L—B

68

to consumer, who therefore either buys a less number of articles or does without. It also places our industries on a reduced ability to cope with foreigners. If forty-four hours is made usual for factory-hands, hands working in the country will also demand less hours, which will, when added to increased cost of colonial-made manufactures, seriously handicap the great producing classes. Subsection (b) :We suggest " eight and a half " instead of " eight." Subsection (c) :We suggest " five " instead of " four." Clause 19, subsection (1), (b) : " Two " days should read " four." Subsection (1), (c) : " Thirty" days should read " sixty." There are seasonable trades in which overtime is unavoidable, else the work cannot be done ; trade will therefore be lost to the country, and the cost of manufacturing will be increased, to the consumers' detriment. Subsection (3): The rate of increased pay for overtime should, we think, be left to the Arbitration Court to decide for each trade on its merits. Clause 21, subsection (3) : To provide a dining-room for as few as four hands will be very hard on small employers, and give large concerns still greater advantages. Clause 28, subsection (3) : Add to clause, "except when all employes agree that wages shall be paid fortnightly." Clauses 30 and 32 : These clauses mean an additional tax on manufacturers of 12 per cent, added to the cost of labour, which in many industries in New Zealand will prevent a profit being made, and will cripple all. It will mean largely increased importations. It will be very unfair to those employers who have been recently before the Arbitration Court, and on the basis of these holidays not having to be paid for have had awards made extending over a considerable period. It will mean increased work for the Arbitration Court, as employers will have to apply for reduction in wages to enable these holidays to be paid for. Clause 33 : We would point out that these clauses, if carried out to the letter of the Act, would involve conditions almost impossible to be carried out, or at such addition to capital as few industries can stand. These clauses, if ridgidly enforced by any Inspector, would mean the closing for a considerable time of many works : it is too much power to put into any one man's hands, and at least an appeal to the Chief Inspector should be allowed. At the present time, although careful and strict where it is necessary, the Inspectors carry out the present Act in its spirit and not in its strict letter, and all sections of the community are satisfied. Clauses 34 and 35 : What constitutes default should be made clearer ; if something else than refusal to carry out the instructions of the Inspector, these two clauses are too penal, and place a responsibility on the employer he should not carry. .

.The Factoeies Bill and the Laundey Teade. The sections of the above Bill which are unreasonable in respect to its effects on the laundry trade, and to which exception must be taken, are : Clause 6, subsection (5); clause 17, subsection (1) (b); clause 18, subsection (1); clause 19, subsections (1), (2), and (3); clause 20, subsection (2); clause 30, subsection (1); clause 35. Clause 6, subsection (5): We consider that to allow an Inspector to take with him into any factory he chooses any person he desires, and to compel the employer to produce his books for that stranger to examine, and to allow him to examine those employed in that factory, is to curtail British liberty, and make it possible for our business transactions to become public property. The words " any person " should be either struck out, or the words " Justice of the Peace or constable " substituted. Clause 17, subsection (1) (b) : This portion of the Bill is quite unworkable in laundries, as it is sometimes necessary for a person to be engaged in different branches of the work within half an hour, and to keep a correct record would mean having a special clerk to note the work of each person. Clause 18, subsection (1) : This is the principal clause of our objections, for, should this become law, the effect would be to cripple the laundry business, and more especially steam laundries. For no one to commence work until 8 o'clock would mean that the majority could not start until 9 o'clock and would be obliged to cease work at 4.30 o'clock p.m., thus working only six hours and a half per day. This is easily explained :It takes one hour to raise a sufficient pressure of steam for engine purposes and for heating drying-rooms, and one hour to have irons sufficiently heated. If males are included in the Act, it certainly means a 9 o'clock start. Then, again, at the end of a day's work, machines must be seen to, fires drawn or banked, engine wiped down, &c, which cannot be done under half an hour; and, to have this done at 5 o'clock, we must 'stop at 4.30 p.m. No provision is made in this Bill for stable-work. No horse can have feed or fresh water, nor be wiped down, nor have its dirty bedding removed, until 8 o'clock ; and should a van arrive at 5 o'clock, which is too late for an overtime permit, what can be done? The whole of subsection (1) of this clause is unworkable in steam laundries, as we could only work six hours and a half for five days, or thirty-two hours and a half a week. It could not be expected that an employer would raise steam on Saturdays, when it would be impossible to work more than two hours and a half—that is, for the majority of those employed. It would simply mean this, should this portion of the Bill ever become law : that a large portion of the laundry-work now done in New Zealand would be done in Australia or elsewhere. With the increased price that would be necessary for the shipping companies to pay, we feel certain they would have the linen done elsewhere. To the Union and Huddart Parker Companies it would be an easy matter for them to have all their laundry-work done in Australia, while the steamers from England could take their soiled linen back with them to England, as is done with many of the Trans-atlantic liners. This would be driving a tremendous amount of work from New Zealand, as the Union Company alone pay from £4,000 to £5,000 annually for laundry-work. The only suggestions we can make with regard to this clause is that all males over eighteen years be exempt from the Act, and that only females and young males be included, as is at present, and that the law remain as at present with regards intervals for meals, allowing half an hour, or allowing, as we do, forty-five minutes for meals.