CLAUSE 2.—(Duty of agricultural wages committees to conform to minimum wage.) (Hansard, 9 April 1940)

§ Miss Ward (Wallsend)
I beg to move, in page 3, line 16, to leave out Subsection (3).
I am very glad that my right hon. and gallant Friend the Minister of Agriculture mentioned the other day that the county committees have an obligation to women agricultural workers, and that a statutory obligation is being placed on those committees to examine the wages paid to women workers in relation to the settled national minimum. I understand that the last census showed that there were over 55,000 registered women agricultural workers, comprising all types of workers; and I am very glad that so far my right hon. and gallant Friend has seen fit to include them under the provisions of the Bill, because it is true to say that all the arguments that were used on the introduction of the Bill can be used in relation to women workers as well as to male workers. What I am not sure about is how far the provisions of the Bill will apply to women workers, because there is no precise definition.

§ The Chairman
I must remind the hon. Lady that we are not now discussing the Bill. I called her in order that she might move an Amendment to leave out Subsection (3) of Clause 2. All that she has said so far has been entirely in favour of the Sub-section remaining in the Bill.

§ Miss Ward
I assure you, Sir Dennis, that in a minute or two I shall explain why I think Sub-section (3) should be deleted. I was trying to be nice to the Minister about the steps he has already taken to encourage women workers in agriculture, but if a little more acidity in my voice would be acceptable, I shall have pleasure in changing my tone. I 530 have been told that I am sometimes a little too acid towards Ministers, and I thought that I would reform, and move my Amendment in rather slowed-down terms. I think this Sub-section should be deleted because adequate protection is not given to women agricultural workers. Although the county committees have to examine women's wages in relation to the national minimum, I do not see that any statutory obligation is put upon them, when they have come to a decision, to send their decision to the Agricultural Wages Board for confirmation and approval as is to be done in the case of adult male workers. Although the machinery provided in Clause 2 covers women workers, they are not to have the advantages of the machinery which is provided for adult male workers, and the national minimum that is provided for in Clause 1. This Sub-section has caused great dissatisfaction to the women who are engaged in agriculture. They feel that for a very long time they have been regarded as casual workers, they do not think that the provisions of this Clause give any encouragement to those women who are being trained at agricultural colleges which are subsidised by the Treasury, and they do not feel that their position is being really bettered under the Bill owing to there being no precise definition.

§ The Chairman
I will try to say to the hon. Lady what I have to say in a pleasant voice, but I am afraid that I have something unpleasant to say to her. Not a single sentence of what she has said has had anything to do with this particular Sub-section. She appears to want to amend the Agricultural Wages Act, 1924.

§ Miss Ward
I thank you, Sir Dennis, for being so nice about it. In dealing with this matter, I see the difficulty that there is in intervening on a matter about which one has no knowledge. I could challenge the world in the industrial field, because I should be certain of what I was talking about. I have been asked by the women agricultural workers to intervene in this Debate on their behalf, and I do not think they will appreciate how difficult it is to keep within the Rules of Order. Sub-section (3) reads: It shall be the duty of every agricultural wages committee to have regard to the national minimum wage, not only in fixing minimum 531 rates of wages for men of full age employed whole time by the week or any longer period in agriculture, but also in fixing minimum rates of wages for any other class of workers, but without prejudice to their power to fix for workers of any class rates higher than are necessary to secure compliance with the provisions of this Act. If I remember rightly, my right hon. and gallant Friend, in speaking in the Second Reading Debate last Wednesday, defined "any other class of workers" as covering women. The reason I ask for the deletion of the Sub-section is that it does not define the precise relationship of women's wages to men's wages, having regard to the national minimum. If I speak much longer, I feel that I shall trespass on your courtesy, Sir Dennis, and on the Rules of Order, but I hope that the Minister, who has a wide vision, will know what I mean to say. Therefore, I leave it to him to make the position crystal clear. I am afraid that if he does not find some way of assuring us that under this Sub-section women agricultural workers will have the same kind of protection as men—it is true that they will have their conditions improved in order to encourage them in their work—although we shall not be able to do anything on this Bill, we shall have to make representations in regard to this discrimination against women. We feel very strongly that this is the time to encourage both men and women in the agricultural industry, and the terms of this Sub-section, by not defining precisely the relationship of women's wages to men's wages, having regard to the national minimum, discriminate against women and leave them in an unsatisfactory position. I hope the Minister will be able to point out that I am entirely wrong, and that women agricultural workers will realise that the Government have at heart their interests as well as the interests of the male workers.

§ Mr. T. Williams (Don Valley)
I am afraid that the Amendment of the hon. Lady the Member for Wallsend (Miss Ward) would rob all agricultural workers who are not adult men, all those on piecework, all those who are seasonal workers, and all women agricultural workers of the only privilege they have under the Bill. Only under this Sub-section, in the category described as "any other class of workers," would women come under the 532 Bill. The other thing that I want to say is that in the original Act of 1924, the Preamble catered for "workers in agriculture," which includes women. This Bill deals with "men employed in agriculture." Therefore, if the right hon. and gallant Gentleman needs a lesson, all that he has to do is to go to the Labour Government's Act of 1924. He will find that in that Act we dealt with both men and women, whereas in this Bill it is only Sub-section (3) of this Clause that makes it possible for county committees to do for women something in relation to what the Agricultural Wages Board is able to do for men.

§ Miss Ward
I would point out to the hon. Member that I raised the matter in this way because it seemed that the only way in which I could bring to the notice of the House the question of women agricultural workers was by putting down such an Amendment.

§ The Chairman
As a matter of fact, the hon. Lady did it only as a result of the unjustified leniency of the Chair.

§ Miss Ward
I am very grateful to you, Sir Dennis.

§ Sir R. Dorman-Smith
I admit that it is rather difficult to answer the hon. Lady's questions, but I think I realise what is in her mind, and possibly the best way of explaining the matter is to state how this Sub-section will work. This goes back to the main principle of the Bill, and I assure the Committee that when we considered this whole question of wages and the setting up of a Central Wages Board, we had women workers very much in mind. As I tried to explain in my Second Reading speech, the actual minimum wage to be fixed by this Board is not an automatically operative wage. The county committee can, under certain conditions, fix the wage rate at a higher level or may apply to the Board to make it lower. What we tried to do was to give a guiding line to the county committees and to say to them, "You cannot go below that line," but leaving the county committees free to work in their own districts and, if need be, to go higher. Naturally that datum line would be worked on, in fixing the rates of the vast majority of workers who would be adult male workers.
We have not dealt, it is true, with others such as juveniles and women. It 533 will be for the county committees to consider the question of the wages of women workers, and we say in this Bill that the committee shall have regard to any alterations which may take place in the national minimum. They will have to try to relate to the conditions in their own areas the movement of wages both for men and for women and also for juveniles. Bearing in mind the main purpose of the Bill, which is to give a guide instead of fixing an automatically operated rate, I think women workers can be satisfied that they will get fair play, and I sincerely hope that in the future it will be possible, through the operation of this provision, to get more women workers back on to the land. I regret very much the disappearance of so many women workers from the land, and I hope that the necessary encouragement for their return to agricultural work will be provided by this Bill.

§ Miss Ward
In view of the Minister's statement, and as I am always trustful, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

§ Mr. Ridley
I beg to move, in page 3, line 25, to leave out Sub-section (4).
I cannot bring myself into such a complaisant condition of mind regarding this Amendment, as the hon. Member for Walsall (Miss Ward) has shown in regard to her Amendment. This is the last Amendment in the Committee stage of the Bill, the presentation of which must have given great satisfaction to the right hon. and gallant Gentleman. The Bill has been welcomed in every part of the Committee because it gives the hope, at last, of some uniformity in the fixing of agricultural wages, and it may result in relieving heavy anxiety in many homes. Because the Bill is so generally welcome, we feel it a pity that the Minister should comprise within it a provision which seems likely to hamper its effectiveness. I want the Minister, first, to explain what is the purpose of advertising these rates in the counties, and, secondly, to examine the consequence of doing so.
By the rejection of the two Amendments which were moved in relation to Clause 1, the Minister now secures that before the national minimum is fixed, there will be consultation with each of 534 the 47 committees. Therefore, presumably, the national minimum figure will be fixed as a result of the advice tendered to the Board by experienced members of the county committees. Surely the county committees are themselves, as to their own county areas, sufficiently representative of county agricultural opinion. It seems superfluous after having consulted with the county committees to proceed to advertise the intentions of the Board to the farming community in the counties represented by those committees. The effect of doing so is even less defensible than the presumed purpose. It will be to present those agricultural interests which object to the primary purpose of the Bill, or object to the minimum figure fixed, with an opportunity of appealing against the figure, of hampering the work of the Board and delaying the operation of the rate itself. Those interests, I suggest, are interests which the Minister should be the last to desire to consult and the last who should get any opportunity of placing restrictions on the work of the Board. The necessity for advertising does not exist after the county committees have been consulted, as provided for in the Bill, and the effect of this Sub-section will be restrictive and hampering and will injure the purpose which the right hon. and gallant Gentleman has in mind.

§ Sir R. Dorman-Smith
I feel that this Amendment has been moved under a misunderstanding. I am not sure whether the hon. Member is aware of the fact that under Sub-section (6) of Section 2 of the Act of 1924, committees are required to give notice before fixing or altering minimum wage rates for their areas. What they generally do is to advertise in two or three papers circulating in the area, so that farmers and farm workers can see what the rates are. We thought it only right, when the national minimum has been laid down and when the county committees make their own determinations—and they still have to publish them under the 1924 Act—that they should include in that publication a statement of what the national minimum wage was so that workers and farmers could see and compare the final results of the county wages committees' deliberations with the datum line of the national minimum wage. It would not make any difference to the working of the Measure if this Amendment were accepted, and I think the Com- 535 mittee will agree that it is only right and proper that workers and employers should be able to compare the national minimum wage with what their own county committee has finally determined.

§ Mr. Ridley
I took some care to read the appropriate provisions of the 1924 Act. They make it incumbent on county committees to advertise the rates which those committees fix. The position in regard to the Board and the national minimum is that the Board has power to consult the county committees. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman says that this provision would not make any difference to the working of the machinery of the Measure, but surely it would enable representations to be made against the rate by various organisations, designed to hamper the working of the Measure and the achievement of its main object.

§ Sir R. Dorman-Smith
I am advised that it would still be necessary, even if this Amendment were carried, for the county committees to publish, and in any case I suggest that the publication of the national minimum wage for purposes of comparison is a desirable precaution from the workers' point of view. If in any given county they saw that the wage rate was to be lower than the national minimum, they would, naturally, desire to make representations to the county wages committee, and the committee would have to consider those representations. I suggest that it would work unfairly if they had not the information on which to make a comparison and form their opinion, and I think this may well prove a valuable provision to the workers as well as to the employers.

§ Mr. T. Williams
The right hon. and gallant Gentleman must have omitted to examine Sub-section (1) of Clause 2 with its proviso, otherwise I think he would be obliged to agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Clay Cross (Mr. Ridley) that Sub-section (4) can be made into a delaying provision. What will be the machinery of this Measure if Sub-section (4) is retained. First, the Central Wages Board must consult the agricultural wages committees before they proceed to fix their national minimum. Then they proceed under Clause 2 which reads as follows: 536 It shall be the duty of the agricultural wages committee for every county, within the prescribed period after receiving notification that the national minimum wage has been fixed or altered, to reconsider the minimum rates of wages fixed by them under the principal Act. Then there is the proviso: Provided that the regulations prescribing the period within which the duties imposed by this Sub-section upon agricultural wages committees are to be performed, shall make provision for any necessary extension of that period in cases where a committee decide to make representations to the Board in accordance with the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section one of this Act. There you have made provision, first, that the Central Wages Board shall consult the county committees and, second, that having acquired all the knowledge they require, they shall proceed to establish a minimum. They prescribe the minimum and lay down a period within which the county committees shall comply with it. But should any county wages committee desire to make representation to the Central Board because the minimum wage is too low or too high, the prescribed period can be extended to enable them to make such representations.
In Sub-section (4), which calls into being Sub-section (6) of Section 2 of the original Act, the same obligation applies when fixing a national minimum. Subsection (4) reads: Among the matters of which agricultural wages committees are required by Sub-section (6) of Section two of the principal Act to give notice before fixing, cancelling or varying any minimum rate of wages there shall be included the national minimum wage. Therefore, when a national minimum wage is fixed, Sub-section (6) of Section 2 of the original Act comes into being. The original Act reads: Before fixing, cancelling or varying any minimum rate, the committee shall give such notice as may be prescribed of the rate which they propose to fix or of their proposal to cancel the rate or of the proposed variation of the rate as the case may be,…. But they have already done that under Clause 1, Sub-section (1). It seems to me that under Clause 2, Sub-section (1), in prescribing a period where a county wages committee has a right to make representations to the Central Board, the Central Wages Board have power to extend the period. Clearly this third condition appears to be wholly unnecessary. I hope that I have made what appears to be a complex problem clear; but, if 537 all three conditions are fulfilled, there must inevitably be an unnecessary waste of time. There is the first consultation, and once it has taken place and a minimum wage has been decided upon, county wage committees are given time to make representations to the Central Board. They cannot, however, make representations to the Central Board unless the wages committees know the minimum which has been fixed. Then there is this third condition, compelling them again to advertise the minimum wage, allowing objection to be made, and the Central Board are called upon to examine this objection and vary the minimum if they deem fit. Although I think there is some point in the right hon. and gallant Gentleman's submission about the first consultation between the Central Wages Board and the county committees I am afraid I cannot find any justification at all for this third condition.

§ Sir R. Dorman-Smith
Clause 2 has nothing to do with objection to the national minimum wage. It merely means that at the bottom of the page information will be given that the national minimum is so and so; there is no intention of inviting objection. It is merely included in the advertisement for the sake of allowing people to compare the final result of the county committees wage with the national minimum wage.

§ Mr. T. Williams
Are we to understand that in the Regulations that are made under Clause 2, Sub-section (1), intimating that a minimum has been fixed, and specifying a period whereby the county wages committee must comply with that decision, advertising will take place at that time, and not in a subsequent period beyond the prescribed period?

§ Sir R. Dorman-Smith
I am not absolutely certain when the advertising comes in, but I will check on that. I repeat that this is merely for information and not in order to invite objection to it.

§ Mr. Ridley
You are speaking now of Clause 2?

§ Sir R. Dorman-Smith
Yes. It is merely an indication to the persons concerned so that they can compare the committee's proposals with the national minimum wage.

§ Mr. Ridley
Surely the Minister is arriving at a conclusion which is unfounded? The provisions in the principal Act make it incumbent on the county committees to advertise in order that objections may be made.

§ Mr. T. Williams
May I read the appropriate Section of the principal Act again? It is: Before fixing, cancelling or varying any minimum rate, the committee shall give such notice as may be prescribed of the rate which they propose to fix or of their proposal to cancel the rate or of the proposed variation of the rate as the case may be, and of the manner in which and the time within which objections to the proposal may be lodged, not being less than fourteen days from the date of the notice, and shall consider any objections to the proposal which may be lodged within the time mentioned in the notice. From that, I think, either we are suffering from profound confusion, or otherwise, if we are not confused, there will be unnecessary delay.

§ Sir R. Dorman-Smith
The national minimum wage will not be included in the notice as part of the county committees' proposals. It is to be on the advertisement to show what is the national minimum, but it will not be among the proposals as to the rates which the county committees give notice of their intention to fix. Let us say, for the sake of argument, that a county wages committee proposal is that the rate should be 3s. a week above the national minimum. That would be a proposal on which there could be representation from the employer or the worker. In the advertisement it would be shown that the national minimum figure was and that the county wage would be X plus 3s. It will really make no difference in time. The advertisement merely clarifies to the worker how his wage is related to the national minimum.

§ Mr. Ridley
I think we are in substantial agreement about what we want, although I do not think we are in agreement as to what the proviso means in its present form. As I understand the right hon. and gallant Gentleman his view is that the advertising provided for here will be merely an announcement of what the county committee intends to do, and that that will be the end of it. But it cannot be the end of it with the provisions of the original Act, the appropriate Section of which has been read by my hon. Friend.

§ Sir R. Dorman-Smith
The county committees will not be publishing proposals for a national minimum wage. They will simply be giving opportunity for objections to the rates they propose to fix for their areas, and this will be after the national minimum wage has been fixed.