HOTEL EMPLOYEES AWARD.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 763, 11 March 1910, Page 7

HOTEL EMPLOYEES AWARD.

V . CbURTXASE FAILS., ' (By Telegraph—Press Association.) ;-v, : v ' ■~ . Dunedin, March 10. "At ; the Magistrate's Court to-day the Hspect.br'-.of Awards ' prbceeded. against 1 Jas. Connor, ; manager; of. th« Palace Hid Leviathan private ■ Hotels; charging hiiii with ■ a breach. of the hotel '.employees' award by employing; four lalihdreske's aild paying thcui less .than the award, rate .of wages.. Mr. ' Haiiitiu 'appeared for. the defence. , ''■'•"'■■■'. .The inspector stated that ', these lauh-. dresses were employed by defendant; and their wages (225. Cd. per week) were paid thein as provided for,in Clause 1 "of the award. Clause 3 of the award stipulated that, whore'lodging was. hot provided, an additional suiii,of ss. per week to each laundress had to bo paid. Lodging in. this case, was hot provided, and the extra.ss. was not paid: ,' Mr.. Hanlbn :. No. The lodging was .provided, and they preferred to go elsewhere. . Therefore, we .were .hot called . Opjjri to jtay the extra ■ ss'. ■ The inspector: Well, that narrows the point downto whether the lodging wits offered or hot. Giving evidence, he said that, on January ,11, he called at the Leviathan. Private Hotel, liiid learned that these laundresses were iiot being paid,is. §" week as stipulated. "He approached . Connor hi .connection..with the huit- , and Mr. Cbrihdt refused to disbiiss It SSfih him. . It being pointed, out Ihat.Mr. Connor, the manager of both hotels, was sued whereas, according to Court prdcedure. il was necessary 'tb .sue. the . ■ Leviathan Hotel and Palace Hotel Companies, the magistrate non-suited the inspector, and awarded costs amounting to JE2 ISs.