Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

ARBITRATION COURT.

INTERPRETATIONS. PREFERENCE TO UNIONISTS. The Industrial Arbitration Court hag given interpretations of important clauses.} in two Wellington awards. The interpretations were applied for in each case by the Inspector of Awards. The preference clause of the Wellington Carpenters' and Joiners' Award was .: the snbject of one of the interpretations. The question for the Court to answer was:— . "Are employers, in engaging carpenters and joiners to act as working foremen in charge of carpenter--; ing or joinery work, bound to give preference to unionists?" The answer of the Court is as idlows: — "If a.worker ie really and eobstanti- . ally a foreman, then he is not subject to . the provisions of the preference clause. ; The fact that he may* occasionally do . some carpenters' work would not bring' him within the' operation of the clause. If, however, the worker is engaged substantially in doingthe work of a carpen- : ter, although he may also supervise tie ■ work of otE«s, then, lie is'a journeyman, , and subject to the award. In other words,' a.bona fide foreman is not subject to the ' award; but the leading hand on a job ' is subject' to it. Whether in any particular case a worker is to be treated as a foreman or leading hand depends on the circumstances of the caee." .-/Tailors' Award. Clause 17, of .the Wellington Tailor* , Award states that the wages of journeymen . tailors . and pressers '. (other than. , piece workers), shall not be less than £i ■ 15s; per week, and continues: "No deduction ■is- to be made from this weekly wage, save for tune lost ' ttaongh th» ■workers' own default." The question for th« Court was.— "Can an employer who employs a ' weekly wage, hand order such weekly wage hand to take a full week off, owing to slackness of trade, and so escape paying wages during the said week?" : ■ The Court's answer ie:— ' ■ ?■'■• : "An employer who. employs a worker ' under this award on a weekly wage-is not entitled to order such a worker to take a week oS for any cause. So long as the relation of master and servant - continues to exist, the worker must, un- • d«r Clause IT of the award, be paid hie weekly wage without any deduction, save . for time lost through his own default. ,.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19100415.2.59

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 792, 15 April 1910, Page 6

Word count
Tapeke kupu
375

ARBITRATION COURT. Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 792, 15 April 1910, Page 6

ARBITRATION COURT. Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 792, 15 April 1910, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert