4

1.-9 A

Act. We understand that the present Act provides for the rate of wages to be paid to employees between the ages of sixteen and twenty, but so far as the rate of wages of any female over twenty years of age the Act is entirely silent, and the employers under the present Factory Act have the right to pay female workers of twenty and over any wage they choose. That, we consider, to be distinctly unfair, and we consider that the Bill which has been introduced and is now before the Committee is one that should receive the support of every section of the community. So far as we can learn, the Bill will inflict absolutely no hardship upon the employers. The only point raised in connection with the Bill is that it will detrimentally affect many of the workers, and a good deal has been made of the number of cases of individuals who have been unfortunate in early life and who desire to learn various trades after they become twenty years of age. Well, I should like to say this: that, looking at the matter from that point of view, we consider that 17s. a week is little enough for any female over twenty years of age with which to keep herself in a decent and respectable manner. I might say this: that there are trades in which the wages have been fixed according to age by the Arbitration Court irrespective of whether the workers have had any previous experience. For instance, in the butchering trade in all the districts of the colony the wages of the employees from the age of sixteen upwards are fixed according to age, and .not according to previous experience, because it is recognised that the amount of service which can be rendered to an employer is governed by the physical ability of the worker. There is any amount of elementary work —we might say unskilled work —in connection with all trades and industries at which a person can earn a decent wage, although it is not skilled work or work of a technical character; but, still, the work is done by the person at an age when he or she requires to earn sufficient remuneration to keep him or her in decency. Consequently we consider that a minimum wage of £1 is little enough for any female or young fellow of twenty years of age to do this. Then, we have to look at the Act from this point of view, if possible: If young women or young men of twenty years of age are to be allowed to obtain work in the different industries at ss. or so a week to commence with, this is going to debar to a large extent the younger boys and girls from qualifying themselves in such trades or industries, because I say, emphatically, that } r oung fellows of twenty years and over are of more value to an employer, and more profit can be reaped from their labour, than from lads of fourteen or fifteen years of age, and the employers would naturally be more inclined to take the older youths than the rising generation, although we consider the boys are more tractable —can be better taught and grounded in the trade than older individuals. We have been informed by the representatives of the Canterbury Trades and Labour Council that in Christchurch advantage has been taken under the present Act to pay females over twenty }'ears of age less than the amount stipulated in the Act for females under that age, and they are advised that under the present law it is impossible to obtain any redress. It is to remedy this state of things that we understand'the Bill has been introduced, and it has the most hearty support of the Wellington Trades Council and the Tailoresses' Union of this city. I might say that in all the other industries in which females are employed in Wellington there is no organization, with the exception of the tailoresses and the matchfactory employees. The Tailoresses' Union supports this Bill, as I have said; but so far as the match-factory employees are concerned, their opinion has not been obtained. We trust the Bill will be passed into law. Andrew Collins examined. (No. 9.) 16. The Chairman.] Do you hold office in the Wellington Trades and Labour Council? —Yes, I represent the Bakers' Union on the Council, and I am also president of the Tailoresses' Union, the Shirtmakers' Union, and secretary of the Bakers' Union and the Plasterers' Union. I might say that I have very little to add to what Mr. Cooper has said, as he dealt with the matter exhaustively. The Trades and Labour Council and the organizations I represent are unanimously in favour of the Amendment Bill brought forward by Mr. Taylor. We all consider that it is only a fair thing that if an employer requires the services of persons over the age of twenty he should pay them something like a living-wage. Our experience is that no employer —no matter what industry he may carry on —will employ labour unless he wants it. Our desire is to foster our manufactures, and also to see that the employers get fair treatment as well as ourselves; but we think that no fair employer would for one moment expect any one over twenty years of age to work for less than 17s. a week. I therefore hope, on behalf of those I represent, that the Bill will be passed into law. 17. Right Hon. R. J. Seddon (to Mr. Jones).] Do you consider it would be fair to the girls you have been employing, and who have received under the Act ss. a week with an increase every year of 35., if you were to ask them to work for less than 17s. a week after they had gone through their course? —No. They would earn more than 17s. a week by the time they were twenty years of age. 18. But if you employ people at less money, does it not prejudice the position of those who have served their course? —If I took a person on at twenty and gave her 17s. and put her alongside an experienced girl getting Bs., there would be a row at once. 19. Supposing an employer had by law to pay his apprentices up to 17s. a week, but after they had served their time their work was stopped, what would you say to a case of that kind? — I should say that would be scandalous. It would be a very mean thing to do. 20. Do you think it would be a reasonable thing to provide by Act of Parliament that all persons who had served their time should not be employed for less than 17s. a week?—We should not object to it at all. If a girl is not worth 17s. a week after she has served her time and is twenty years of age she is not worth anything at all. 21. You heard what Mr. Cooper said, that there are men and women employed at less, and they are worth more than a boy or girl at fifteen I— Not to us. Their fingers would not be so nimble as the younger ones, and in certain trades there is the danger of accidents. I should be afraid to put them on to certain work.