HC Deb 12 December 1966 vol 738 cc12-3
15. Mr. Hilton

asked the Minister of Labour what action he proposes to take against building contractors offering hourly wage rates to general building craftsmen which exceed the rates agreed under the standstill on prices and incomes.

Mr. Gunter

An employer is acting contrary to the standstill if he pays rates higher than those paid by him for the same work before 20th July, 1966. Actual rates paid often exceed negotiated rates, and I appreciate that this can give rise to difficulties in present circumstances, I have recently discussed these matters with the leaders of the Building Trades Unions and also with the National Federation of Building Trades Employers, which has agreed to issue further guidance to its members. This will stress the importance of observing agreed rates except where genuine incentive schemes provide the opportunity for increased earnings, and will draw particular attention to the requirements of incomes policy during the severe restraint period.

Mr. Hilton

While I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that lengthy and informative Reply, does he realise that most evening newspapers now carry straightforward offers of rates of 12s. an hour, which is nearly 60 per cent. above the rate, and that in the construction industry, the largest single employer of male labour in the country, the incomes freeze appears to apply only to the official negotiating machinery? Others can make any offers they like and the net result will be the erosion of the status of the official negotiating machinery for the industry.

Mr. Gunter

I am fully aware of the danger to the negotiating machinery—my friends in the trade unions have informed me about that—but, with respect to my hon. Friend, I do not think that the matter is quite as simple as that. Whilst it is true that rates are being advertised daily above the negotiated rates, some of those inflated rates were being paid and offered before 20th July.

Mr. Biffen

Does the right hon. Gentleman have any evidence that rates are being paid which are a contravention of the spirit of the prices and incomes standstill, and if so, does he propose to make an order under Part IV of the Act?

Mr. Gunter

I have already said that the main issue revolves about single advertisements which daily appear in evening newspapers throughout the country, where one bricklayer or one plumber is required at rates much in excess of nationally negotiated rates. It is difficult to check up on possibly thousands of cases to see whether, for example, 12s. is being offered, whereas the negotiated rate in London, which might be 7s. 1d., was being paid to previous employees before 20th July. It is full of difficulties, but I assure the hon. Gentleman that if on analysis and research we can find the case we shall do what we ought to do about it.