Hours of Work in War Industries

Southland Times, Issue 24228, 11 September 1940, Page 4

Hours of Work in War Industries

MANY readers will have noticed a remarkable discrepancy between two decisions abo.ut the extension of working hours which were announced by the Government last week. An order was issued permitting workers in the tanning industry in Otago and Southland to work an additional four hours a week at ordinary rates. At the same time the Minister of Labour (the Hon. P. C. Webb) refused an. equal extension of hours to the management and employees of a firm in Auckland “engaged on important munition work.” The position in this case was that the workers themselves took the initiative and offered to extend their hours to 44 a week, at ordinary rates of pay,. in order to expedite the production of munitions.

When the offer was first submitted [The New Zealand Herald reported] the management called employees together and explained any possible implications, inviting free discussion and questions. The employees then affirmed their offer by resolution which stated they wished to convey to the Government their desire to do their utmost to further New Zealand’s war effort. This decision was taken on July 29. Application for an extension of hours was made by the firm through the Auckland Manufacturers’ Association on August 7; and almost a month later, on September 4, a reply was received from the Minister of Labour rejecting the offer. The grounds for the rejection, which the Minister, as chairman, communicated on behalf of the Industrial Emergency Council, were that “there is not sufficient evidence to enable the application for an extension of hours to be granted at the present juncture.”

“Proof” Required

The episode is a gravely disturbing example of the treatment given to a group of workers who have tried to respond to the Prime Minister’s call: “Work for your lives!”

They are engaged in the production of munitions, which is in the forefront of the country’s war effort, and they volunteered to work on Saturday mornings in order to accelerate their output. After their offer was made, with enthusiasm, they had to wait nearly a month for the Government’s reply; and then they and the management were told, in effect, that if they wanted to work longer hours they had to prove their case! In a statement made after full publicity had been given to the incident, Mr Webb suggested that if the firm would supply more detailed tion the application might be reconsidered. But the Minister’s original reply contained no such invitation to supply additional evidence; it simply rejected the offer on the ground that the evidence was insufficient. If more details were required the Minister, or the council, had ample time to obtain them during the month which this “emergency” organization allowed itself to reply to an urgent letter. But to say, at the end of the month, that stronger proof was needed of the value of an accelerated output of munitions in this under-equipped country in war time, was to stand reason on its head. It is perfectly true, as Mr Webb pointed out, that an award of the Arbitration Court should not lightly be varied. It is also true that a war against the most powerful enemy the Empire has ever faced, will not lightly or easily be won. How the Government expects the award workers of this country to contribute their share towards winning it without any effort apart from the pocketing of higher' wages, is beyond comprehension.