BROKEN AWARDS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LI, Issue 15610, 15 May 1914, Page 4

BROKEN AWARDS.

MILKMEN IN COURT. §I

HEAVY PENALTIES IX. FUTURE,

Several cases involving, breaches of various awards were'brought before Mr. C. C. Kettle. S.M., at the Magistrate's Court

yesterday.

The inspector of awards proceeded against Ambury's, Ltd., and W. Woods, A. E. Willis, and A. Drew, milkmen, for break-, ing the clause of the award governing their business that ■ provides that • milk shall not be delivered before 4 a.m. :■':"••.'■

The inspector, Mr. E. W. F. '. Gobs, V;-,-stated that the employees had informed him that a loss in trade had been occasioned by the fact that an opposition firm, m ;■'. had broken the award by starting out too M early, thereby reaching customers before ; ' Ambury's men.

The company's representative admitted the breach, and agreed with the inspector 'as to the cause of the offence. The opposition firm was now observing the award, however, and, as far as his own firm was concerned, there would 60 no further breach. . ;'-'

The magistrate fined the company 10s oa p each of the three charges, and the men s* ; ;;' each, remarking that .the defendants had taken a wrong course to maintain their .. business. He added that if milkmen broke m the law deliberately in future he would m inflict heavy penalties. W& F. Skeets was charged with employing a|| boy to retail milk at 5s per weak, instead v| of 46s per week. The defendant admitted 0 .;? taking the boy around with him, but. v added that he paid him nothing. The boy.. m had wanted to go around, and had been taken for bis own amusement! A fine of M 10s was inflicted. '? •■ ,•":>'.■;-:: A similar charge was made against Percy,..-; Bates, who admitted taking a boy with him, but denied having guaranteed Briy|| wages. He had given the boy a few-.' shillings occasionally. Inspector Goto < l stated" that the defendant had refused to give information when approached in i*:"; gard to the matter. A fine of £1 as im- • posed. ''-'."- ■■ W. J. Hill, who stated that he had .; employed a boy at 15s per week to.fhow,.". him the round when he took over the business, was lined £2. Further charges of a similar nature wrfl" ; adjourned. n ' • •:: YOUTHFUL WORKER. NO CERTIFICATE OBTAINED.' A charge was made against Arthur Cleave, and Co., Ltd. (Mr. Clayton), of employing a boy under the age of 16 years without first 'obtaining from the inspector Of lac-, tones a certificate of fitness relating to W °Mr. Clarion, in pleading guilty on behalf -of his client, said there had been* ■;, misunderstanding about the boy m W"V, tion. The foreman of works had, to iwvbest of his belief, instructed the boy t°. secure a permit, but apparently the matter had not been attended to. , : The defendant was fined 10s, and cow 9a. ■ \f -. J TECHNICAL BREACH. v ,|/,| MATTER OF PROPORTION. ?■ || The Sartorial Service Company (Mr, & P. Towle) admitted having committed » technical breach of the tailors "J-'ll engaging one more weekly-wage manttoj|| the proportion set, forth in he a" allowed. It was shown that although «J a pieceworks the man objected to J»|| d &B at times earn £3 3s a week, he W^ggffl that sum. On two occasions he«»« «" h d slightly over £3 3s in a week, but* received the usual amount. As » p», ■.;■,■.-.■■ of fact, during a period of *«* I pg under review, he bad been pa' %$M more than he had earned. .-„ ' v ' ; v:The magistrate--in this case »■'• y Fra Z er,S;M.-remavkedthat,althogbt breach had not robbed the man n «V wav, the firm must have known it* doing wrong. A nominal fine of 10», b«*. , ever, would meet the case. --i-'^MM