BREACHES OF AWARDS

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 152, 23 March 1921, Page 6

BREACHES OF AWARDS

DECISIONS OF MAGISTRATE.

Reserved judgment was given by Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., in tbo Magistrate s Court yesterday in a case brought by the Inspector of Awards against A. E. Preston and Co., butchers, under the butchers’ award, for employing female assistants in a butchery. The cose was heard last week. . In giving his decision the Magistrate held that under the provisions of the Act women could be employed in shops specifically pork butchers’ establishments. In, the shop in question, on one side the business of a pork butcher was carried out, and on the other an ordinpry business. The defendant did no business on the butchery side after 5 p.m., but sold to pork butchery customers until 6 p.m. The female employees did no work in the ordinary butchery. “The Act,” added the Magistrate, “lays down that by clause 12 of the award females may be employed as shop assistants in shops where the sole business carried on is that of a pork butcher. The Arbitration Court has given its ruling on this clause, and it is made clear that shops in which fresh meat in cuts or joints ore sold are not entitled to the benefit of clause 12, but must comply with the provisions of tho award relating to ordinary butchers. . • • In the face of this ruling, the only defence to the action is the one set up by the defendant, that there are really two separate and distinct shops, as distinct as if they were owned by separate m<tividuals. Ido not. agree with this contention. It is answered by the fact, that Preston’s is registered as one shop, under section 13 of the Shops and Offices Act, 1910 Therefore, if he wishes to carry on the business of an ordinary butcher, the defendant must carry it on in a separate and distinct shop, or divide his present shop into two. Carrying on hIS business as he does, precludes him of the benefit of clause 12 of the award. It has not been proved to me that the women Preston employed did any woik on the ordinary butchery side. Judgment was given for the plaintiff for a nominal sum of 10s. and costs. His Worship also gave judgment in the case brought by the Inspector Awards against the same firm on the ground that it employed assistants on the statutory half-holiday. Judgment was gtaen for plaintiff for X2 and costs.