MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVI, Issue 4838, 5 June 1925, Page 4

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

BREACHES' OF AWARD. WAGES BOOK IN DISPUTE. At the Magistrate’s Court, Paeroa, on Monday last, before Mr J. H. Salmon, S.M., Mrs C. V. Crosby (Mr E. A. Porritt) had claims preferred against her amounting to £BO for alleged breaches of the Northern Industrial District Private Hotels Award. The first information claimed the sum of £5O as a penalty for an alleged breach that during the period from December 1, 1924, to March 7, 1925, defendant failed to keep a correct time and wagefs-book, as required by clause 14 of the Award. A further sum of £2O was as. a penalty for an alleged breach in that from January 31 to March 7 of this year she failed to pay the minimum rate of wages to Misses E. Pilbrow and E. Paraku. For failing to exhibit a copy of the Award in a conspicuous place a penalty of £lO was also set out.

Mr F. Wilson appeared for the Department of Labour, and explained that the amount claimed Was higher than usual;'but he”’alleged that the defendant had made a studied attempt to defeat the Award and pay ( less than the minimum wage required under the Act. The first witnoss. was Emmie Paraku, Kom.ata North, who said that she had been employed at Crosby’s hotel for over a month. She had acted as housemaid's assistant, and had also helped in the kitchen. For the five weeks she was engaged at the hotel she got £2 2s, but since the inspector Irad visited tlie hotel Mrs Crosby had made the amount up to £6. Mrs Crosby had never asked her to sign a wages book until after the inspector had visited the place. She worked from about 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., with time off for meales, and sometimes an hour in the afternoon. When the. inspetce-j' called Mrs Crosby told her to say that she had only been there two days. To Mr Porritt witness admitted that. Mrs Crosby had given her a dress and sufficient material to make three other dresses. She had also received boots and stockings. Mrs Crosby had bought the clothes and allowed her pocket-money amounting to,£7 12s 6d, which she was satisfied to accept as a settlement when lier services were dispensed with, A receipt had been given in a wages and overtime book. Witness denied having been told that she was to receive £1 10s 6d a week. Cross-examined by Mr Wilson, witness said that the time the inspector called she did out know that she was to get the dresses and other clothes.

Enid Pilbrow said that she was at present, employed at the Criterion Hotel, but had previously been employed at Crosby's Hotel. On engagement! Mrs Crosby had paid her 30s a week until such time as the inspector called. The initial entry in the wages book was made by Mrs Corsby, the rate being £2, and witness carried on the entries on the understanding that the matter would be adjusted later. She had signed for £2 a week but had only actually been paid 30s a week. Her main duty was cooking, under Mrs Crosby’s instructions. Since the prosecution had been laid Mrs Crosby had told her to say that she had received £2 a week, but she had' never received that, wage,.and thq entries in the wages book (produced) were not' correct. After the proceedings had been, instituted Mrs Crosby , give her three weeks’ holiday.

To Mr Porritt witness said that when she was engaged Mrs Crosby was doing the cooking, but Mrs Crosby told her that she would not be engaged unless she could undertake the cooking as well as being a waitress. It. was her first experience of service, and she did not know what wages she was. entitled to, but thought that by signing the wages book for £2 Mrs Crosby would put the ’ matter right and pay the difference. She was ignorawt of the terms of the award. To Mr Wilson witness explained that she had been responsible for the cooking. She had tried to have the action stopped, and understood that she could not , claim the arrears of wages due. To His Worship witness said that she did not get assistance in the kitchen unless the house was busy. Mrs Crosby usually did the calving, ,and sometimes Mr J. Crosby helped in the kitchen with breakfast. She had 'never seen a copy of the award.

