MINIMUM WAGE

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Issue 193, 1 September 1937, Page 7

MINIMUM WAGE

-Preap Aasociation.

Riglit qf Factory-Owners Tq Make Dsdnctions IMPQRTANT DECISIQNS

Bv T»lp«rnpb-

PALMERSTON N., This Day. An importanc reserved judgmeut of tho Chiof Justice Sir Michael Myers, coneerning the right of faetory owners to make deductions from wages of employees when short time is worked was deiivered in the Supreme Court at Palmerston Nortk yesterday. The Chisf Justice upheld the decision of Mr J. T. Stout, S.M., against which appeai was ,made. . The Magistrate had dismissed an iufformation brought by Mr Gordon Brown, inspector of factories at Palmerston North, against the Manawata •jlnitting Mills, Ltd. It was allegcd that, during the week ending Jaauary 15 they employed Violet Iving, a person with over three years' faetory experience, and failed to pay her not less than £2. At the hearing of the appsal Mr H. E. Gooper appeared for the department and Mr G. I. McGregor for the Manawatu Knitting Mills, Ltd. His Ho^our's judgment stated as follows: — "The respondent company was charged before the Magistrate at Palmerston North that it did employ Violet King, a person with over three years' faetory employment, during the week ended January 15, 1937, and did fail to pay her not less than £2 for the said week's employment. The in- ' formation was laid under Section 32 of the Factories Act, 1921-22, as amended by Section 12 (1) of the Factories Act of 1936. The learned Magistrate dismissed the information and this appeai is brought against his decision. "Thq section as amended reads as follows: 'Every person who is employed in any capacity in a faetory shall be entitled to receive from the occupier such payment for his work as is agrped on, being not less than 15s in any one week during the first six months of employment, with half-yearly increments on the agrced rate of not less than 4s a week until the eqd of the third year of emplQymcnt, aud thereafter not less than two pounds a week. No dcduction shall be made from the wages of any boy or any woman under 18 years of age, e?cept for time lost through the worker's illness or default or an account of the temporary closing of tho faetory for cleaning or repairing the maehiuery.' "Thp admitted facts," His Honour stated, "were that during the week ended January 15, 1937, Violet Eing, an adult employee at respondent 's faetory, who had completed her three years' faetory experience, and whose wage for a iull week's work was 45s, lost one day's employment through no fault of her own, but on the instructions of her employer on account of temporary slacknoss of work in her department. As a rcsult she had one day's wages, 9s, dedupted, hcr wage for the woek being brought down to 36s. "X agree with the Magistrate '» flecision. I think that his view was right on the construction of the Statute. It is merely the minimujji rate of wage, in piy opinion, as is the learned Magistrate 's, that the section fixes. That is shown by other provisions of tho IStatute such as paragraph (b) of Sectio'n 32 which says: "Such rate shall in evpry ease be irrespective of overtime. ' Sub-section (2) of®Section 12 of the Amcndment Act also refers to the rate of payment.' Paragraph (c) of Section 32 of the principal Act, it is true, says that "Such payment shall be made in full at not more than fortnightly intervals.' That, however, does not refer to the amount of payment, but only to the times or periods that the wages, whatever the amount may be, are to be paid. Apart from that, Section 32 (a) itself expressly proliibits any deduction being made from thq wages of any boy or womau Under 18, except for time lost through the worker's illness or' default, or on ac- ! count of the temporary closing of the j faetory for cleaning machinery, Tha ; neeessary implication 5& I think, thai J possible deductions are contemplated in j all cases. Such deductions are neces- ; sarily made from the wages payable. j Strange Kesuit mvoived. i The appellant's suggested constructioa wouid apparently involve the strange result that during the closing bf the faetory for cleaning a deduction might be made from the wagep of a ,boy or girl, but not from those of an ; adult worker. "What the section does, I think," proceeded His Honour, "is to ife a ;miuimum rate of payment, such rate of payment being subject, however^ to :proper deductions except so far as 'prohibited in the case of jxoys and ; women under 18 years of age or genlerally uuder pfovisions of the Aetj e.g,, section 3§ of tho principal Act as amended by S?etipia 13 of the 1936 Amendnieut Act; .dealing with hoiiday3. "Mr Cooper sought tQ place some reBapce on Section 19 pf the 19§6 Aafc Which sa^'S: 'All awards and ifidustrial agreements ugder ihe Industrial Oonciliatioa and AtBitration Act, 1925 (whether xuade before or after the commencement of thip Act)' shall Bp TPad subjecfc tp thq provisions of this Act: Provided that 'nothing therein sbali be constrned to reduce the rate of wages payable to any worker, purSuant to any award or incJustrial agreement, or to incrcaso his working kours a^i fixed by any such award or agreement.' I dp not think, however, that this section affects tho matter. "Tlie appellant's contention, in effect, is that ISectlon 32 (a) is to be read as if there was a proviso in it that in no ease shall the wages actually paid be less than the minijnum mentioned. Whether or not that was intended I cannot say, AU I can gay is this: If it were intended, the language of the section does not, in my opinion, on its true construction, carry out the intention. ! "Tk« appeai is dismissed with £7 7si ,