BAKERS’ AWARD

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8608, 19 December 1913, Page 11

BAKERS’ AWARD

AN EMPLOYEE. CHANGED WITH BLEACHES. FINES FOB EMPLOYEES. ' Yesterday at the Magistrate's Court, before Mi- J- S. Evans, S.M., I|he Inspector' of .Awards, Mr B. T. Halley, proceeded against Henry Fisher, • a Kiddiford street- baker claiming a pen, alty of AID for an .alleged breach of too bakers’ award by failing to pay to a journeyman, Vi Clifford, the award rate of wages from dime Ist to October 9 th- The inspector also sought to recover a similar penalty for a similar alleged breadh in connection with the employment of a iobber, V. Richards. The defendant .was further charged with wilfully making false entries in his wages and overtime books. Mr Bailey conducted his own case. Mr J. J- McGrath defended. Evidence was given by Clifford to .the effect that ,bo had frequently asked, hus employer for -23 5s a week, the wage due to him- for doing the foreman’s work. As it was, he was getting only £3 2s a week, and Fisher refused to .raise hie- wages* saying that he could no* afford to do so. In regard to the information concerning false entries in the books, Richards, to whom the entries referred, said that he worked all day one Monday and was not paid for it. No entry a« to the work was made in the books, ’"'-T Addressing the court, Mr McGrath submitted that no conviction could be, enr tered in regard to the information of wilfully making false entries. The evidence was that- the book had been kept by defendant’s wife in accordance with the contract mode with the two employees, The matter would have been different if the defendant had wen charged with failing to keep a book. His Worship said that this was no excuse. Probably only one employer out of a 1 hundred kept his own books. Counsel contended that there was no evidence before the court that Ins defendant had made false entries. Defendant had occupied the position of foreman and paid himself the wages due Clifford had been paid .£3 2s a week find overtime, A hen entitled to only A“2 15s. Bichards had been employed out of generosity by the defendant and kept in work when his cervices were not rs9^lTm'magistrate held that the section of lh« Act in' point was incomplete in that it did not indicate that there was any obligation on the part of an employer, to. enter the actual number of hours worked in his books. His IVorphin intimated ' that ho Would reserve hie decisionEMPLOYEES FINED. Clifford was proceeded against b.r the inspector with a claim for X 5 for working aii a, foreman and failing to claim tfiie rate Of wanes stipulated in clause 2 of the award. On the defendant pleading gui’ y ms Worship imposed a line of iOs, remarkiug that it was of little or no use having -the awards if they were not going to be adhered to. Similarly Bichaids was fined SSOa for failing to. claim ftJie rate of wages ettipulatedi for A “jobber ’’ •