AWARD BREACHES ALLEGED

Press, Volume LXXVI, Issue 22941, 10 February 1940, Page 18

AWARD BREACHES ALLEGED

SALVATION ARMY AUXILIARY CO.

PEOPLE’S PALACE INVOLVED IN SIX CHARGES

Six charges against the Salvation Army Auxiliary Company, Ltd., were brought by the Department of Labour yesterday before Mr F. F. Reid, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court. The charges were based on alleged breaches of the New Zealand Private • Hotel Employees’ Award, 1938, to which’the company, which carried on the business of a private hotel known as the People’s Palace, in Manchester street, was subject. The charges, alleging, breaches for each of which a' £lO penalty was sought by the department, were:— (1) Failing to keep a time and wages book from September, 1938, to .January 1939, in which were correctly recorded the daily hours; of employment of three workers; (2) failing to exhibit in - each department of the establishmerit' a time-table of actual . hours to, be worked; (3) failing to pay overtime due to Oliver- Morris (kitchen hand); (4) failing to pay overtime due to Charles H. Hill (kitchen hand); (5) failing to pay Ruby Laughlin (second cook) due overtime, and (6), failing to allow her a half-holiday from 1 p.m., in addition to one full day each week. Mr K. W. Walton represented the defendant company. Mr S. E. McGregor, inspector of awards, conducted the case for the department. From evidence, said Mr. McGregor, it could be seen that the workers were, instructed by the chef to record on their time sheets the hours which he wrote out for them, and that these hours were put down on their time sheets and copied by the employer into the wages and time book, when it was known to those in charge that much longer hours had actually been worked. “This case is totally different from an ordinary case of a worker of his own accord recording incorrect hours to pile up against his employer a substantial claim for overtime. It is a case of workers conscientiously carry-, ing out what they were told to dp by their immediate, superior,” Mr McGregor said. “In connexion with these

cases,” he added, “I am ■ directed to emphasise that the department has done everything possible to effect a settlement without proceedings. The company refused to admit any liability on compensation to the workers. Evidence of two witnesses taken elsewhere was before the Court. Evidence was also given in the morning by Mr S. W. Armstrong,, (the inquiring inspector), and by Laughlin. ' Denying the department’s contentions, Mr Walton said that the company had placed full reliance on the timesheets filled in by the employees. They were instructed to fill in the sheets correctly, and the authorities knew nothing of their apparent failure to do so. The company, however, pleaded guilty to the one charge of failing to exhibit a time-table. Brigadier Thomas Buttermore said that after a claim had been made in 1938, the company was all the more particular about tiie hours and accuracy of entries. The company made it clear that it did not want the employees to work overtime, but where overtime was inevitable it Was always paid. To Mr McGregor, witness said he did not carry on the rule of his predecessor that overtime was not to be countenanced. When overtime had to be worked it was entered. He did not know the kitchen staff was working overtime, and as for the hours on the sheets he had to take the staff on trust. Three other witnesses besides Brigadier Buttermore were heard in the afternoon. The Magistrate reserved decisions on all charges. _■