The question of amending the hours of business next arose eighteen months later after the General Manager had drawn the attention
of the Management committee to overcrowding at certain branches. The following minute of the General Committee with reference
to hours of business of the Bank and a report of the General Manager on the question were submitted to the General Purposes Sub-Committee
of March 9th 1925.
The following Minute of the General Committee with reference to hours of business of the Bank and a Report of the General Manager on the question were submitted to the General Purposes Sub-Committee's meeting on March 9th 1925:
18th
February, 1925
Copy Resolution of the Bank Committee, passed at a Meeting held on the 16th inst.
The General Manager called the attention
of the Committee to the inconvenience occasioned by the overcrowding of various branches at certain hours on Saturday nights, particularly
at Aston Cross, Bearwood and Balsall Heath Branches, and a discussion took place on the general question of Bank accommodation, together
with the desirability or otherwise of making alterations in the times of opening of branches.
RESOLVED:- That the General Manager be
instructed to present a full report on the whole matter to the General Purposes Sub-Committee, with any recommendations he may have
to make thereon.
The General Manager reported as follows:
At the last meeting of the Bank Committee I was instructed to present a report to the General Purposes Sub-Committee on the question of changing the present hours of business of Daily Branches.
Mention was made (1) of keeping the Bank open continuously from 10am to 8pm on Saturdays, and reducing hours on other days, and (2) of opening the Bank on Friday evenings in lieu of Saturday evenings or in addition thereto.
The Committee will remember that the question of hours of business has received very serious consideration on two occasions, viz., at the time the Bank was established in 1919 and 2½ years ago as a result of a visit paid by a deputation to Scotland. The alteration which the deputation felt justified in recommending, and which the Bank Committee ultimately adopted, was to make the evening openings a half-hour later, and to close one hour earlier on Thursdays. The experience of the Scottish Banks (which confirmed the experience of the larger English Savings Banks) proved that it was not wise to change hours of business unless a real demand for such change emanated from the depositors, and that success can be measured largely by stability in the matter of hours of business. The practice of varying the hours of business at different Branches in different parts of the town has been tried in several towns, but has not proved successful. On the contrary, it has only confused depositors and caused dissatisfaction and complaints. Unless special reasons can be advanced in support of differentiation, the wisest course is to adopt uniformity. The only way in which the most convenient or acceptable hours of business could be ascertained would be by plebiscite of depositors, and without such proof it would be difficult to justify experimenting. I am not aware of any demand for a change in our present hours.
There are one or two points which are prominent in examining our figures relating to ordinary
deposit and withdrawal transactions, viz., the even manner in which withdrawals are spread over the weak, and the increase which has
taken place in Monday and Saturday morning transactions. The position will be better understood by the following figures.
|
|
Percentage
of |
Year's Transactions |
|
|
Deposits |
Withdrawals |
|
Mondays From 10am to 2.30pm |
14.0% |
11.2% |
|
" 6pm to 8pm |
17.9% |
12.2% |
|
Tuesdays " 10am to 2.30pm |
8.9% |
10.7% |
|
Wednesdays " 10am to 2.30pm |
7.4% |
12.1% |
|
Thursdays " 10am to 12 noon |
3.6% |
8.4% |
|
Fridays " 10am to 2.30pm |
6.3% |
13.9% |
|
Saturdays " 10am to 1pm |
18.4% |
15.8% |
|
" 6pm to 8pm |
23.5% |
15.7% |
These figures only relate to the ordinary business on the Savings Bank side of the Bank's work. To the mid-week figures must be added the transactions in Home Safes, water accounts, rates, and other sundry matters which are purposely concentrated to the mid-week period.
With regard to a continuous opening from 10am to 8pm on Saturdays, I am of opinion that such a change will not materially increase business, nor will it appreciably relieve Saturday evening pressure. On the other hand, I think some regard must be paid to extraneous matters which materially affect other people. The tremendous attraction of sport during winter months is a factor which cannot be ignored; and during the summer months evidence is so pronounced that people are anxious to get away as early as possible after dinner on Saturday, and in fact do so. The marked fall in our transactions on Saturday evenings from May to September substantiates this view. To open during the usual tea-time interval would be a waste of time, as was demonstrated when our opening hour was 5.30pm. A continuous opening to the public from 10am to 8pm would mean staff hours from 9am to 9pm. This, in its turn, would call for two sets of officers, and introduce a dangerous practice of dual control at a Branch, which is never satisfactory. It would further complicate matters with depositors who on one occasion would deal with a certain officer, and on another occasion may have to deal with a second officer who may be ignorant of what has transpired between the depositor and the previous officer. I do not think the Committee would be wise to adopt such a practice.
As regards the suggestion of reducing the hours of business mid-week, I am of opinion such a proposal would meet with opposition from depositors. When one considers the present day hours of business it is difficult to justify any curtailment. If the Branch was closed for a whole day, which was another suggestion, the value of a daily opening and the designation of "Daily Branch" goes at once. While we cannot expect deposit transactions in bulk during mid-week, we must expect a large percentage of withdrawal transactions, and any step which tends to decrease opportunities to withdraw money would, I think, be a mistake.
