CLAIM FOR WAGES.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 45, Issue 13856, 12 June 1919, Page 5

CLAIM FOR WAGES.

SEQUEL TO INFLUENZA EPIDEMIC.

LEWIS v. LAWTO.N

Samuel Lewis, carpenter, proceeded against William Law ton, senior, in the Ma-sterton Magistrate's- Court this morning, to recover a sum of £21 10s wages for a period he was off work during the intluen/.a epidemic period. The claim was at the ra.te of L's, per hour for ten hours a day.

Mr McKen/.ie appeared for plaintiff, rind Mr Wilson for defendant.

Mr McKen/ie, in opening his case, cited cases to show where the Court in other towns had ruled that employees should bo paid for time lost owing to the iniluenza epidemic, unless their engagement had boon terminated by the, employer.

Mr Wilson, for defendant, maintained that the eases cited by Mr M-cJvenzie were different from, the present case, in that they referred to permanent employees by the week, whereas a carpenter's eugagement was from day to day, and the a.ward only required two hours' notice to terminate their engagement. Samuel Lewis, builder, said that on Armistice Day a holiday on full pay was given on the understanding thatwork was to be resumed the next- day. Witness arrived by coach Ou the job at Te Maire, near Featherston, the following day about mid-day. His employer then said that as one employee had in - iluen/.a, Mr Bidwill. objected to the work going on, and witness was asked to leave off the job for a week. Witness did not receive any pay for the period he was off work. His engagement had not been terminated by Lawton. He did not .'•(■ turn to work at the end of the week because Lawtou had sen; word to say not to come back till tliev heard from! him.

Replying, to Mr Wilson, plaintiff said he worked for the Charitable. Aid Board on hospital work, from about November Ib'th to 2.3rd, for "which he received vS. He then took ill himself, and was not able to go back to work till the end of three weeks.

William Lawton, builder, said he had given Lewis a. holiday on Armistice J)ay and paid him. When Lewis returned the following day Mr Bidwill said he did not think it fair for the men to be travelling away and running the risk of bringing back influenza. Witness 1 old Lewis they would close dowu for a week. A fortnight later witness saw Lewis in Masterton. Witness considered that- when he told Lewis to go, Lewis could come back or could stay away altogether if ho wished.

Replying to Mr McKenzie, witness said he had not given Lewis two hours' notice. Witness and his son and another man had commenced work after a week's spell, but Lewis did not come back for three weeks.

His Worship said that where daily labourers were told there was no more work for a week, it was looked upon as a termination of the engagement. Lewis was entitled to pay for the two hours' notice. Judgment would be given for plaintiff for 4s.