Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.


. . a CLAIMS FOR BREACHES.; (By Telegraph.—Press Association.} WELLINGTON Thursday. Reserved judgments were delivered by Dr. A. MeArthur, S.M., to-day in cases of alleged breaches of industrial .awards. ~. In tlie case of the inspector of awards v. Staples and Co., the plaintiff claimed to recover £10 as a penalty for an alleged breach of the Wellington painters' •award. Defendants employed James McMillan as a painter, and paid him only 50/ per week of 45 hours, instead of 1/3 per hour as required by. the painters' award. McMillan was a regular hand employed as a maltster's labourer at a constant wage of 50/ a week. He was engaged off hand during the alack season in doing odd jobs of painting. His Worship considered the defendants were quite justified in employing McMillan as they did, and they committed no breach. The "Wellington Seamen's Union claimed from the "Wellington, Havelock, and Motueka Steamship Company £10 as a penalty for an alleged breach of award. Charles Grant, ordinary seaman of the s.s. Manaroa, "was employed in performing duties of lamptrimmer on the vessel-at a monthly wage of £4 10/, alleged to be contrary to an award, which provides that laniptrimmers shali be paid a monthly wage of £7. The /magistrate said the Manaroa carried one A.B. in excess of the required number. "Clause 2 of the award," said his Worship, "regulates the rate of wages, and says 'lamptrimmers and A.B.?s shall be paid £S, and lamptrimmers £7.' I take this to mean that if a lamptrimmer is also an A.B. he shall get £8, and that if he is a laimptrimimer pure and simple, he shall get £7. Grant does not come under either denomination. He is not an A.B. and it would be absurd to call him a lamptrimmer pure and simple on a small steamer of 78 tons. Moreover, he worked under the day system, not watch and watch, and did his lamps as part of the day's work, just as he did brass and other work allotted to himi. I cannot see that the defendant company has been guilty of a breach of the award." A suit was brought by the inspector of awards against the Wellington Gas Company. The plaintiff claimed to recover £10 for an alleged breach of the building trades labourers' award. The company employed as building trade labourers two men who were not members of the union when certain members of the union were available. A penalty of £2 witih costs was imposed.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

Bibliographic details

INDUSTRIAL AWARDS., Auckland Star, Volume XL, Issue 90, 16 April 1909

Word Count

INDUSTRIAL AWARDS. Auckland Star, Volume XL, Issue 90, 16 April 1909

  1. New formats

    Papers Past now contains more than just newspapers. Use these links to navigate to other kinds of materials.

  2. Hierarchy

    These links will always show you how deep you are in the collection. Click them to get a broader view of the items you're currently viewing.

  3. Search

    Enter names, places, or other keywords that you're curious about here. We'll look for them in the fulltext of millions of articles.

  4. Search

    Browsed to an interesting page? Click here to search within the item you're currently viewing, or start a new search.

  5. Search facets

    Use these buttons to limit your searches to particular dates, titles, and more.

  6. View selection

    Switch between images of the original document and text transcriptions and outlines you can cut and paste.

  7. Tools

    Print, save, zoom in and more.

  8. Explore

    If you'd rather just browse through documents, click here to find titles and issues from particular dates and geographic regions.

  9. Need more help?

    The "Help" link will show you different tips for each page on the site, so click here often as you explore the site.