ARBITRATION COURT.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 679, 2 December 1909, Page 11

ARBITRATION COURT.

SUNDAY AT A ROADSTEAD PORT. An appeal case connected with the Federated Cooks' -and' Stewards' Award .was."decided yesterday in tho Arbitration Court by Mr. Justieo ■ Sim. ■ Mr. Hindmarsh appeared for tho appellant union,; and Mr. Levi for the respondent., tho Union Steam Ship. Company. ■ Tho: company,, according to tho decision. of tho . Judge, owned the-steamer Mnitai, which arrived; at. and left, tho' Gisborno roadstead on two; Sundays, June 0 and 20 last. ; On each' day a mess-room steward, W. A.: Campbell, worked for more than eight hours,: and was paid ,3s. :'.overtiino' on each occasion. The Magistrate held that mess-room stewards were not entitled to any overtime at 'bar harbours or roadsteads, .unless , employed on an excursion or on a holiday. Ho therefore gave judgment for the defendant (tho company), but the Judgo hold that the appeal should be allowed, deciding that. Campbell •, was , entitled to 'be paid the 'maximum* of six hours' pay on each of tho days,in question. .The respondent company, was ordered to pay. the costs of the appeal («Ca 55.) and disbursements. ■ •. i -. TAiLORS'" TEAM SYSTEM." • Another appeal, the Wellington Tailors' industrial Union of Workers (appellant) versns lurltcoldio and .Stains, "Ltd. (respondent), was 'decided by Mr. : Justico Sim yesterday. Mr. Hindmarsh appeared for appellant, and Mr. Herdman for respondent. : .' The Judge romarlted that an action had been brought by, the appellant against the respond-' ent 'in tho. Wellington Magistrate's Court to recover a penalty for ah alleged breach of the, "Wellington, Tailors' Award. -Hie breach alleged to have been committed was that of distributing work on what was known as the' " team : system," during tho month of' May, 1909, in the employment of Miss Cashman and Miss Foster, contrary, to clause 14 of,tho.award. The Magistrate held that a; breach had» not been committed, ' and gavo; judgment for the defendant.' His Honour- said that what the' Magistrate had to determine' Was a question of fact—whether the respondent' had distributed wOrk on the " team systomi" He had come to tho conclusion that the respondent had not done so.; He had found on tho evidence 1 that, during the '.month of .May, hro girls gave some slight assistance to a 'coat-hand in order to get certain , work' done 'in time, "and this, he held, did not constitnto, in the circumstances, working by the " team, system?' That -.was; in effect, a finding- that'the respondent had hot distributed, work on I ;.the " team system." It had not been' .established .that the Magi's- ' trate had misdirected himself as to the proper; construction "9f th'p award,' and his decision on,'the,:,question • of . fact'.in .the .base, was, therefore, final. -Tho. appeal would be dismissed '-with costs (£5 55.) to the respondent.