HC Deb 08 December 1911 vol 32 cc1848-53

(1) In this Act— The expression "shop" includes any premises where any retail trade or business is carried on, except where such retail trade or business is carried on merely as ancillary or incidental to some other business (not being retail trade or business) and does not form a substantial part of that business; The expression "retail trade or business" includes the business of a barber or hairdresser, the sale of refreshments or intoxicating liquors for consumption on or off the premises, and retail sales by auction; The expression "shop assistant" means any person wholly or mainly employed in a shop in connection with the serving of customers or the receipt of orders or the dispatch of goods, but shall not include a person so employed—

  1. (a) if he is the only person regularly employed in the shop and is a member of the family of the occupier of the shop, maintained by him, and dwelling in his house; or
  2. (b) if he is the manager of the shop and the business carried on thereat is not personally conducted by the employer; or
  3. (c) if he is casually or intermittently employed for not more than thirty hours in a week.

(2) For the purposes of this Act "population" shall be calculated according to the returns of the last published Census for the time being.

Sir J. GIBSON

I beg to move, in the first paragraph, to leave out the words "except where such retail trade or business is carried on merely as ancillary or incidental to some other business (not being retail trade or business), and does not form a substantial part of that business," and to insert instead thereof the words "but shall not include any part or parts of the premises coming under the provisions of the Factory and Workshops Act, 1901."

Mr. CHURCHILL

The provision cannot affect a shop so far as the shop is a factory.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendments made: Leave out the words "except where such retail trade or business is carried on merely as ancillary or incidental to some other business (not being retail trade or business), and does not form a substantial part of that business."

In the second paragraph, leave out the words "for consumption on or off the premises."

After the word "auction," at the end of the paragraph, insert the words "but does not include the sale of programmes and catalogues and other similar sales at theatres and places of amusement."—[Mr. Churchill.]

Sir JAMES GIBSON

I beg to more, in the third paragraph, to leave out the words "or the dispatch of goods."

I have received numerous letters on this subject, particularly from the representatives of the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce, and in reference to it the right hon. Gentleman was waited upon by a deputation at Dundee. To a deputation in Dundee the right hon. Gentleman said:— He considered there should be no difficulty, subject to the provisions of the Bill as to maximum hours, etc., in making separate arrangements as regards the hours of shop assistants who required to remain for the dispatch of goods. The closing of the dispatch department at an early hour would be a very great inconvenience to those who receive orders for that day, and which the customers want on that day. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will see his way to exclude from this portion of the Bill the dispatch of goods.

Mr. CHURCHILL

When I saw the deputation to which my hon. Friend referred the Bill was a very different Bill from the Bill we are dealing with to-day. It then included very elaborate provisions for the restriction and regulation of hours. Now everything has gone except the half-holiday. I am bound to say I do not see why a person should be deprived of his holiday merely because he happens to be employed mainly in the dispatch of goods instead of being mainly employed in serving in the shop and only partially employed in the dispatch of goods. This has nothing to do with the delivery of goods out of doors. The definition on page 25 was most carefully considered, and we really felt that this was the best way of expressing what we mean by shop assistant. I am afraid I cannot go the length of leaving out those engaged in the dispatch of goods. The separate packing department or persons engaged in the dispatch of goods can arrange one afternoon in the week, and whether that be so or not we ought not to narrow the definition of those persons who should be given the half-holiday.

Sir J. GIBSON

I am satisfied with the explanation that it can be so arranged that those men shall get the opportunity of taking holidays on another day, and I desire to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. NORMAN CRAIG

I beg to move, in Sub-section (1), "to leave out paragraph (a)."

In this case you have an exemption if the assistant is the only assistant employed, and if he is a member of the family. I am aware that in the Act of 1892 an exemption was made of members of the family in the case of young persons, and the only persons who are sweated under that Act are the members of the employer's family and the servants. That is no reason why that provision should be repeated now. Why should the occupier of a shop be exempted from giving his own son a weekly half-holiday and proper meal times? I cannot conceive why such an exemption is desired. If he is the only person regularly employed, he is in no different position from somebody else's son who is the only person regularly employed. Why the House should go out of its way to reserve to a father the right to deny the half-holiday and meal times to his son, I cannot conceive.

Mr. HARRY LAWSON

I beg to second the Amendment, and in doing so to register a protest against the insinuation that Members on this side have not wished to secure shop assistants and shopkeepers a measure of recreation which we, just as much as hon. Members below the Gangway opposite hold that they require. If we took a different view in Grand Committee as to the means of securing that object, we were just as anxious as hon. Members opposite to effect it. I cordially agree with this Amendment. It seems to me that to except members of a family will lead to the greatest absurdities in practice. The area of the family will be increased to suit the purpose of the trade. Many people will become related to shopkeepers for the purpose of this exemption who could not prove their relationship before a Court of Law, and certainly not according to the canons of the Church. For these reasons I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will take a step which is practically rendered necessary by the smaller proportions of the Bill, and that he will consent to do away with an exception which in the former state of the Bill was perhaps necessary, but which now would certainly be nothing but mischievous and obstructive.

Mr. CHURCHILL

As far as the half-holiday is concerned, I think there is a great deal of force in what has been said, but as regards the Schedule of meal times, I think there would be very great difficulty in saying that an old woman who keeps a small shop in a village must put up a Schedule of the hours at which her daughter who assists her in the shop is to have her meals.

Mr. NORMAN CRAIG

There will be the same difficulty if it is somebody else's daughter.

Mr. CHURCHILL

It is not quite the same thing. One must not take too small and precise points of this subject. My Latin does not carry me far, but it does carry me as far as de minimis non curat lex. As far as meal times are concerned it is not necessary to put up a Schedule in such a case as this, but I agree about the half-holiday, and I will consider in what way that point can be met, while at the same time not forcing shops of this small character to put up a formal Schedule. I do not want to worry a large number of people where as a matter of fact it is not reasonable.

Mr. NORMAN CRAIG

On that understanding I ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Mr. GRETTON

Before this Amendment is withdrawn, the right hon. Gentleman should remember that if he interferes with the arrangements between father and son or mother and daughter, he is making a very serious interference in the family life. He ought to be very careful indeed how he breaks in among the members of a family and takes the son out of the authority of the father and puts him under the authority of the police and magistrates.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment made: In Sub-section (1), leave out the word "or" at the end of paragraph (a).

Leave out paragraphs (b) and (c).—[Mr. Churchill.]

Mr. GLYN-JONES

I beg to move, in Sub-section (1), at the end of paragraph (a), to insert the words, If he is a person by whom the business of a pharmaceutical chemist or chemist or druggist is bonâ fide conducted in accordance with Section three of the Poisons and Pharmacy Act, 1908. The Amendment standing in my name is necessary because the effect of the last Amendment has left the exemption from the definition of assistant of "the manager of the shop where the business carried on thereat is not personally conducted by the employer." I have no objection to these words coming out, but the Clause now would apply to particular circumstances which I think the House will see need this Amendment. The Section referred to in this Amendment, Section (3) of the Poisons and Pharmacy Act, 1908, provides that in no shop can the business of chemist and druggist be carried on unless there is a specified manager, whose certificate shall be exhibited in the shop. The business, too, must be bonâ fide conducted by that manager. The moment the manager leaves the shop or business, if it is carried on, it is carried on illegally. So that the effect of this Bill, unless this Amendment is inserted, will mean that in every shop, in every branch shop particularly, where there is a qualified chemist as manager, on one day in the week at least he must leave at one o'clock and the chemist's shop will have to close. I do not think that it is contemplated that a qualified chemist in the position of manager should be covered. He is not quite in the same position as an assistant. A chemist having a certain professional character cannot at the same time escape the obligations cast upon him. You might as well say that a doctor's assistant must leave his work on a specified day of the week at 1.30. I think one ought to make a distinction between a business in which a person with a statutory qualification is required, and any other. It is with great regret that I move this Amendment.

Mr. CHURCHILL

I do not like to make any exception in the Bill. I think it is very desirable that everyone should have their half-holiday, and I do not quite see why the chemist, merely because he is a branch manager, shall be kept from it. It is quite true that a chemist who does not run his shop himself must appoint a manager, but there is no reason why the manager should not have his half-holiday the same as anybody else.

Amendment negatived.