£50 PENALTY

Auckland Star, Volume XLVI, Issue 60, 11 March 1915, Page 6

£50 PENALTY

IMPOSED ON RESTAURANT KEEPER. WAGES AND TIME-BOOK TBOUBLE. It is seldom that the maximum penalty is imposed for a breach of the Shops and Offices Act,- but such a case occurred at the Magistrate's Court today, when Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M. was on the bench. Frank Whitehead was charged iwith having committed a breach of the Shop and Offices Act by failing to keep a wages and time-book as required by the Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1098. Dr. Bamford, for *he defendant, pleaded guilty. i Walter Newton, Inspector of AwaTds, stated he visited the defendant's establisment in Queen Street on the 9th of February, and inspected the wages and time-book. He found it had not been entered up to date. Mrs. Rachel Woodhead said she entered the time book under the instructions of Mr. Whitehead. When she told 'him overtime had been worked by the girls, he instructed her to keep ■the hours within 52-for -the week. Dur-. ing the time the territorials were at the ' wharf the girls worked long 4iours, and also at Christmas-time. i "I knew perfectly well it was more | than my position was worth-to enter up more than 52 hours for the week," said I witness in answer to Dr. Banvford's question why she had not kept the book properly entered. j After hearing further evidence, Mr. Kettle said this was the worst case of, the kind he ever had before 'him since i he had to deal With breaches of the award. It was clear there had been a j gross breach-of the award. When employers ignored the laws the only thing they must expect was to be punisEed. The law limited the penalty to £50, and in the present case, where the law had been deliberately broken, 'he did not sec bis way to reduce the penalty below the maximum fixed.

Dr. Bamford asked'his Worship 'to take into account that this was the first case against his client.

Mr. Kettle said the evidence showed • that this thing had been going on for some considerable time, and a penalty of £50 would 'be imposed.

Mr. \Vhitehead was also fined 10/ each in two cases of employing girls from 9. a.m. to 2 p.m. without allowing time ■for lunch. One of jttae girls stated she had never asked for a meal and been refused.

Mr. Bamford. said Wa .client was guilty of a technical breach.. Thercnevcr had been any difficulty in-the girls getting ameal, and no complaints had been made to Mr. "Whitehead.

Mr. Kettle said it was the duty of employers to-carry out the awards, and not wait for employees to demand them. A penalty of 10/ would be. imposed in each case.

The same defendant was ordered to pay a penalty of 40/ for selling tobacco and cigarettes after ft p.m..

Dr. Bamford pleaded guilty, but explained that Air. "Whitehead thought he. 'had a right to sell in a restaurant, but made the mistake of selling from his shop.