Motor Mechanics’ Award

Hokitika Guardian, 17 December 1921, Page 1

Motor Mechanics’ Award

PENALTY FOR. BREACH. WELLINGTON, December 13. \ case of an unusual nature came before Mr \V. G. Riddell, S.M.. at the 'Magistrate’s Court, to-day, when the Inspector of Award, Mr J. Jackson, sought to obtain a £lO penalty against WaTter Stanton, of the firm of Stanton s Ltd., for a breaeh of the motor mechanics award. The breach, it was, alleged, consisted in defendant having refused to supply to the secretary of the union a list of workers in his employ who canto within the scope of the award. Mr Jackson, in outlining the case, stated that on March D>th. last the secretary of the union personally asked defendant to give him a list of the names of workers in his employ, because lie wanted to ascertain whether or not they were members of the union, He was very discourteously received, ami the information was refused. About a fortnight later the secretary wrote asking for information, but no reply was received. On October 24t1i.. the secretary personally handed Stanton a letter calling upon defendant to supply the names, but the information had not yet been supplied. Walter Bromley, secretary of the union, remarked that the first time he went to defendant’s workshop, Stnnton said: “If von go down there this morn ing I’ll shoot you.” Witness observed that he did not want to be shot, but f he preferred, defendant could refuse to give him permission to go into the workshop. Permission was refused. De-

fendant also said, if ho had his own way, he would not employ a union man nt all. Witness gave evidence as to handing defendant tt letter personally on October 24th., requesting that the information as to names be supplied. Defendant said that none of his cm- I ployecs belonged to the union. Tliet had informed him that they were unaware of its existence. He had no recollection of Bromley having called upon him. Certainly someone did interview him, stating that he was secretary of the union, but lie produced no authority to that effect. No letter had been handed to him asking him to give the names of his employees. Tn reply to Mr Jackson, defendant stated that a copy of the award was posted in his workshop, but he had not read it. “1 think there has been a breach «f tho award,” remarked his Worship. “Tt is the duty of all persons bound by awards to make themselves aware of the contents of those awards. A penalty of 10s will be imposed.”