BREACHES OF AWARDS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 431, 13 February 1909, Page 13

BREACHES OF AWARDS.

9 CANDIDATE FOR PARLIAMENT FINED. (BI TELKaUAPn—PRESS ASSOCIATION.')

'■■:-f ''-'":',:'■■*:■):.■' ■"■■•;?"( ;, ''Tliiiaru r February v 9,This morning ..two. cases under the. amended .'Arbitration";- Apt.,; of -last ssssibnvwore beard by 'the 'Magistrate; , . • J-. Jackeon and Go. ; were proceeded against for. a breach-, of the caraward viri.-paying , loss "than, award rates,.while a.breach -yriti. also, alleged against .Qeorgo;'Kollo.• for,..acbopting'less than '■ rate wages., v The.-'defence was raised that Kollbr was,-n'ot.''a carpenter, : L but ; was .'employed;.as a'.'.handy man,.thus, coming under:tho : saw-. mill employees' award; Tho Magistrate held , .'tKat-breaones.had,'occurred,,; arid "fined I ', the employers 10s.; arid costs 215.: Ho ; also''con--■victed -Koller.' Additional interest -. attached to .'the-case; from .the (fact -thatKollor:. was a candidate 'for : tho Timaru Seat- at the! late election; .; Counsel referred to .some:.; of 'Kol l ler's' statements .made theni-but ■tho.Magistrate refused to hear. them.. ...'"Witness'stated that. , : Koller admitted/, during the ■ campaign,. that he; was : not-a .carpenter,:. but>a. savr-min;,'.omployee.'-'-''i--'..: ,s;':.'-; 1 :;.v : ; .;■ ■■ -.', : "};;[' :' 4{v:^ . ;•; ..' '"u'l. : ■-.'_"• ;' t ..'Ashbur'ton,'-. February, 12.■•!": '.'; At'■' the'- Magistrate's Court to-dayi before Mr. V;; G. Day, vS.%- Hugh B. Bowor claimed. £2 from Theophilus Best, for committing, a>breaoh'-ofi tho Chfistchurch';,tailoring working for £l'7s; 6d;,:'instead,or. £2' 165., \ per .week, .a 6, .the' award provided; Defendant -was fiiiM 10si Mr. Bower,claimed £10 from O. Andrews and Co. ; for a breach' |of, the same' award, in' employing two :'• apprentices. The., firm \yaa - also charged' with ..a' breach.of .the award in respect of Best, and of 405.,- without costs, , was inflicted in e'ach.case.^ ; :;:,: -..-;. . -.-.;■ :?:..:\\ ■::].::.<;' '(P ; s 'V> Invcrcarglll, February. 12. -.-■ ; The Arbitration' Court-, sat:.to-day,..'; when several breaches, of"award were' .dealt with;■ Nominal penalties ..woro.inflicted where : 'thei brenoh was unintentional. For paying less than the award rate, William Dunlop, tailor, was fined':'£3;'".jDonald Manson, baker,, .was . fined -£2 ; for '■ failing' to pay wages .'for • inoro than-a fortnight;;;'. \ v' ,,, '-- ■: '.•''. -V;:; ; In the case'J.L,'Harper against. John Walker,' building contf actors a' olaim for'£soo , compensation, on account of an. acoident which, resulted .in the. loss of claimant's right arm, the.question was' raised of whether-sufficient .notice was given:.' Decision was reserved- '■' : The'sitting; wa's; conolude'd/and the' Court ..:■.....,