1091
Factory Night Work 15 DECEMBER 1969
figure has risen to 15,000. Therefore, I ask the Under-Secretary whether we are not perhaps in the process of legislation by the enlargement of exemptions.
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity showed her concern about the matter by setting up a working party to consider the working of the Factories Act, 1961, and in particular some of the sections affect- ing women. On the question of women on night work, there was a general divi- sion between those representing the T.U.C., on the one hand, who were totally opposed to the employment of women on night work, and the repre- sentatives of the C.B.I., on the other hand, who were generally in favour of such employment.
Indeed, the C.B.I. set up its own work- ing party on the subject under the chair- manship of Miss Hampshire, the head- mistress of Cheltenham Ladies' College. I do not know what experience she has of industry. I can only record that her conclusion and that of her associates was that it was a good thing for women to be employed on night work.
The T.U.C. was strongly against it. Paragraphs 20 and 21 of the Report by the working party set up by the D.E.P. summarise the arguments as follows:
'(20) The main argument put forward by the T.U.C. representatives for keeping some restrictions is that because a large proportion of working women are married with not only house and husband but also often children to look after, they have in effect a multipli- city of jobs. Thus the pressures to which they are subject are likely to cause them to overwork against their better judgment. This may not only damage their health and in- crease the risk of accidents. but have serious effects on the well-being of the family. In the interest of society generally, it is argued, the state must intervene to protect women against the combined effect of those social and economic pressures. (21) This argument is put forward particularly strongly in regard to night work. Women on night work still have to do domestic work. It is argued that if they still do this during the day they are likely to become overtired with a consequent risk of increased accidents. On the other hand, neglect of their domestic responsibilities may have serious social consequences in regard to family life, juvenile delinquency, etc." That argument has been put so clearly by the T.U.C. that I do not need to under- line it.
To return to the case of Shuresta, I can do no better than quote, to illustrate the sort of thing that has been going on,
8 H 17
(Women)
1092
from a letter which I have received from the District Secretary to the A.E.F. The District Secretary is a most energetic and able man and is deeply concerned about these people whom he represents. He wrote to me about the situation as follows:
"For over 15 years the unions have had a running battle with this company about the extremely bad wages and conditions. I have attended repeated meetings with the company arising from complaints from members about filthy conditions in the factory in the lavatory and lack of protective clothing.
To come to the situation of women being employed on nights, approximately 16 months ago I was informed that women were working on nights. I immediately contacted the local Factory Inspector and asked for these women to be withdrawn. An investigation took place and the women were withdrawn.
This year at the beginning of November I was again informed that women were being employed on night shift. Again I was in touch with the local Factory Inspector and drew attention to the fact the company were em- ploying women on nights. The women were withdrawn from night shift on 14th November. You will note that on the two previous occa- sions this company has been in breach of the law and absolutely nothing was done about it. No special provisions were made in the field of welfare while employing these women on nights. The only other concession that was granted was a canteen where women could make tea for themselves. No staff was laid on for them in this respect."
I could continue because the District Secretary has gone into the matter with great thoroughness, and it is clear the company is extremely unsatisfactory in its employment of women and pro- vides a perfect illustration of some of the major social reasons why women should not be employed on night work in factories.
I ask my hon. Friend a few questions. Why has no legal action been taken in the past against this company for being in breach of the law. Secondly, why in view of the firm's record did my hon. Friend's Department give a special ex- emption through the Factory Inspec- torate?
The company claimed that it was engaged on an export order so there is no special machinery to cover an ex- emption. This tends to undermine the purpose of the Factory Acts.
Will my hon. Friend tonight give an assurance that the exemption will not be renewed? Finally, will he redefine the criteria which he uses for these ex- emptions? He will recall that in a letter to me he said he was going further into