TRADES AND LABOUR.

Mataura Ensign, 18 July 1906, Page 3

TRADES AND LABOUR.

AN IXTKIiESTIXti APPEAL. ! Per I'nitod Press Association. ! WELLIXCJTOX, July 18. j The Appeal Court is occupied hearing) Hip oa<o Haillio and Co. v. Arthur Recce. Tito appellants are printers at Pahiatua, and respondent was an employee. Ho was not apprenticod, but worked for wages. In 15)1)2 iiit award was made by the Arbitration Court fixing (he minimum wii«o lor printers' employees, and appellants were parties to this award. The respondout continued in their employ for two years after the award, receiving leys than the minimum stated in the award; but no contract was made by him to take less than the minimum wage. The appellants did not comply with the provision of the Act which allows a lower rate to be paid in certain eases. Appellants'had been tilled for a broach of the award, and m> portion of the fine was paid. who began the action, claimed fit ICs. the difference betwoon his rate o| pay and the minimum wajje in | the award. The magistrate at Pahiatua decided against him, but in the Supreme; Court the chief Justice held that the respondent was entitled to recover. It was from tliis latter decision that the appeal is now being made. The case raises a very important (|iie>Uoii, and is the first of its kind in the colony. The Arbitration Court has been in the habit, when tininj? employers- for paving less than, the minimum wa<je fixed by an award, to order a part or the whole, of the fine to be paid io the employee, and it is generally considered that the emploveo has no lur-th.-r remedy. It the Chief Justice's decision is upheld every employee paid less than thr minimum fixed by the Arbitration Court in his ease will bo able to hrinjr an action to recover the balance, and the result involves much litigation ! and manyth ou>:imls of pounds. Mr Henlnum. for I lie appellants, eonleiuleil lliat the respondent must have known lie ««s enleriiiK into tin illegal contract, ami therefore could not now sue 011 it.