Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

ALLEGED EVASION OF AWARD

PAINTERS PROSECUTED AND FINED. By Telegraph.—Preaa Association. Dunedin;. Last Night., ilr. W. 11. Widdowson, S.M., gavo liis decision to-day in the ease in which, a firm of painters, Gear, and Silvertson,. were proceeded against by the Inspector of Awards, the latter claiming £lO as a penalty for a breach of the Dunedin painters' award. It was alleged that the defendants employed two apprentice* (Wilson and Hunter) in excess of the proportion allowed by the award, or, in. the alternative, they employed Hunter as a painter at less than Is 3d per hour, without first obtaining a permit. A partnership agreement, dated August 12, was produced by the defendants, who claimed that a bona fide partnership had been entered into between themselves and Hunter, and that no evasion of the. award or fraud of any kind was intended. Hunter was then seventeen years and eight months old. By the agreement the defendants purported to admit Hunter into partnership»for two years, the terms being that Hunter was to receive a one-eighth share of the profits on work done by the firm during that time, such share being at least £4 per month for the first year, and not less than £5 per month for the second year. All other profits were to be divided equally between the two defendants, and all stock to belong to the latter, and the partnership to be carried on under the defendants' names. The only interest Hunter had under the agreement was his one-eighth share of the profits of the business, payable as stated. Defendants, in the first place, wished to take Hunter as an apprentice, but not being able to do so, sought to employ him as an under-rate worker, in which again they were unsuccessful, and the partnership agreement was then entered into. His Worship.held that the partnership was not bona fide, and he fined the defendants £3, with costs. He added that but for the fact that defendants were working painters, the penalty would have been very much heavier.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19101123.2.21

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 192, 23 November 1910, Page 4

Word count
Tapeke kupu
339

ALLEGED EVASION OF AWARD Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 192, 23 November 1910, Page 4

ALLEGED EVASION OF AWARD Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 192, 23 November 1910, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert