HC Deb 09 July 1948 vol 453 cc750-64

  1. (1) The workmen employed in a factory may appoint two or more of their number, together with not more than two other persons, not being consulting engineers, to inspect the factory, and the persons so appointed shall be allowed once at least in every month, accompanied, if the occupier of the factory thinks fit, by himself or one or more of his representatives, to inspect all parts of the factory and shall, where an accident has occurred in a factory of which notice is required to be given to the factory inspector under the Factories Act, 1937, be allowed to go together with any person acting as legal adviser to the workman or with a consulting engineer selected by the workman, accompanied as aforesaid, to the place where the accident occurred, and to make such inspection as may be necessary for ascertaining the cause of the accident.
  2. (2) Every facility shall be afforded by the occupier and all other persons for the purpose of inspecting and the occupier shall on demand produce to the persons appointed all registers, certificates, notices, and documents kept in accordance with the Factories Act, 1937, or any regulations made thereunder, and the persons appointed shall, except where the inspection is an inspection for the purpose of 751 ascertaining the cause of an accident, forthwith make and sign a full report of the result of the inspection in a book to be kept at the factory for this purpose and the occupier shall forthwith cause a true copy of the report to be sent to the factory inspector.
  3. (3) If the occupier or any other person refuses or neglects to afford such facilities as aforesaid, or if the occupier fails to produce the registers, certificates, notices and documents kept in accordance with the Factories Act, 1937, or any regulations made thereunder or if the occupier fails to send a true copy of the report in accordance with this section he shall be guilty of an offence against the Factories Act, 1937.
  4. (4) The factory inspector, when visiting a factory for the purpose of inspecting it, shall consult with and be accompanied by the persons appointed in accordance with subsection (1) of this section.—[Mr. Piratin.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. Piratin

I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

This new Clause refers to the participation of shop stewards in the carrying out of the Factories Acts and of this Bill when it becomes law. During the Second Reading Debate, a number of us, while welcoming the Bill, felt that it did not really go far enough. For that reason, a number of new Clauses have been put on the Order Paper in an effort to improve the Bill. Even these new Clauses do not go as far as many of us would like. In some respects, a revolutionary change is likely to be called for and we are trying to make a few constructive additions to the Bill.

This Clause seeks to provide rights for shop stewards in the carrying out of the Factories Acts. Similar provisions are contained in the Coal Mines Act, 1911, and, therefore, this is nothing new so far as legislation is concerned. It proposes only to extend that legislation to factories. Subsection (1) is the key of the Clause. It provides for workers to be appointed by their workmates to inspect a factory, and to do so at least once a month, accompanied, if desired, by the employer and/or his representatives, and to inspect all parts of the factory. Therefore, when an accident occurs which is reported to the factory inspector, these persons appointed shall have the power to accompany him to the scene of the accident, and to make any inspection which they think necessary to ascertain the cause of the accident. Subsequently, they may be able to make some valuable suggestions for the prevention of further accidents. No such provision is contained in the principal Act.

The principal Act on no occasion refers to trade unions, to workers' representatives, to shop stewards or any other body of persons associated with working-class life, participating in the operation of the Act. Section 123 of the Act deals with the powers of the inspector when inspecting a factory. It gives him power to obtain information and access. We have moved a long way since 1937, when the Act was introduced. Today a great responsibility is placed on the shoulders of the workers, particularly the workers in industry. Ministers, including the Minister of Labour himself, naturally are calling on the workers to stand up to this responsibility. They are asked to reach new heights of production. I submit that they are restricted in carrying out those responsibilities both from the practical and, in a sense, the psychological point of view by the limited use of joint production committees, and the limited responsibility of the joint production committees even when they function. Here we are not dealing with the question of production as such, but with good welfare in a factory, or, as the Act terms it, good welfare, health and safety in a factory on production. No one on either side of the Committee can be in doubt as to the value of that. These things directly concern the workers and are vital to them. There can be no doubt that the workers themselves desire such powers, and there can be, in my submission, no valid argument against granting them. Before I proceed further, I want to take up a point which the Minister introduced in his statement last week. In his reply on the Second Reading Debate, he said: The right of the workers to be consulted on welfare has been raised. That right is in existence and is in operation, because in a great number of factories and works throughout the country there are workers' committees— I am not quite sure what is meant by that— welfare committees and bodies of that kind"—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 2nd July, 1948, Vol. 452; c. 2513.] I suggest that there are very few welfare committees in industry, but my knowledge may be restricted. On the other hand, I notice—and I have studied this fairly carefully—that the report of the Chief Inspector of Factories makes no reference to the number of welfare committees, although he makes reference to this matter. I submit that there are very few of these committees. Secondly, they have no rights in law, and if the workers on a welfare committee make any particular proposition they can take it no further if the other side do not accept it, or if there is no mutual understanding on the matter. Therefore, although that argument is valid so far as it goes, it cannot really affect the matter which I am submitting to the Committee.

Subsection (2) of the Clause urges that the employer shall provide facilities to these appointees—that is the name I give them—as outlined in Subsection (1) and produce documents in relation to the factory for their scrutiny. In the event of an accident, the appointees should have facilities for drawing up a report for the factory inspector, which he should accept and consider. Subsection (3) declares the occupier to be guilty of an offence in accordance with the terms of the principal Act if he fails to carry out these duties.

Subsection (4) discloses a new note, and provides for the factory inspector, when visiting a factory to inspect it, to consult with and be accompanied by the appointees. When a factory inspector visits a factory, he must see the employer or his representative. He cannot gain access to the factory unless someone in charge says, "You may come in," and that someone in charge is the representative of the employer, if not the employer himself. Section 123 (1, f), gives the factory inspector powers to examine persons. That really implies that these persons are reluctant to give information and therefore—rightly so—he has power to demand information from them. The proposition set out in this new Clause goes much wider in every sense than what is stated in Section 123. The whole setup in factories and the provisions of the law keep the factory inspector isolated from the workers' representatives.

What can happen—and I know this does happen—is this: the factory inspector can come along to a factory to see the records. There is no particular accident or matter relating to the factory that has been brought to his attention. He just wants to see the records. He can see the records in the office of the management. He will go there and look at them. He will exchange a few words with the management by way of courtesy, and leave the factory. [Interruption.] I am submitting that this does happen, and if any hon. Member wants to dispute it, he is entitled to get up and do so. These things can happen, and there is nothing in the law to prevent them from happening. A factory inspector can visit a factory, and the workers in the factory in general, and the shop stewards in particular, may not even know that he is present, and he is not referred to them in any way whatsoever.

I submit that under Subsection (4) of the Clause, there should be a responsibility on the factory inspector to consult with the appointees, who are elected by the factory workers. This Subsection would give the workers in industry a new responsibility and a new dignity and authority which we want to inculcate and develop. I submit that the Clause as a whole is very timely when the Government and Ministers are making so many calls on the workers for increased production and greater responsibility. It will be a better guarantee of the implementation of the Factories Act than exists at the moment. It will help the work of the factory inspectors, and it will, I think, be welcomed by them. It will take away the Radical reform mentality of the sponsors of that Act, and will contribute towards developing working-class responsibility. Finally, if accepted, it will do great credit to the Minister of Labour.

1.0 p.m.

Mr. George Thomas (Cardiff, Central)

I hope that the Minister will give sympathetic consideration to this Clause. Since the principal Act was introduced in 1937 there has been a radical change, and the nation has now accepted that there should be a new place in industry for the worker. This request is a very reasonable one, and it is something which has already been accepted by enlightened employers in many fields of industry. The right hon. Gentleman will know that it has long been the privilege of miners to have their colleagues moving around the pits examining conditions and making reports thereon. It means that the miners are able to make reports which are very helpful in compensation cases. In the same way it is very important that the workers in the new factories which are springing up in the Development Areas should also have their representatives on these investigations.

If this Clause is accepted by the Minister it will give our people a new confidence. There is nothing so frustrating as to have an independent inspector visiting a factory without hearing the point of view of the workers. There is nothing worse than for the workers to feel that their point of view has not been properly put forward. I hope the Minister will appreciate the importance of the provision in the Clause that a full report shall be signed and put into the inspection book for later study by His Majesty's inspector of factories. It will mean that anything which a bad employer might like to hide will be brought to the notice of the inspector of factories. This Clause is asking for something which has been recognised for a long time as the right of workers in other fields of industry in this country.

Mr. Solley

I also wish to support to this Clause. I am not without experience of investigations into factory accidents. My experience has been mainly on the side of the workers, and I have found that when an accident happens there is usually a considerable amount of misunderstanding among employees as to the cause of the accident, and the possibilities of avoiding it. In these days, when it is most desirable that there should be a spirit of co-operation between the workers, on the one hand, and the Government and employers on the other, every possible cause for suspicion should be removed, and I suggest that this Clause goes a long way towards fulfilling that purpose. Furthermore, a new dignity would be conferred upon the representatives of the workers, and the Clause would, in my opinion, lead to a substantial diminution in the number of factory accidents.

It is, unfortunately, true that a little while ago a number of accidents occurred because women refused to wear the safety caps that were provided, or because workers engaged on piece-rate work disregarded the safety measures provided by the employers. These accidents would have been avoided, in my view, had the shop steward movement had sufficient statutory authority, such as is envisaged in this Clause, which would give them sufficient standing in relation to their fellow employees, and so enable safety caps and other safety measures to be used more fully. If we are to minimise the danger of accidents, increase confidence between the employees and the Labour Government, do something which adds to the dignity and importance of the workers and, looking ahead, take a step which will bring into operation machinery which can be used in the true Socialist State of the future, we should back this Clause.

Mr. Attewell

I wish to make a speech in support of this Clause, because silence might be taken to indicate that one is not in full sympathy with the object behind it. I fully appreciate that we cannot produce at this time the sort of Amendment we should like, but I accept the purpose of this Clause, that the operatives in a factory should conduct investigations whenever occasion arises. As a trade union officer, the wording of this Clause seems to me to be a little unpractical The Clause states that: The workmen employed in a factory may appoint two or more of their number— I can visualise "Two or more" being interpreted as 50 or 60, which will mean we shall have a whole procession going round a factory. My union has for many years had shop stewards, which we call "shop presidents." This is woven into the fabric of the union, and these people are representatives of the union whose duties are limited. On the other hand, we have full-time trade union officers who, as a result of their years of experience, have become accepted as reliable people. It is my view that those who inspect the factories on behalf of the operatives should be the trade union officers. That is the difference between myself and the Clause, which asks for shop stewards.

Mr. Solley

If my hon. Friend will look at the first line of the new Clause, he will see that workmen employed in a factory may appoint two or more of their number. There is nothing in the Clause which refers to shop stewards. My hon. Friend's point, which is a good one in special cases, would be met by the workmen in the factory appointing their trade union nominee.

Mr. Attewell

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, but I am well aware of that. If shop stewards are substituted by trade union officers, it comes within the realm of practical politics. If the Minister, on the Report stage, will bring in a new Clause to give a legal right to representatives of workers to be entitled to inspect a factory, I am sure it would give satisfaction. At present, there is no such right. I remember, a lad of only 16, going round a shafting. To gather information with which to protect our rights, not under the Workmen's Compensation Acts, but in the ordinary courts, I visited the factory. It was difficult for us to get full information, because the factory was not one which had been within the province of the trade union movement for a sufficient length of time.

I would like to know how many trade union officers have received complaints about sanitation, about the filthy and revolting conditions of many places in our factories? The average firm is only too pleased to look into the matter, and quickly have it remedied, but there are others which do not do that, and nothing can be done because there is no right of entry. I agree that the factory inspector can be contacted, and that he will sometimes look for himself, but more often he refers the complaint to the health authority of the local council. Workers' representatives should be enabled to inspect, so that they can make suggestions in accordance with the experience of their co-workers.

There is also the question of accommodation for workers' clothing. Often in bad weather, workers' outer clothing is bundled together, with no opportunity for drying. When complaints are made about failure to provide sufficient drying facilities, representatives of the workers are prevented from inspecting the factory because there is no legal right. Although I know the Government do not desire to have more contentious legislation than is necessary passing through the House at this time, I hope the Minister will bring forward a new Clause on the Report stage to meet the principle raised this afternoon.

1.15 p.m.

Mr. Isaacs

I want to say at once that I am not prepared to accept this Clause, about which there has been a good deal of muddled thinking and speaking. My hon. Friend the Member for Harborough (Mr. Attewell) brought some practical experience to bear on this matter, but I think his mind was addressed more to the right of the workers' representatives to inspect, than joining in the grand procession around the factory. The hon. Member for Mile End (Mr. Piratin) referred to a speech which I made on Second Reading, and said he did not know what I meant by "workers' committee." I should have thought that the hon. Gentleman, who is one of those who claim to be very close to the workers, would have heard of such a committee. He must have been working in the wrong street—

Mr. Piratin

I made my points constructively and helpfully, as did other Members who have spoken on this matter. According to HANSARD, the Minister used the phrase "workers' committee." I have heard of a works committee, a joint works committee, and factory committee, a shop stewards committee and a joint consultative committee, but I have never heard of a workers' committee, and the only reason I raise the point is to get some elucidation. I would remind the Minister that there is no need for any unnecessary "wisecracking," because that can work both ways.

Mr. Isaacs

The hon. Member said he had not heard of a workers' committee, and I still say that I am surprised at that, because I have come into contact with such committees in many parts of the country. He also said there were not many welfare committees. Such committees were in being in many works long before joint production committees or other committees of that kind. The hon. Gentleman also said that the factory inspector was isolated from the workers. The workers' representatives can contact him; the trade union official can and does contact him. If there is any isolation it is not always the inspector's fault. There may be occasions when it is, but from my experience, before I came into this office, I always found the factory inspector most willing to listen to any points put to him, and ready to try to remedy any grievances. There is need for the factory inspector to keep in close contact with the representatives of the workers, but it must be a two-way traffic. The factory inspector should not be tied down to a regulation that, before he can go and make an inspection in a factory, he has to make it a condition that he must be accompanied by some persons appointed for that purpose.

In the main the need and periods for factory inspections vary. There are factories of such a character that it will be sufficient, owing to the absence of dangerous machinery, if they are visited once every year or every two years. There are others where congested machinery and changes in the plant mean that more frequent visits are necessary. If the workers consider that the factory inspector has not been there often enough and ought to go, it is only a question of asking him to go and look at a particular factory and the arrangements that have been made. Under this new Clause, persons are to be appointed to go with him. It says: The workmen employed in a factory may appoint two or more of their own number, together with not more than two other persons, not being consulting engineers, to inspect the factory, and the persons so appointed shall be accompanied, if the occupier of the factory thinks fit, by himself or one or more of his representatives, to inspect all parts of the factory. Suppose it is limited to four persons, what is the use of the factory inspector making a round of inspection in a factory followed by a procession of that kind? A lot of time would be taken in listening to them and taking notice of the points to which they wish to draw his attention, and other points would be overlooked. It says in Subsection 4: The factory inspector, when visiting a factory for the purpose of inspecting it, shall consult with and be accompanied by the persons appointed in accordance with Subsection (1) of this Section. Even if we were to accept that as practicable, it could not be put into operation for a considerable time, because it would require the appointment of a vast host of new factory inspectors. Some of my hon. Friends referred to the fact that this is operating in the coal-mining industry. My hon. Friend the Member for Central Cardiff (Mr. G. Thomas) said that this has been granted by enlightened employers, and referred to it in the mining industry. I think there should be a full stop between those two sentences.

