BREACH OF AWARD

Grey River Argus, 5 December 1924, Page 3

BREACH OF AWARD

REEFTON EMPLOYERS FINED. At the S.M. Court yesterday at Reel ton, the Inspector of Factories (Mr S. Tyson) proceeded against the firm ot Higgins and Fincctt, sawmillers for breach of award, in that they had failed to pay wages when due. Mr Reece appeared for the defendants, and pleaded guilty under extenuating circumstances. The .Magistrate entered a con viction, inflicting a penalty of £3 an i costs (£2 14s). The Inspector also proceeded against Ihe licefton Coal Company. Ltd., for a breach of the Reefton coal miners agreement proviso relative to th;* 30 mile radius, in that they discharged driver without giving him notice (throe days) or paying three shifts in lice, '.hereof. Mr I. Patterson, for the. defendants. pleaded not guilty. The In ipector called Messrs F. Loubcre. M>‘. Kan (Secretary of the Miners’ Union), while evidence for the defence was given by Mine Manage) Talley. Defendants pleaded that they were justified in discharging Loubcre for disobeying eiders given by the Manager, and that Loubcre was Io work on Saturday, which was pay Saturday. In reply, the Inspector contended that as Saturday was pay Saturday, and under Section 2> of the .ygreemeut a man was not supposed < • work, as il was an off Saturday and the order given Loubcre by the Manager to work on that day was m.d a lawful order, and Loubcre was justified in not working on that day. A breach of the award had been committed by the Management in not giving Loubcre either three days' notice or three days’ pay in lieu of not ice. Atfei :i tair amount of argument, His Worship staled that according to the agreement as drafted, only I lie. shiftmen could be employed on pav Saturday. The agreement may be crudely drawn, but nevertheless, both had made themselves parties to it., and were bound by if. lie found that a technical breach hud been committed, and he would impose a penalty of £2 and costs