ELECTRICAL WORKERS’ AWARD

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 134, 2 March 1921, Page 6

ELECTRICAL WORKERS’ AWARD

A TEST CASE IN COURT. Reserved 'judgment was delivered by Mr. J. S. Evans, S.M., in the Magistrate s Court yesterday, in the cace Inspector of Awards against the Harbour Board. The facts were that the defendant board, being a party to the electrical workers award,- employed seven men during November, 1920, and, it was alleged, failed to pay them award wages for journeymen electricians. Two of the seven men are permanent employees of the board, and in respect to these it was claimed that they were insured, that the board patd half the life insurance premium, that the board paid a part of the men’s superannuation fees, and that they received a week’s holiday on full pay. It wa» contended that these amounts should be included In the calculation of wages. The Magistrate held that, as gratuities, they could not be counted as part of the men s Wages to satisfy the requirements of the award. There vas then the question of whether the seven men came within the scope of the award. To bring them within the award the work done must relate to the construction, erection, and repairs or all classes of electric lighting and pouer appliances, or any other a Pp'* anceß ,'"’fl l I fJ l required a practical knowledge of electricity.” The two permanent hands rid general work in connection with the erecting. inrtnlling, and repairing of electno appliances, incluling. installation of telephones and cells, wiring, etc., an u His Worship held that they must be taken to have a practical knowledge of electric, itv though not qualified journeymen. The other five men were employed m connecting up cluster lights for ships holds. This work consisted mainly of plugging in connections, purely mechanical work requiring n° practical knowledge of electricity and the Magistrate held that the men could not be said to be electricians, and that, therefore, there had been no breach of the award in respect of tho five men. The defendant board was ad. judged to have committed a breach of the award in respect of the two permanent hands, and was ordered to pay a penalty of £2. The penalty was made light because it was a test case, and leave to appeal was reserved.