BREACH OF AWARD

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 26, 25 October 1918, Page 5

BREACH OF AWARD

rho Inspector of Factories (Mr. 1!, T bailey) proceeded against N. B. Austin proprietor of the Don Restaurant' o few days ago at tho Magistrate's Court to recover a penalty of JilO for an alleged breach of the private hotel am.' restaurant workers' award, in that he employed D. Niehol as a general hand for.tho six months ending July U at 275. 6d. per week, instead of 325. -ad. Plaintiff also claimed a further i! 10 for a second breach of tho samo award, in that defendant failed to provide divers perjudgment, said that Mr. H. F OWv who appeared for the defendant, admit ted that neither lodging nor 7s Cd in «l U « W had been proTi(led ' and provlnrW- tle . l ; ewas "o accommodation for todgors at the restaurant, and that one of tho persons who obtained meals there lodged ai u house in Boulcott Street owned ori oocupwl by Mrs. AusGnj that the rstablKhmeiits were conducted separately, but where persons arranged to lodge with Mrs. Austin and have their meals at the restaurant, and vice versa and paid in one weekly sum at the restaurant, the money was apportioned between the defendant and his wife as arranged Defendant also catered for casuals. The Magistrate held that the facts submitted by defendant fell short of proof, and tnat defendant had committed a breach of clause 6of the award. In regard to clause 5, he considered that in ordinary coses the term "general hand" applied to a worker whose duties were not fixed out wero varied as tho occasion demanded- A particular worker must be class- ?<* as a general hand, and His Worship held that a breach of clause 5 was committed. Defendant was fined £2 and