? contended that these men are not working in or about the factory and are not subject to the shorter hours,” said Mr Bailey. “If there were any doubts about it the Shops and Offices Act, 1922, gives the inspector the power to determine the point, his decision being final and conclusive.”

Dealing with the second charge, Mr Bailey said a sub-clause provided that it should he sufficient if the driver of a petrol wagon when a distance of two or more miles from Christchurch stopped his vehicle for half an hour to eat his meal. Under the Explosives and Dangerous Loads Act a tank wagon and trailer while in use must be constantly attended; no carriage conveying dangerous roods was allowed to remain stationary within a borough or town district, except as was necessary for the loading or delivery of goods, or at a place approved by the inspector. , Mr Bailey said the Court had ruled that if the dri-er was free from his

»s during the lunch interval his lunch interval uni not, count as part of- his daily hours. The driver of a petrol wagon had to remain by his vehicle: he was not free from .duty, and the time occupied by him in eating his meal was not his own. “Defendants will, no doubt, set up tiie defence of custom,” said Mr Bailey. “I submit that the industrial unions have established their objection. Furthermore, evidence will show that one company is paying overtime and another was doing so for a considerable period.”

CASE FOR DEFENCE. Opening the case for the defence. Mr Mountjoy said it was agreed that the inspector had power to decide whether a worker was employed in a factory or in a shop, but he held, that this had' no. bearing on the present case, as in the oil companies’ installations there wore no shops and the inspector had power only where there was a combined shop and factory.

“The decision of the Court will have a far-reaching effect upon the employment of drivers by oil companies,” said Mr Mountjoy. It was submitted that no breach had been committed by working petrol wagon drivers 44 hours a week without the payment of overtime, as it was considered the award gave authority to the oil companies to work drivers 44 hours a'week. The Arbitration Court order fixed the hours of workers in oil companies’ factories at 40 a week, hut as these workers represented only 16.68 per cent of the total employees in the oil industry in New Zealand it could not be claimed that the Court had determined the hours of employment for all workers in the industry. It would be anomalous to restrict oil companies to 40 hours a week when common carriers carting for oil companies could work their employees 44 hours a week. Dealing with the second claim' for a penalty tor lading to pay drivers for the lunch interval when a distance of two or more miles from the depot, Mr Mountjoy submitted that no breach had been committed. Evidence was given by Lionel Wallace Albert, warehouse representative of the Vacuum Oil Co., that under the previous award the drivers had been paid for lunch hours wjieii they remained on their vehicles, but this had been discontinued under the present award. The Judge said the Court would consider the matter and make known its decision as early as possible.