PENALTY OF £10 CLAIMED

Southland Times, Issue 23988, 1 December 1939, Page 4

PENALTY OF £10 CLAIMED

alleged breach of AWARD DOROTHY PATERSON LTD. CHARGED The sum of £lO as a penalty for a breach of the New Zealand Tea-Rooms and Restaurant Employees’ Award was claimed in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday by Mr H. M. Hopper, Inspector of Awards, from Dorothy Paterson Ltd. Mr R. C. Abernethy, S.M., was on the Bench. The defendant company was represented by Mr B. W. Hewat. The defendant company was proprietor of the milk bar at the corner of Dee and Esk streets known as the Brown Owl milk bar, Mr Hopper said. During the period from October 1, 1938, to September 10, 1939, three girls were employed in the bar as female bar dispensers or milk-bar attendants and were paid the prescribed rate of £l/17/- a week. However, in addition to their bar duties the girls were required to scrub the floor of the bar each week. They would do this work in turns and the same girl would do the scrubbing every third week. Because of this duty which the girls were required to perform, he contended that they were entitled to be classed as general hands and to receive a weekly wage of £2/6/-. “Does it mean that if a girl takes a scrubbing brush and soap in her hand for five minutes she is entitled to be classed as a general hand?” asked the Magistrate. ~ . „ “That is the position,” said ME»HopP< Milk-bar attendants were classed as shop assistants and as such it was no part of their duties to perform major charing work, continued Mr Hopper. In the large stores in the city the assistants did not perform charing work as it was not incidental to their duties. The same position should exist in the milk bar. EVIDENCE OF EMPLOYEES Grace Ellen Clarke, a former attendant at the milk bar, spid that the floor was scrubbed on. the Thursday, this work taking about half or three-quar-ters of an hour. The same work was performed on the Friday and the bar was also washed on the Saturday. On the Sunday washing and polishing work occupied about one and a-half hours. Elizabeth Joan McLean said that during the 18 months she had been employed as attendant she was paid a wage of £l/17/- a week. During the week she did the scrubbing the bar was washed, if necessary, on the Thursday, Friday and Saturday. On occasions the bar floor was scrubbed. On a normal day this work would occupy about half-an-hour. Scrubbing and polishing work was done on the Sunday. To Mr Hewat: Certain of their work was performed before the public was admitted. Evidence was also given by another attendant, Rita Sands. Ernest Walter Lyall' Zimmerman,

manager of the milk-bar, said that the instructions he gave were that the bar floor was to be washed on Friday and Saturday and to be scrubbed on the Sunday. This duty was accepted by the girls as part of their job. The facts of the case were so simple that it was extraordinary that the matter should be brought before the Court, said Mr Hewat. The girls were quite satisfied with the duties assigned to them and it was only after two years that there was any suggestion of higher wages. According to the department’s submission the girl doing the scrubbing would receive more than 10/- for approximately two hours’ work. What the department was submitting was that the duties of the attendants did not include keeping the floor clean. The defendant contended that this work was incidental to the girls’ duties as milk-bar attendants. The department went further and claimed that because scrubbing was part of their duties the girls should be classed as general hands. The award was arranged in such a way that the employees were paid according to classification. Their duties were not defined and could be gauged only by the names of the classifications. There were clasifications for house maids, linen maids, laundresses and so on, but none for charwomen and floor cleaners. It was not a case of removal from one classification to another. It was an attempt to get an increase in wages by bringing the girls into the classification of a general hand. The Magistrate reserved his decision.