I.—9a.

22

[W.fGALLOWAY

16. The wages that are paid at the People's Palace are similar to those paid in the licensed hotels in Wellington?— Yes, According to the number of hands in the kitchen. 17. What is the tariff there ?—ss. a day. 18. You were there prior to the giving of the full day off?— Yes 19. How many hands did you have in the kitchen then? —Four. 20. There has been do increase in the kitchen staff since you started to get the full-day holiday?—No; but we might have put one hand off in the slack time, but it has not been slack. 21. There have been four hands during the whole of the summer, at any rate? —Yes, for the past eight months in the year. 22. Mr. Davey.] Could you tell me whether the new arrangement lias affected any other part of the hotel—say, the housemaids, 4c. ? Has more labour had to be put on? —I could not say. 23. You do not know anything about that part of the hotel? —No.

Ai.exandkr Croskkky, Secretary, Wellington Drapers' Union, made a statement and was examined. (No. 12.) Witne&e: 1 am secretar}' of the Wellington Drapers' Union, and 1 appear on behalf of the Wanganui Drapers' Union as well. I should like to ask, to start with, that this Shops and Otlices Act should come into force on the Ist January, 1914, instead of the Ist April, 1914. 1. Mr. Davey (Acting-Chairman).] Does your evidence affect the drapery trade generally ! Yes; the whole of the drapers' assistants in Wellington and Wanganui. With regard to clause 1, subclause (c), " The hours of his employment during each week,' we would like that to read " The daily hours of his employment during each week, and that the starting and finishing time be entered daily." This afiects us slightly. It affects the drivers, 1 understand, more. We are asking for a similar thing so that we shall know the hours we are working. Then 1 go on to subclause (d), " The wages paid to him in respect of each week : and." There is a little question here. We ask the Committee to consider the proposition of putting in after the word " wages," the words "premiums, bonuses, and commission* paid to him in respect of each week." I should like to explain the reason why we are asking for the words " premiums, bonuses, and commissions to be put in. Last November the soft-goods assistants in Wellington got an award of the Arbitration Court relating to wages, &C., and since that has come in one house in Wellington that was paying men £2 ss. per week prior to the award coining into force is still paying the £2 55., though the Arbitration Court award says that the men shall receive £2 15s. These men are receiving premiums on goods sold. If the premium comes to 10s. a week that premium is added to the wages of i>2 ss. to make up the minimum wage of £2 15s. So these men have not received any increase. They have had their premiums dedvicted and shifted on to the wages they were being paid at the time they gave evidence — £2 ss.—to make up the £2 15s. If they make I ."is. in premiums the extra ss. is put on to the next week. It is shifted about from one week to tinother, so that they never receive the premiums at all; these are put on to make up the minimum wage. We have no manner in which we can rectify this unless something is put into the Shops and Offices Act to regulate the matter. 1 have approached several of the Inspectors in the Labour Department, and discussed the matter with them, and they told me it was rather peculiar but that we could do nothing as the law stood at present. We think it would be perfectly fair if the words "premiums, bonuses, and commissions" weir put in, and then we should know where we stood: our men would get their minimum wage as prescribed by the award, plus the premiums or bonuses, which the employers would not be allowed to interfere with. 2. The employers might stop those, then, might they not? —We would prefer that they did; but we do not want them to interfere with them. Now. with regard to subclause (2) of clause 4, we would like to see all the winds deleted after " wages" in the second line of the subclause. Our contention is that no assistant should be held responsible for tin , correctness of the employer's statements in his book. Females and juveniles especially would be very reluctant to dispute' or refuse to sign an incorrect statement. We think that the provision in the old Act is better than the provision here. We think it would be much better if the words were deleted, and tin , employer made the one to certify to the correctness of the statements in his own books. Besides, it leaves it open for unprincipled people to conspire to deie.it the Ait. Clause 5, subclause (a), " after half past nine o'clock in the evening " : This is an extension of half an hour on the present Shops and Offices Act. For what reason it is madt we are unable to understand. We contend that —especially for females, who are employed more in fruiterers' shops and confectioners' shops —9 o'clock is quite late enough, without increasing the hours. 3. Hon. Mr. Massey.] On whose behalf are you speaking now? —On behalf of the females employed in the confectioners' and fruiterers' shops. 4. But do you officially represent them here?— No. We are only speaking on behalf of the shop-assistants' industrial unions. 5. You are speaking unofficially ? —Yes, on that score. There is one point I find I have missed. Clause 5, subclause (1), " Subject to the provisions of this Act and to any award of the Arbitration Court " : Some doubt is felt here that if these words were included the Court might, if it dad power to award hours, &c., in sonic trades, extend those hours over a period, and although not greater than the number of hours provided in the Act, they might be more broken, and consequently longer from the time of starting to the time of finishing. 1 would suggest that the matter be provided for as follows : "In the event of an industrial union of workers " —I put this in because I believe the Shops and Offices Act is principally to provide for trades which are not working under awards of the Arbitration Court—"ln the event of an industrial union of workers applying to