Woman on roadside stall was shop assistant for pay

Press, 4 November 1986, Page 10

Woman on roadside stall was shop assistant for pay

A woman who worked in a market garden roadside stall in Christchurch for several weeks in 198283 should have been paid as a. shop assistant, the Arbitration Court has ruled, in a reserved decision.

An inspector of awards with the Labour Department had sought $673 in arrears of wages and holiday pay on behalf of Mrs June Alice Wood while she worked for Redwood Garden Holdings, Ltd, in December, 1982, and January, 1983. The Court, comprising Chief Judge J. R. P. Horn and Messrs E. W. J. Ball and T. R. Weir, found that the award which should have applied to Mrs Wood’s employment was the fruit and vegetable shop employees’ award, not the market gardens award, under which her employer had paid her.

The fruit and vegetable award has higher rates of pay and is negotiated by the Shop Employees’ Union, while the market gardens award is negotiated by the Labourers’ Union. The Court said that Mrs Wood was employed in the shop and packing area of the business, in Sawyers Arms Road. She never worked in the garden itself and did not pick fruit.

The Court said that the essential question on the facts was whether Mrs Wood was a packer who also attended to sales, or a salesperson who also packed fruit.

Mrs Wood had said that she was mainly a salesperson, while a director, Mrs J. E. Harrow, had estimated that Mrs Wood spent 25 per cent of her time selling, 30 per cent making up cartons and boxes, and 25 per cent

packing fruit. The Court held that Mrs Wood was either selling, or packing fruit for the purposes of sale through the shop, 50 per cent or more of. her time. The Court said that there could be many variations in the industry. It concluded that a substantial, if not greater, part of Mrs Wood’s duties were in selling at retail to the public, and most, if not all, her other duties were ancillary to that function. i ! . The Court asked the parties to calculate the correct arrears and to advise it, so that judgment could be entered accordingly.

The advocate for the defendant company was Mr B. R. Greenslade, while counsel for the plaintiff was Mr R. G. Hill. The case was heard in Christchurch on September 30 and October 1.