BREACHES'OF AWARDS.

Auckland Star, Volume XLI, Issue 101, 29 April 1910, Page 3

BREACHES'OF AWARDS.

3 Breaches of awards were dealt with by j Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M., at the Magistrate's 3 Court yesterday afternoon. The Auckland Housepainters' Indus--3 trial Union proceeded against Williams and Green for a breach of the house r painters' award, inasmuch as defendants 2 failed to pay an employee for time rea- , sonably occupied in walking the distance " between their place of business and the / scene of the work. Mr. Skelton appear- .' ed for the union, and Dr. Bamford for de- . fendants. The employee in question, Eu- ,_ gene McG-uire, stated that ten minutes j was occupied to walk to and from the V Devonport ferry to the work, and he was s not aware that he was entitled to payj, ment for the twenty miilutes a day. - Argument arose as to the interpretation f of the clause affecting the point, and . counsel agreed to state a case for the i ruling of the Arbitration Court. 7 E. B. Dufaur, represented by Mr. Dec--1 -iston, was charged on the information - of the inspector of Factories with failing - to keep a wages and overtime book as r provided for under the Industrial v Oont ciliation and At—tration Act. The - breach was denied. A copy of the book - kept was put in, and was declared by - the S-M. to be insufficient for the pur--3 pose. He stated it was necessary for i wages books to be properly kept, and iti was time employers knew what were t their responsibilities. A fine of £1, and ' costs 7/, was inflicted. A peculiar position was revealed in • the prosecution of S. J. Flewellyn, licensee of the Eoyal Hotel, for failure to give • a half-holiday from 2 pjn. to four house- | maids during the week ending March 1 12th, as required by section 23 of the Shops and Offices Act. Mr. Shanaghan 1 prosecuted, and Mr. Earl appeared for • the defendant. , It was stated in evidence by 8.. T '_ Bailey (inspector) that the girls ha- , not complained. They got time off three ; or four afternoons in the week, and it was an arrangement they had themselves brought into effect. They were quite satisfied with it. , Mi. Kettle inquired why the case had . been brought before 'the Court if the . girls were satisfied. Mr. Shanaghan pointed out that th& Act required a half-holiday from 2 p.m~ and it should not be broken. This particular section of the Act was difficult to administer, and unless the Act was . complied with the Department would . never be able to find out if the employees were getting their half-holiday. I Mr. Kettle thought that if an employee was entitled to a holiday he or she would see that the employer gave it. In such [ a case as the one before him, however, he did not see any objection to the ', girls arranging their own time off or | making any other arrajngement to suit themselves.. .If the girls were satisfied, who were the complainants? If a girl wanted to work on her half-holiday, he did not see that anybody could stop her. unless her employer absolutely forced hei to go out whether it was wet or fine, or locked her up in her room. He saw no reason why the Department should interfere. Mr. Earl stated that the housemaids employed by the defend a.nt had every afternoon off from 2 till 6 o'clock, and one or two returned for an hour, but on the whole they had more ' liberty than they could demand under the AcDefendant, in evidence, stated that his instructions to the housemaids "were that they should take the half-holiday every week, and arrange the day to suit themselves. He was under the i_r_-es-sion that this was being done, and knew nothing of the other arrangement until he was notified by the inspector. Since then he had expressly required the girls to have a full afternoon one day a week. The girls had never complained. Mr. Shanaghan refused a suggestion to withdraw the case, whereupon Mr. Kettle intimated .that he would (reserve __ decision. A. Erickson was proceeded against by the Auckland Tailors' Industrial Union for failing to pay wages to two employees for January 3rd, which was observed as a holiday at deferdant's shop, but was not an..award holiday. Mr. A. E." Skelton appeared for the Union, and Mr. Grosvenor for the defendant. In the course of the pre*liminary argument it was admitted that the Employers' Association were defending the case, and Mr. Grosvenor stated that he did not feel justified in further contending that a breach had not been committed. The defendant was fined 10/- and costs on each of the two charges. John Black, a party to the furniture trade award, was charged, on the information of the Inspector of Factories, i with failing to keep wages and overtime books between November 16th' and January 14th. Mr. Ziman, who appeared for the defendant, admitted the breach, but pointed out in extenuation that, owing to the illness and business worries of the defendant, he had negI leeted to keep the required books during the period complained of. . The S—l. inflicted a fine of £2 and costs 7/-, stat-! ing that he took into consideration the • fact that defendant had been put to considerable expense in meeting other! prosecutions in connection with the same matteiii The Magistrate also intimated that in ail cases where there was neglect to keep proper wages books, which he regarded as most important, he wouldl inflict higher and higher penalties, the maximum being £50. Submitted for sale at the Mart, Token-bouse-yard, the late Mr. Alfred Beit's house, 26, Park-lane, was stated to have an annt—l ground rental, payable to the Duke of Westminster, of £1150, which is 1/6 per foot. The property was withdrawn at £44,600. Two new moderately fast ste_tners are to be built for a direct service to Buenos Aires by the Pacific Steam Navigation Company, a-n- at a shai-holders' meeting at Liverpool the chairman said that the advance in the iaxwry of _rav_l was shown by the fact that while a. few yea—i ago a st——o—lip could be b__t for £ 100,----000, a modern vessel cost £350,000.