ARBITRATION COURT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 20, 18 October 1907, Page 9

ARBITRATION COURT.

INTERESTING POINTS RAISED. [by telegram.—mess association.] •' Auckland, October 17. The Arbitration Court opened its sittings yesterday afternoon.' The Auckland Racing' Club admitted having committed a breach of the house painters' award by employing a man named Henry De Granville at less than the award rato. Mr. Hartland, the club's secretary, explained that the breach was committed unintentionally. Do Granville, who was a painter, had told him that he preferred regular employment as a ! casual hand rather than at his trade, at which he earned an uncertain amount. Ho (Mr. Hartland) accordingly put him on as a casual hand at Ellerslie at 7s. a day, 'and,'subsequently he was given some painting .to do. The club's officials were absolutely unaware that they wero committing an offence,' and when the matter was brought, under his notice ha offered to pay up the-whole of, the arrears. The Court imposed a fine of £2 and costs oil the club, and mulcted De Granville in a similar penalty. • r Proceedings were taken against H. Kneobone aiid J. M. Lennon on a charge of having committed a breach of the award. Mr. Reed; appearing'for the defendants, stated that m June last Mr. Kneebona sold out his shop in Symonds Street to Mr. Lennon, and then bought another place in Queen Street. The weekly half-holiday was observed by hairdressers in the two- streets' on different days, and when Mr. Kneebone's, half-holiday arrived he went up and assisted Mr.. Lennon, who returned the compliment. They merely exchanged labour, and he 'submitted that there was no breach.' Mr. La Cren, in. roply, stated that under the Shops and Offices Act any one who worked for another was an. assistant, and should'be paid. Mr. lteed submitted that the law did not prohibit an employer working on a half-holiday in another shop in exchange for services roturned. If it was ruled that one employer could not work for another on a half-holiday and vice-versa, the matter could still be got ovor by the one man paying the, other a> half-sovereign, or whatever it might be, when; he assisted him,, and the other returning tlin. half-sovereign when the service was returned,, 1 which reduced the thing to an absurdity. Mr. Lo,Cren said thero Was another phase of th« matter which had to be looked at, and thai) was that, theso employers, in exchanging labour,', were keoping other men out of work. The Court held that as thero had been am' exchange of labour only, no breach had been committed. - - ' ' . A number of . persons were fined for em'ploying workers at a less sum than stipulated in industrial awards. ' _ The Arbitration Court, dealing with S breach of tho furniture trade award by E. M. Baker, for lia'ving employed, in excess of the regulation number of apprentices, boy whe had'been two years at the technical school, held that a breach had been committed, but as the defendant had acted on the strength, of a permit from .the chairman of the .Conciliation Board, who had exceeded his jurisdiction, a penalty of £1 would' meet the casa.