A WAGES PROBLEM.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18703, 8 May 1924, Page 11

A WAGES PROBLEM.

O ■ ■■ 'Af-'-t -Jfrf r: >t'P : '-r t-'V' "TIME AND A-HALF." HOTEL WORKERS' AWARD. > " COURT'S, RULING SOUGHT. <.;i A r question in regard to the rate of payment for work performed on certain days hfir workers ! employed in hotels was raised; before . the Arbitration Court t yesterday, ■jMr-.'i; Justice , Fraaer ,presiding, j,.,; 's; The inspector -of awards, Mr. - W. < Slaughter,-,-: sought ' an i interpretation , on; j behalf of the Licensed Victuallers' Asso- ; ciation of *; clause 4 (a) of j the '< Dominion licensed hotels award, which , read a3 follows:—'"Employees who work on Christy mas Day, New Year's, Day, Good Friday; Easter Monday, Labour Day and Sovereign's Birthday?shall be paid time and ahalf rates for. such work." : Mr. Slaughter said r; the department's view of the clause was that it meant that. each worker who worked on any of the days in' question was entitled to ' one and a-half days' pay in addition to his ordinary, weekly wage. That was tn© union's view also. Previous decisions of the Court had held that time and a-half rates meant one and a-half days' addi- '■ tional pay. : ■ ; ' " The secretary of; the Hotel Employees' Union, Mr. A. Jackson, supported the inspector's view, and : .d the union would , not. have concluded the agreement had its assessors thought that the effect was to grant only one half-day's additional pay. He asked the: Court to place the workers on the same footing as other workers who were not obliged- to work on the days in question. It was not possible to have made .the days holidays in the hotel trade, where work was essential on such days. ' The assistant-secretary of the New Zealand Employers' Federation,: Mr. B. L. Hammond, said the Court was obliged to give the ' clause a literal interpretation, and in doing so must, uphold the employers' contention A that' the , effect of the clause was, to, entitle the workers to one half-day's :pay only in addition to the ordinary weekly wage." Mr. Jackson had himself 'admitted that it was ' impossible for the days to' have been mad® holidays, and if thoy ..were not holidays, then the cases relied upon were not in point, and the union's -claim must fall to the ground. The cases previously decided by the Court were not analagous. His Honor said it; was clear the days were not holidays. i Mr. Hammond said that, in that event, !■ the,union could not Succeed, • for vhe reason that the Court had repeatedly held that-'* time and - a-half "rates meant the ;■ ordinary wage, plus half as much ag&in, | except m cases where the days were noli- , days. The issue was simple; the Court ■ was required to say merely what : time and a-half rates meant. • * ' ;" ' i- His Honor said jit was obvious the , parties held different views on the clause , when it was agreed to. It was'extremely unfortunate that the'matter was not more ' fully discussed at the conference, but.it ; seemed pretty clear that each' side had formed its own idea of the meaning, and " it had not entered their heads that the ' other side held a different view. ! The Court reserved its decision.