CLAIM FOR WAGES

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 33, 9 February 1927, Page 10

CLAIM FOR WAGES

"A claim for a difference in wages was heard before Mr. W. G. Biddell, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesterday. The plaintiff was Walter Hadley (Mr. T. C. Hislop), and the defendants were the Wellington City Corporation (Mr. J. Lockie), and the amount claimed was £4 19s 9d. It was stated that the plaintiff had been employed as a general labourer at the Miramar quarry, and that during the course of his employment he was transferred to other work at the same rate of pay. The plaintiff alleged that the other work was such as to entitle him to carpenter's rates of pay. . ' . It was contended for the Corporation that the plaintiff, having terminated his employment with the Corporation on sth October, 1926, was disentitled to the amount claimed, owing to the fact that the action had not been brought within three months, as required by the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 190 S. Counsel rsked for a non-suit on that ground.

Mr. Hislop said that he could not understand the raising of such a defence, since the Corporation had asked him for nri extension of time in which to consider the matter.

In reply, Mr. Lockie said that a letter had been forwarded to the plaintiff's solicitor well within the three months, stating that the Corporation would make no offer. However, in view of the circumstances, he was quite prepared to have the case adjourned for a fortnight to allow the Corporation to consider whether such a defeuce should be raised.

The Magistrate said that he would hear the evidence in the meantime, subject to the council's decision on the point raised. The evidence was accordingly heard, and the case was adjourned for a .fortnight.