Mr. G. Thomas

There must be.

Mr. Isaacs

There is a difference in the mining industry because there the workers appoint the inspector. The man appointed is their inspector, and there is a great deal of difference between a periodic inspection of mines with specific things to look for on each occasion, and going round a factory inspecting lighting, sanitation, welfare, plant and machinery. We feel it is more in conformity with modern ideas that we should encourage our own people to build up joint consultation in the factories for these purposes. This joint consultation brings about more rapid improvements. Many of these factories have safety and welfare committees, and they are able to draw the attention of firms to matters that ought to be remedied, and they do not have to trouble the factory inspector at all. The hon. Member for Thurrock (Mr. Solley) said that this would give a new dignity to the workers and reduce accidents. I do not see how a new dignity will be given to the workers by appointing four of them to walk round with an inspector.

However, he did refer to another point which was of considerable value but not from the point of view that he suggested, and that was women's caps. I was associated during the war with the Industrial Welfare Society, and we knew that the failure of women to wear caps led to a number of accidents. The caps were not suddenly worn because the factory inspector came on the job, but as a result of a concerted campaign drawing attention to the necessity for them. If their fellow workers in the shed had said to these women, "You are a lot of sillies not wearing these caps," they would have put them on, and a lot of sad accidents would have been avoided. That would not have been accomplished by the factory inspector, accompanied by these representatives, making a formal procession round the factory and asking them to put on their caps. These things can be done better by co-operative methods.

Industries are working rapidly towards closer co-operation in matters of this kind. Certainly it would be a hindrance to the inspector if he were only allowed to walk round a factory accompanied by one or more appointed for that purpose. We are satisfied that the factory inspector must be able to visit works at any time. In many areas there is close contact between the inspector and the representatives of the organised workers. He addresses trade union and trades council meetings and explains what are their powers under the various Acts and how these powers operate. We shall secure the objective we are trying to reach by the method of co-operation, and we should do more harm than good by having rigid legislation of this kind. I would ask the Committee not to accept this new Clause.

Mr. Piratin

I am sorry the Minister cannot accept the new Clause. He has not given adequate reasons for his objections to it. He has made a few points on which I hope to make some comments, but I do not think they are adequate. I should like him to do away with the idea of a grand procession during a factory inspection. I am sorry if the wording is not as perfect as it should be, and I agree absolutely with my hon. Friend the Member for Harborough (Mr. Attewell) that there is plenty of scope for improving the wording. The hon. Member agrees with the general purpose, and in due course, if the Minister would bring in an entirely new Clause serving the same purpose, he and others of us who support the idea would be satisfied. The Minister gave no indication of that.

This talk about a grand procession is only a play on certain expressions in the Clause, which could be worded to satisfy everybody. The point was made that the appointees would go round with the factory inspector, but Subsection (1) is quite specific. In the second part of Subsection (1), it is clearly laid down in line 5 that where an accident has occurred in a factory, of which notice is required, these appointees shall have access to the factory to make an inspection. That point was not dealt with by the Minister. It is the point mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Mr. Solley), who claims to have had experience of this sort of thing in the courts, for there have been cases where the trade unions said that they could not have access. Therefore, this is a problem which perhaps could be resolved in this way. At least it deserves attention.

The Minister said that in many cases these matters could be put right by the workers' representatives working together with the employers. The hon. Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Mr. Rhodes) indicated, by his occasional monosyllabic interjections, that invariably the workers' representatives get on harmoniously with the employer or his representative. If that is so, there is not much need for any of this legislation. For example, Section 123 would not be needed, because it states that the factory inspector has power to obtain information from the people in the factory from whom he requires the information. If all were working harmoniously together, the inspector would not need to have these powers.

1.30 p.m.

