WAGES AND OVERTIME

Taranaki Central Press, Volume IV, Issue 438, 20 May 1937, Page 5

WAGES AND OVERTIME

BAKERY WORKERS Charges Against Employer “I realise that these labour regulations reduce the relations between the employer and employees.' to a strictly business footing and. that there i s little room for sentiment, but still there it is, the law is framed to .compel ithose that are not generous,” stated Mr W. H. Woodward, S.M , in the Stratford M'a<gi£trate’s Court to-uay during the hearing of charges against Thomas Smith, baker, Stratford, of failing to pay award' wages and overtime rates’ to employees. A penalty of £lO on each of the three charges was claimed Sy D. T. C. Cooper, Inspector of Factories. Defendant was charged that during the period from July 1, 1936, to September 26, 1936, he employed W. Ferguson as a foreman baker and did fail to pay him £5 10s per week as required by the provisions of the Finance Act, 1936; that during the same period he employed J. Patterson as a journeyman baker and did fail to pay him £5 per week as required by the Act; and that he employed W. Ferguson, and J. Patterson in a bakehouse on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday in each week at an earlier hour than 4 am., afid did fail to pay them double rates for such time worked between midnight and 4 a.m. Defendant was further c'hargedi under the Factories’ Act with failing to keep a proper wages and overtime book. After evidence had been heard defendant assured the Magistrate that he would pu|t: the wiages' and overtime book in order at once and the question of penalty on the various charges was deferred for one month. Amendment to Charge.

Defendant pointed out thalL with his country delivery he was entitled to start an hour earlier than 4 a.m., and the chargei was amended accordingly. He admitted that the full wages hadl not been paid. He pointed out, however, that his bakery employees free bread and he also, paid their unemployment taxation. He ! had no objection to paying award wages. For years when business w-as good he had paid award wages and over. His employees commenced' work at hours.- It’o suit themselves and if they wanted to finish early they worked accordingly. To the charge of failing to keep a wages and overtime book defendant pleaded not guilty. He said he did not have the new book prescribed by the regulations, but he had an old book which he had been using for years. In evidence the Inspector said that Ferguson had been underpaid to the extent of £ll 16s 8d and Patterson by £5 10s. 1 . As no record nad been kept< of the hours, the employees were interviewed and they stated that on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Fridays they smarted at 2 a.m. For those four days each man "He . entitled to 4s a day overtime, which meant that over the period, the employees would have been entitled to £44. Defendant had been advised that a proper wages and time book

should be kept, that arrears of wages must be paid, and that if he wanted to start before a.m. he must pay overtime due. However, nothing was done. The Magistrate; I understand from Mr Smith’s 1 remarks the employees are not claiming the back wages The Inspector: Yes, I understand that one of them is related to defendant. Defendant said he could have paid the money and had 11 refunded. He had been perfectly open in all that he had done. NOMINAL PENALTY. Private Hotel Workers. "All that is necessary in thia case it' to vindicate the law.” said lie Magistral'© when fixing the penalty in the case of D. T. C. Brayshaw v. Ada Cox, a claim for £3O, penalties for three breaches of the New Zealand Private Hotel Employees' Award. Evidence was heard last Court day and the question of penalty was deferred until the payment or otherwise of the arrears of wages. Mr R. R. Tyrer said the wages due to one girl employee had been paid. In the case of the other employee an adjustment was necessary. In all £6 10s had been found towards the arrears of wages. The Magistrate fixed the penalty at 10s on each of three charges.