IMPORTANT JUDGMENT.

Manawatu Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 2076, 17 March 1922, Page 5

IMPORTANT JUDGMENT.

[ AFFECTING MINING COMPANIES. I (Per Press Association.) : INVERCARGILL, Last Night. An important case to mining in- , terests was decided by Mr G. Cruick--1 shank, S.M.. to-day. A miner sued the Nightcaps Coal Company to re- = cover the difference between £8 11/ being wages due for Si days' work at ® the minimum wages of IS/, and £5 1 3/5. the amount, earned at the ton--3 nage rate paid by the company. The ’ case was a test one under the new 1 award, by which a considerable re- • ductlon Was made in the earnings of miners. The Magistrate said the difference in the output and earnings ol (he men under the old agreement and the new award was very striking. Plaintiff before Christmas averaged 3i tons of coal hewn, and made a daily wage of £1 16/. Now. his average output was 2 i tons, and the average wage was 13/10. Each miner was sending out one ton less per day. and was earning loss than half the former : wages. No one could say that 13/ ; was a fair wage for a conscientious L miner. The award fixed the wages at . 18/ per day when men were on piece- ■ work. Clause 25 of the award com- ■ polled the company to make the men’s • earnings up to 18/ per day. when i working on the tonnage rate, if a L man, through no fault of his own, was : unable to earn 18/ per shift. The . company had refused to make up the j extra payment, alleging that the men. • being dissatisfied with the award, were going slow. The onus was on ! the company to prove that. The plaintiff seemed to his Worship to be a lino type of miner, with a long experience in Wales and America. If the companv considered the miner was not earning an average of 18/ at the tonnage rates, through malingeri ing or limiting the output, it should s dismiss him. The award tonnage rates i were so low that to his mind a miner could not earn the minimum wage. The company had failed to convince him that the man’s failure to earn IS/ was through any fault of his own, and judgment must be for the amount claimed, with costs.