1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152 
T.U.C. Support for Employers
8th January 1960, Page 50
8th January 1960
Page 50
Page 50, 8th January 1960
— T.U.C. Support for Employers
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
LIORTIFYING their case for a shorter working week, the T.U.C. declare: "Work is not an end in itself: it is the means to the enjoyment of a higher standard of living and more leisure for rest...." When, as in the case of road passenger transport, the length of the working week is governed by the availability of labour, a 40hour week will yield no More leisure-, but merely a greater element of overtime in the pay packet. The T.U.C.'s argument inadvertently supports the employer? argument that the time is not yet ripe for this concession.