BREACH OF AWARD

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 59, 2 December 1933, Page 22

BREACH OF AWARD

Employer’s Agreement With Workers FINES IMPOSED “We must bring the system this man has adopted to the light of day. This sort of thing must be stopped,” said the inspector of awards, Mr. <l. Georgeson, in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday. He gave evidence on charges against a restaurant-keeper of paying some of his employees less than minimum award wages, while at the same time showing in the wages book payments at the award rate.

The restaurant proprietor, John R. Baillie, pleaded guilty to all the charges, which consisted of three of failing to pay his waitresses award wages and two of making a false entry in the wages book. For each breach of the award he was fined 10/by the magistrate, Mr. C. R. OrrWalker; on one of the other two charges he was fined £5 and costs, and on the other he was convicted and disch:u»l. The minimum award rate for, accused’s waitresses was £l/11/3, said Mr. Georgesou. The employees received only 15/- to £1 a week, but they signed for the larger amount. This had been under agreement with Baillie when they were engaged. He had said that he could not afford to pay the full wage.

Baillie had started his business with a shortage of capital, Mr. Georgeson continued. That seemed to be the reason for the offences. He was attending a meeting of his creditors at the time of the hearing. However, it was very important for all such systems to be discovered and stopped. Because of defendant’s short-paying he owed one waitress the sum of £2/12/-, another £l/10/-, and a third £2/11/3. Mr. A. L. Hollings, who appeared for defendant, said that he understood a heavy penalty was not being asked for in these cases, the main object being to bring the matter before the public. The award now was no longer in force. The waitresses concerned were not now in the business, and the newly engaged waitresses were working at £1 a week, and that had become a proper payment.

In fixing the penalties, Mr. OrrWalker said that failure to pay the award wage in the circumstances was not quite so serious, seeing that the wo'-’-'rs agreed to the arrangement. But the serious offence was the manipulation of the wages book. That is a very serious offence,” he continued. ‘To alter the book and press these poor employees to sign their names to false entries is not honest.”