SEAMEN'S WAGES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24715, 18 September 1941, Page 6

SEAMEN'S WAGES

CLAIM ON MASTER OF GREEK SHIP COURT ORDER REFUSED (P.A.) AUCKLAND, Sept. 17. Further legal proceedings arising out of the dispute between the master, Elefterios Georgacopoules, and - eight members of the crew of a Greekowned ship of the Panamanian registry, took ~> place in the Magistrate's Court to-day, when the men asked the court to fix the amount of wages due by the master to the superintendent of marine for their benefit r and to"direct that the 'amount remaining unpaid : at 10 a.m. to-morrow be levied by a distress warrant and the sale of the ship. The men concerned are at present in gaol, having been sentenced to • a month's imprisonment last week for failing to. obey lawful commands whi!e in safe harbour. According to their statement, they were owed a total of £757 6s sd. They were represented by Mr King, while Mr Cocker appeared for the master. Disobedience of Commands

Mr King said the owners of the ship contended that as the men had disobeyed orders no money was due to them. The men held, however, that if their contracts provided for the payment of so much a month, that money became.due at the end of each month. Section 137 of the Shipping and Seamen Act. 1908, gave the magistrate discretionary powers in the matter. If it was considered that imprisonment as well as forfeiture of wages was too harsh a punishment, the magistrate could order payment of some of the wages.

Mr Cocker said a term of the men's employment was that they should be subject to Panamanian law. That provided for the forfeiture of all wages if lawful commands were disobeyed. No wages were, therefore, due. Even if the men were entitled to something, it was not the amount claimed, as some of their accounts were in debit. Furthermore, this was not a case in which the discretion of the court should be exercised. Under the. deportation order already made by the court, the company had to bear the expense of sending the men back to Shanghai, and it should not be required to pay them wages in addition. Question for Supreme Court The magistrate, Mr F. K. Hunt, said that when he had dealt with the men last week it had not been his intention that they should lose their wages as well. The Supreme Court, however, had arrested the ship on a previous occasion on the matter of wages, and he thought that this question should be referred.to that court.

Declining to grant the application, the magistrate said that if the men were not satisfied they could issue a writ in the Admiralty jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.