WORK IN RESTAURANTS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23108, 6 February 1937, Page 8

WORK IN RESTAURANTS

FEMALE ASSISTANTS* HOURS "A MOST UNJUST LAW" That . the law which precluded restaurant proprietors from employing female assistants after 10.30 p.m. was a most unjust one was the opinion expressed in the City Police Court yesterday by Mr J. S. Sinclair during the hearing of a charge of employing a female assistant after this hour. The defendant was Phillip Barling, who pleaded guilty. • The defendant, Mr Sinclair said, was not wilfully defying the law. Other restaurants were breaking this most unjust law, and the worst offender was the Government itself. During the holidays the railways restaurants were open through the whole night, and girls were employed during that time, not only for 10 minutes or a quarter of an hour after 10.30. The Government, in- effect, realised the impracticability of enforcing the regulation. The magistrate:' I do not know whether the. Act applies to. railway restaurants or not.

Mr . Sinclair: But r surely these •restaurants are not exempt. Restaurant-keepers, Mr . Sinclair continued, were placed in a difficult position. .The law did not say that their premises must be- closed at 10.30.. ■• It simply said, that female assistants must, not- be employed after that hour.. This created ah impossible situation, as male assistants could not be procured, and if the employers could not keep the girls on- for'a quarter of an hour after, 10.30 they might as well close up business. The after-picture trade was their best source of revenue. " I - appreciate the difficulty," observed his Worship, " but I must take the law as it is." Mr Sinclair said that the matter was a serious one for restaurants. His client was not the only offender; other big restaurants did it, and if they did not they must go to the wail. If the Minister fully considered the question, he would, no doubt, see the injustice Of the law, and, as a matter of fact, restaurant proprietors from all parts of the Dominion, proposed joining" in a deputation to interview the Minister and ask that the matter be reviewed. In fairriess to his client, therefore, counsel asked that, pending this deputation, the Labour Department agree to an adjournment. This particular law had not been enforced for 16 years. Mr A. J. Haub, who represented the department, said that prosecutions under the section had taken place in 1928, 1931 and 1935. He did not think, however, that the department would offer any objection to ah adjournment as suggested by Mr Sinclair. '■". - ' ?-' \ •," : • The hearing was adjourned sine die,; to be. brought on,, at three days' •notice.- '■■•: \-__l__ ."'" .