A WAGES PROBLEM

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22719, 4 May 1937, Page 13

A WAGES PROBLEM

RATE IN BROKEN WEEK WORKER OFF AT SLACK TIME EMPLOYER NOT LIABLE TO PAY [BT TKT.KCRAPH —PRESS ASSOCIATION] PALMERSTON NORTH, Monday Reserved judgment in a case of importance under the labour laws was given by Mr. J. L. Stout, &.M., the case being a test one brought by the Department of Labour against Manawatu Knitting Mills, Limited. It was submitted for the defence at the hearing that, if the department's contention was upheld, the industry would be called upon to bear an additional burden of costs never contemplated. The defendants were charged with employing a person with over three years' factory experience for the week ended January 15, and failing to pay not less than £2. It was claimed that this was a breach of the Factories Act as amended in 1936. The facts were not in dispute.

An employee, paid £2 5s weekly, lost one day's employment through no fault of hers, but on the instruction of her employers, on account of temporary slackness of work in her department. As a result she had 9s, representing one day's wages, deducted, bringing her wages for that week down to 365. The department claimed that section 32 of the Act made it penal to reduce the weekly wage below £2. The magistrate states that no authority was quoted for this proposition, but it was contended that it is the meaning of the section. He held that the wording of the section is against such construction, for the concluding words of sub-section A contemplate reductions by limiting reductions from the wages of boys and women under 18 years to time lost through a worker's illness or default, or on account of the temporary closing of a factory for cleaning or repairing machinery. "I think all the section does is to fix the minimum rate of pay for a full week's work," said the magistrate. "This is a guide to employers or the Arbitration Court in fixing wages in an industry on the analogy of the basic wage fixed by the Arbitration Court. The provision does not mean that a worker is entitled to the minimum wage, irrespective of the work done by such worker, but that a worker is to be paid for work done at not less than the rates fixed by the section. This view is supported by section 14 of the amending Act, 1936, providing for payment for certain holidays. The charge, therefore, must be dismissed."