Frederick Wils,on, Inspector of Awards, Hamilton, said that on March 7 he visited Crosby’s Hotel and asked for the wages and overtime book. An examination of the book showed entries relating to a Miiss Hagen and Miss Pilbrow. Miss Pamku’s name was not, shown, as it was alleged that she had only been employed two days. Witness pointed out that one of Ills staff had stayed at the hotel in January and had then seen a Maori girl in defendant’s employ. On being questioned defendant, had said that she was not aware that it was necessary to make entries for casual, labour. Defendant had told him distinctly that Miss Pilbrow! was receiving £2 a week. To Mr Porritt witness stated that he was not prepared to say Mrs Crosby, had been quite open about the investigation. He did not believe the irregularities had been made in ignorance, and was of the opinion that studied afforts had been made to evade the award. He admitted that defendant had asked to ,be supplied with a copy of the award. THE DEFENCE. Mr Porritt submitted tliftt if breaches had been made in the first two charges they were only technical ones. He contended that the way the charge was laid showed that, it was tlie form of the book that was objected to, and not that incorrect wages had been paid. It had not been possible to obtain a copy of the award, either in Hamilton or ’Auckland. Catherine Vincent Crosby, Paeroa, said that she had. been connected wilb hotels for years and had never been charged with a breach in

connection with the running of the hotel. The wages book as far as she was aware complied with the requirement's of the award. The girl Paraku had not been entered, said plaintiff, because she did not want to employ her permanently, but had taken her in and provided her with clothes, which Paraku had received at the time of the inspector’s visit. The wages paid to. Paraku was. at the rate of 30s 6d a week, but that sum might not have been paid in actual cash on account of the deduction for clothes. Defendant stated that she had always done the cooking herself, but had been assisted at times by . Miss Pilbrow. Her son usually prepared breakfast for guests leaving by the early trains. She maintained that Miss Pilbrow had never held the position of cook. An endeavour had been made several times to obtain, a copy of the award. At times employees had been paid over the award wage. Plaintiff contended that she was cook and regarded Miss Pilbrow as a kitchen maid, the award wages being £1 12s 6d, plus a bonus of 5s ,6d.

To Mr Wilson defendant contended that she had informed the inspector that Paraku had received clothes. She maintained that she had actually paid Miss. Pilbrow £2, but could not suggest why Mr Pilbrow should maintain that, she had only received 30s.

Under pressure Mrs Crosby admitted that in 1921 an inspector had visited the hotel and had found that three girls were being employed but no entries had • been made in the wages book, but plaintiff said that she was only employing members of her own family.

Mr Wilison produced a letter and a number of receipts for arrears of wages, paid ,to girls arising out of an investigation by the inspector at that time.

Mr Wilson pointed out that according to. defendant’s statement Miss Pilbrow was ; committing perjury by s’aythat she had'not received £2-a week.

Defendant maintained that £2 a week was the actual sum paid to Miss Pilbrow.

John Crosby, son of the defendant, detailed the work he did in the kitchen in the early morning, and maid he had been assisted in the preparation of breakfast by Miss Pilbrow.

To Mr Wilson witness said he had no knowledge of the amount of wages paid to any of the staff, as that part of the business was attended to by his mother. He had never heard Miss Pilbrow, or any member of the s.taff, complain about the wages not being in accordance with the a,Ward. Repeated' efforts had been made to get a copy of the award.

Following addrcisses by Messi's Porritt and Wilson His Worship, in summing up, said that the defendant had failed to keep the wages book in the manner prescribed, and it was fairly clear that the girl Paraku had not lieen entered in the book, but on the second information the . evidence had .shown that the employment of Miss Paraku hud been of a very casual nature, and there was no doubt that she ■had been fairly treated. He was convinced that the minimum wages had been paid to her, considering the nature of her engagement. The second charge was a more serious one, and on the evidence he was to find that Miss Pilbrow had been content ■to accept £1 10s. 6d a week for a period of over 16 months. The buiden of proof was on the prosecution. He wajs not satisfied beyond all. doubt that Miss Pilbrow had actually received £2 a week, but he had to take into consideration defendant’s unshaken evidence, backed by hhe fact that Miss Pilbrow had actually made a number of the entries in the book herself and had always signed for £2 a week. On the face of it he coiilfi not convict defendant. Two breaches had been committed, but they Were not serious. On the girst chaige plaintiff was entitled to recover £2, and on the third charge a further sum of £2 would be awarded plaintiff, ogether with costs totalling £1 :9 s Bd.