MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume I, Issue 135, 24 May 1911, Page 7

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

NAPIER. TUESDAY. May 23r<l. (Before Mr. S. E. McCarthy, S.M.) BREACH OF INDUSTRIAL AWARD. At the afternoon sitting of the court the Inspector of Awards', Mr. R. T. Bailey, brought an action against William Ward, builder and contractor, for employing a nonunionist between the dates of January 14th and February 18th, when there were unionists ready and willing to take the position. Mr. Bailey briefly outlined the facts of the case. The driver who was engaged by Ward met with an accident, and a lad was put on in his place. He. proved to be unsatisfactory, and another driver, the non-unionist who is the cause of the present dispute, was taken on. When this man was engaged there were several unionists out of work. No inquiries were made at the Labour Department as to whether there were any unionists seeking employment. No application had been made to Mr. Bayley’s predecessor, M ‘ Gohns. Joseph Bartlett said his name was on the employment book, kept in the Labour Department office, and he was out of work when Ward employed a non-unionist. He would have taken the job if he had been offered it.

Charles McKenzie, secretary of the Napier branch of the Drivers’ Union, deposed that the previous witness was a unionist and was financial. He knew that Bartlett’s name* was on the book at the time when Ward employed a non-union-ist. Slade, the man employed by Ward, was not, and is not, a unionist.

Air. Cresswell, for the defence, stated that if an employee were objectionable to the employer, he could employ a non-unionist or a unionist, and this was what Mr. Ward had done. William Ward, contractor, deposed that at present he had a man named Slade in his employment. On the 3rd of February Slade spoke to him about the job, and on the 6th he was engaged. Did not know if Slade was a unionist. On the 4th March he instructed his clerk to ring up Mr. Gohns,,formerly Inspector of Factories in Napier, and find out whether there were any unionists out of work. The Inspector, witness alleged, stated that there were no drivers’ names on the? employment book, and advised the clerk that if Slade became a member of the union it would be all right. No names of men out of employment were supplied by Mr. Gohns. This was contradicted by a letter which Mr. Ward hirnself had written, stating that he was supplied with the names of three inen who were out of work. Frederick McVay, clerk to Mr. Ward, remembered Slade being engaged. Before engaging him witness rang up Mr. Gohns, who supplied him with three names of drivers out of work. Witness did all he could to find these men. To Mr. Bailey: The conversation concerning these three men took place between witness and Mr. Gohns on March 4th. The responsibility of engaging Slade rested with Mr. Ward. Mr. Bailey pointed out several discrepancies in the evidence given by Ward and McVay. He showed that March 4th was a Saturday, and the Labour Office was closed on that afternoon. Witness said that Slade declared that he would not join a union. To Mr. Cresswell: Mr. Ward had been working under about eight different awards during the last few years. His Worship summed up the eviI dence at some length. He stated [ that he thought Mr. Ward or his ! clerk had failed to make the necessary inquiries on the date they alleged they did. The prescribed course, as laid down by the award, had not been adhered to. A conviction must follow. A fine of £2 was inflicted, with 3/- costs.