We are trying to make a provision which would ensure a right for factory workers' representatives similar to that which is now provided by decent employers. The hon. Member for Ashton-under-Lyne knows better than I do, in view of his profession, that not every worker has a decent employer, and the hon. Member must not judge others by his own standard. What we are trying to do is to apply the provision to those people who are not amenable to the considerations of good conduct and harmony between themselves and their workers. I hope the Minister will look at the matter again. I propose to look carefully at the wording of this Clause, because I believe that, if we put our heads together, we could devise some new terms which would perhaps help the Minister to accept the new Clause, and I hope he will be able to do so.

Mr. Berry (Woolwich, West)

Will the hon. Gentleman also inquire into his objection to consulting engineers, who can be very useful people?

Mr. Piratin

Yes, I will look into everything, and I hope that other hon. Members will do so, and that, by means of mass pressure, we shall be able to induce the Minister to accept the new Clause.

Mr. Rhodes (Ashton-under-Lyne)

As I have been referred to, may I make one or two comments? I think the hon. Gentleman is making very heavy weather of this, and there is an implied doubt whether the factory inspector knows his job or not. The days have gone when managements used to send the younger employees up the yard to avoid their meeting the factory inspector, when information had been obtained from another mill in the district, that the inspector was in the neighbourhood. The factory inspector is a very able individual, and he does not go into the office and kow-tow to the management at all. He is a man who goes into the office knowing full well that he is competent to do the job that he is sent to do, and knowing that he can do what he likes in regard to the inquiries which he wants to make into the conditions in the factory.

Mr. Attewell

Bearing in mind the purport of this request and what is behind it, and even if the factory inspector is all that my hon. Friend says he is, does the factory inspector pass any of his reports to the trade unions?

Mr. G. Thomas

Would my hon. Friend at the same time say whether it is possible for a factory inspector to visit all his factories so often that the need for other people to keep their eyes wide open simply would not arise?

Mr. Rhodes

No, of course, it is not. I am in agreement with the hon. Gentleman regarding one part of the suggestion he made—that with regard to the trade union representative having access to the factory after an accident has occurred, or in the case where there is a complaint launched by the operatives themselves that there may be dangerous machinery. I quite agree with that, but we are short of factory inspectors, and they cannot be provided in a short space of time. Whether it is the unattractiveness of the job or not, I do not know, but we have not as many as we would like to have. I think the Minister has given an adequate reply on the point. I agree that consultation on these matters should be by means of joint machinery between the management and the workers. On the point raised about the trade union representative having access after an accident, I quite agree, but not otherwise.

Mr. Julius Silverman (Birmingham, Erdington)

I hope the Minister will be able to think again about the principle involved in this new Clause. I can well appreciate that he might find the particular machinery suggested in this new Clause unsatisfactory, and there are many points of criticism that could be made about it. What I am concerned about is the principle involved in the Clause—that of consultation with the workers on questions of safety—and I would remind the Minister that one of my colleagues, the hon. Member for Ladywood (Mr. Yates), raised the matter on Second Reading, when he was speaking on behalf of all the Labour Members from Birmingham. Representations have also been made to us by the Birmingham Trades Council, representing many of Birmingham's industries, and the trades unionists engaged in them have expressed their interest in the adoption of this principle. It seems to me quite clear that the principle could be adopted without encumbrance by any of the difficulties which the Minister set out, and it would be of advantage.

The hon. Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Mr. Rhodes) said that factory inspectors know their job. I do not think anybody has questioned the competence of the inspectors, but the plain fact is that there are not sufficient of them to conduct periodic inspections at sufficiently frequent intervals. In the City of Birmingham, there are many factories which have never seen a factory inspector, and there are others which have only seen one on very rare occasions. Here is a suggestion for a provision for somebody to look after the safety precautions on behalf of the workers in the intervals between the visits of the inspector and until such time as the Minister can appoint the necessary number of inspectors. I hope the Minister will look at the matter again and reconsider the principle involved.

Question, "That the Clause be read a Second time" put, and negatived.