BIG CLAIM FOR OVERTIME

Manawatu Times, Volume 62, Issue 132, 5 June 1937, Page 2

BIG CLAIM FOR OVERTIME

Feilding Woman’s Suit Against Hastings Brewer DECISION RESERVED. A civil action was commenced in the Magistrate's Court on Thursday, before Mr J. Miller, S.M., when M. Payne, married woman, sought to recover from D. Newbigin, brewer, Hastings, formerly manager of the Mangatera Hotel, £192 8s 4d overtime while employed there for some time in 1936. Mr A. M. Ongley appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Hallett, of Hastings, for the defendant. Plaintiff, at present employed as a cook at the Manchester Hotel, Feilding, deposed that her husband was appointed manager of the Mangatera Hotel in April, 1930. During the first iweek she relieved the cook and did the laundry work, for which she was offered 10s per week. She refused the offer, but continued to relieve the girls without any payment. On May 11 she was .offered tho position of cook-general, which she accepted. She did not receive the full award rates, receiving £2 a week. A new award came in in June and she received £2 9s per week. When witness took over the position of cookgeneral the staff had been reduced to two, including witness and a house-maid-waitress. Mr Ongley: Who did the laundry work?—l did. Witness said that in September her daughter was employed as housemaid. She commenced duty at six in tho morning and finished for the day about 8 o'clock at night. Mr Ongley: Where did you have your meals?—ln the kitchen. Witness said for about two months— August and September—there were 10 regular boarders in the house. She was supposed to get a day and a-half off in the week, but only received two weekends. She signed the wages book as if she had had her time off. Defendant's representative, Mr Bayliss, told her that Mr Newbigin would make it up to her later by giving her a good position in another hotel. Mr Bayliss was aware that she was working 14 hours a day. She never received any overtime. Replying to Mr Hallett, witness said she did not tell Mr Bayliss that she was working over 12 hours a day. Mr Hallett: Was not the arrangement in the first place that your husband and yourself and family were to go into the Mangatera Hotel, hold the license and run it?—Yes. So that your husband went into the hotel as manager?—Yes. You practically acted as hostess?—l had no time to entertain. Until you were appointed cook you helped your husband in tho hotel?— Yes. Replying further to counsel, witness said when she was appointed cookgeneral she was informed that she was to receive the standard rate of pay for such work. To the magistrate, witness said the claim for overtime was not made until after the expiration of her engagement at the hotel. Mr Hallett: The actual cook's work would not take more than Bix or seven hours a day?—lt would be more than that. About 10 hours. E. E. Payne, formerly licensee of the Mangatera Hotel, stated that when he entered the hotel he was to manage the place for two or three weeks, when he was promised by the defendant to be given something better. He was to receive £2 10s per week, with keep for his wife and family. The arrangement in regard to wages was maintained until he objected, when he received £3 per week, which was less than a barman's wages. Mr Hallett referred to the lapse of time before plaintiff took steps to recover the overtime. Obviously if the « claim for overtime had beeu made at the proper time and in the proper manner the wholo position would have been altered.

The magistrate: Yes, the work would have been discontinued.

Mr Hallett: And new arrangements would have been made. He added that Mr and Mrs Payno had been appointed in the ordinary way and this arrangement continued until May 11, when the cook left. During the time the Paynes were in the house it was run at a loss.

Kenneth Bayliss, registered accountant, who acted as defendant's representative, deposed to having kept the books of the hotel, and as to the arrangements made with Mr Payne for managing the hotel. When the Paynes went into the house the then cook was receiving £2 per week, and she had never made any claim for overtime. It was hoped that the business at the hotel would improve and that Mr Payne's wages would be increased, but unfortunately this did not materialise. He used to visit the hotel once a month. Mr Hallett: Did Mrs Payno ever express any dissatisfaction with her position?—No.

Was there ever any suggestion made by Mrs Payne—or Mr Payne—that Mrs Payne was entitled to overtime?—No. Replying to Mr Ongley, witness said Mrs Payne was paid the standard rate for cooks employed in a country hotel. The magistrate said the hotel could not be treated as a country hotel, but as a town hotel.

Replying to Mr Ongley, witness said he had difficulty in getting Mr Payno to keep the records at the hotel accurately, particularly as to the hours worked. He was entirely unaware that Mrs Payno was working overtime. Ho was never told that Mrs Payno had never had her day and a-half off each week.

Mr Ongley: The arrangement was | that Mr Payne went into the hotel with 1 the promise of something better?—ll have heard a good deal about that but I know nothing of it. I might have suggested that "Mr Newbigin would not forget you." Evidence was given by Mrs Newrick, wife of the present licensee, that, her

duties consisted of assisting in the work of the house, and in relieving tho employees. She also relieved the cook whenever it was her day off. Witness did not think that the cooking should occupy a total of 10 hours a day.

Mrs K. Marsh, who was employed at the Mangatera Hotel as a cook from December till Easter, said she never worked more than 7 i hours, with the exception of show time, when she probably did not work more than 81 hours. She had plenty of time to spare and was able to do a lot of knitting. His Worship reserved his decision,