As regards substituting Friday evening for Saturday or Monday evening, it is, of course, impossible to say what affect such a proposal would have on the Bank. Having established Saturday evening openings, and knowing how popular and successful they are, I am reluctant to suggest any change to Friday without evidence from depositors that it would be equally as satisfactory to them as Saturday. From enquiries I have made of several depositors I do not think it would be as popular. From a staff point of view it would be preferable to be open on Friday instead of Saturday; but that point of view cannot be urged in face of the records we possess of the popularity of Saturday evening openings. Our experience at Branches which were open on Friday, Saturday and Monday evenings, proved that Saturday was the most popular. I do not think there is much likelihood of diverting Monday's traffic to Friday. Our Monday depositors are, in the main, drawn from that class of community who decide during the week-end how much they will save, and who are not likely to be hurried in their saving habits. Every Savings Bank has this particular class of saver, who is a valuable asset and worthy of being encouraged.
From our records it is proved that during last year the
traffic at daily Branches on Saturdays and Mondays distributed itself as follows:-
Saturdays
From 10 to 1 45.29%
6 to 8 54.71%
Mondays
From 10 to 2.30 44.38%
6 to 8 55.62%
The Saturday and Monday transactions have to be dealt with subsequently in the various books, and it is Wednesday evening before everything in the way of posting and proving is completed. This is a satisfactory and economical practice. If each day's business had to be completely carried through, and all the books balanced, before the staff left for the day, it would mean a substantial increase in staff for the rest of the week. To attempt to meet the situation part time staff has been tried and always proved unsatisfactory.
As regards an addition of Friday
evenings to our present hours, I do not think it would appreciably increase business. It may result in a transfer of some portion
of Saturday's traffic to Friday, but that in itself would not be much advantage to the Bank. We have no difficulty in dealing with
the volume of transactions on Saturdays at Branches where sufficient accommodation is provided, and no congestion occurs, except where
the accommodation is limited and will not permit of more staff being provided. This is the case at Aston Cross, Balsall Heath and
Bearwood. The provision of adequate accommodation rather than changing hours of business, is, in my judgement, the direction in which
the Committee should move. To introduce a third evening duty would inflict a hardship on the staff which I feel sure the Committee
do not desire. At present the two most valuable evenings in the week are sacrificed throughout the year, and, as I have on previous
occasions pointed out, such a loss cannot be adequately compensated for, either by extra payment or the granting of time off on other
days in the week. It is not overstating the case to say that 75% of the social engagements which the staff might take advantage of,
were they free from Saturday and Monday evening duty, occur on those evenings, and to the extent that they are prevented from taking
part in such engagements their opportunities are narrowed. On Saturdays and Mondays it is always 9.30 to 10pm before any of the staff
can reach home. The weekly hours worked by the staff at our Daily Branches during the past year averaged 41.6 hours per person excluding
overtime spent on balances, whilst at Head Office the average was two hours more. These hours are in excess of the recognised Corporation
hours, but despite that fact, and the circumstances stated above, the staff have never complained. They are enthusiastic, and I believe,
happy in their work, and I hope the Committee will not introduce any conditions which will tend to dim that enthusiasm or make the
staff less happy.
March 7th 1925.
The Sub-Committee were of opinion that it was undesirable to extend the time of Branch openings on Saturdays, but the Chairman of the General Committee made a suggestion that consideration should be given to the desirability of opening the daily branches on additional evenings in the week (Fridays proposed), with a view to some of the pressure on Saturday evenings being removed, and on the understanding that the staff should be increased so as to provide that no officer should work more than two evenings in the week.
692 RESOLVED:- That the General Manager be instructed to report his observations on the foregoing proposal.
Those observations were made at the General Purposes Sub-Committee on April 6th 1925:
At the last meeting of the General Purposes Sub-Committee I was requested to consider whether it would be possible to arrange for the Bank to be open on Friday evenings in addition to Saturdays and Mondays, and to so arrange the work by rota that no member of the Staff would be required to work more than two evenings in the week.
I have given considerable thought to this matter, but I cannot recommend the adoption of any system which will divide the control and responsibility at a Branch.
There are many difficulties in the way of working a rota staff for the purposes of the Bank. In the first place, it would mean continual changes at the same Branch if the officers were to be treated fairly as between Friday, Saturday or Monday evening duties, and depositors would continually have to deal with first one Branch Manager and then another. The same thing would apply to all the Branch Assistants.
It would also mean that the incoming Branch Manager would have to attend at the Branch to take over the cash and accept the responsibility for the premises, and on the same day he would have to make similar arrangements at the Branch he was leaving. Assistants who hold keys of a Branch would have to make similar arrangements with another officer. Such a system would, I am afraid, tend to looseness, and would weaken our present position of being able to fix responsibility.
There is a further objection to working by rota, in that it would mean increased work and supervision in making the necessary arrangements, the liability of confusion during the holiday period (which extends over at least six months of the year), and during temporary absences on sick leave.
I strongly feel that in the interests of the Bank the Committee should maintain the present days and hours of business; and I am quite satisfied that if the practice of providing adequate counter accommodation at Branches is followed, the depositors can be dealt with quickly and to their satisfaction. I would repeat that no demand has been made for any change, and I think the policy of adhering to the fixed hours of business instead of again disturbing the arrangements is the best.
It is difficult to estimate the extra cost which a rota staff would entail;
but as 98 officers would have to be relieved for one night in the week, it will be seen that additional staff would be required.
April
3rd 1925.
After consideration of this report, the Sub-Committee decided to defer further consideration of the matter until the result was known of a scheme to pay the wages of employees at Cadbury's Bournville factory directly into their bank accounts. This scheme, which included a propositionl to have extended hours at Selly Oak and Stirchley branches, was proposed in 1924. In the event, no changes in the hours of business was made until July 30th 1931, when the Saturday evening opening was switched to Fridays.