Deane v Wilson

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: K. B. Div.
• Judgment Date: 28 June 1906
• Court: King's Bench Division (Ireland)
• Date: 28 June 1906

Deane

and

Wilson (1).

K. B. Div.

CASES

DETERMINED BY

THE KING'S BENCH DIVISION

OF

THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND,

AND ON APPEAL THEREFROM IN

THE COURT OF APPEAL,

AND BY

THE COURT FOR CROWN CASES RESERVED.

1906.

Master and servant — Contract of employment — Weekly wage for specified hours — Bonus for full-time work — Failure to put in full time — Deduction of bonus — Truck Acts (1 & 2 Wm. 4, c. 37; 59 & 60 Vict. c. 44, s. 1).

Held, that the deduction of the 2s. bonus was not an offence under the Truck Acts.

Case Stated for the opinion of the Court at the instance of the complainant, Lucy A. E. Deane, Inspector of Factories, in respect of an adjudication by the magistrates at Newry Petty Sessions on April 25th, 1906. The defendant was Abraham Wilson, a partner in the firm of Abraham Wilson & Co., and the charge against him was set out in the summons as follows:— “For that on or about the 10th day of February, 1906, at Edward-street, Newry, in said district and county, you being the employer of a certain workwoman, to wit, Theresa Dixon, did, contrary to the provisions of the Truck Act, 1896, unlawfully make a certain deduction of 2s. from the wages of the said Theresa Dixon in respect of a fine, in that such particulars in writing as are required by the aforesaid Act were not supplied to the said Theresa Dixon on the occasion when the deduction was made, whereby you are liable to a penalty of not less than £5 and not exceeding £10.” The magistrates dismissed the charge on the merits; but, upon the application of the complainant, consented to state a case, which they did as follows:—

At the hearing of the said complaint it was proved, on the part of complainant, that the said Theresa Dixon was a workwoman in the spinning factory of Abraham Wilson & Co. at Edward-street, Newry. She deposed that she had been employed in the factory for a lengthened period, in fact since childhood. She also admitted that she had read the printed rules of the factory, and that they were posted up in the works. The third rule was— “Any person being absent without reason, and not assigning satisfactory reason, shall lose bonus or be discharged, or may be prosecuted according to Act of Parliament, as may be considered necessary under the circumstances.”

The said Theresa Dixon proved that when she served full time in the factory she received the sum of 10s. for the week of 55¹/₂ hours. However, when she was out a quarter day (and did not thereby serve full time), there was a deduction from this sum (10s.) of 2s. 4d. This deduction was made on or about the 10th February, 1906. The witness admitted that she had been out the quarter day during the week then being paid for. She did not go to work on one of the mornings of the week until 9.45 o'clock—after the breakfast hour. She should have been at the factory, to keep full time, at 6.30 o'clock a.m.

For the defence it was proved by Messrs. James Wilson, a partner in the Company, and E. J. Kilbraith, book-keeper of the firm, that the wages of Theresa Dixon (and others at the same work) were 1s. 4d. per diem.

However, for some years past, in order to obtain a full attendance of the workwomen in this factory, the management decided to give a bonus of 2s. per week for full attendance, and for that alone.

The quarter day's wages (at 1s. 4d.), which were not earned, and the bonus (for full-time week) were not paid to Theresa Dixon on 10th February, 1906.

It was contended by the complainant that under 1 & 2 Wm. 4, c. 37, s. 25 (extended to Ireland by 50 & 51 Vict. c. 46), the bonus was “wages” within the meaning of the statute quoted; that the deduction was “a fine”; and that an offence had been committed (when the statutes were together construed) under 59 & 60 Vict. c. 44, s. 1, clause 2 (b).

The Justices were of opinion—1st. That the minimum penalty (claimed in the said summons) of £5 under 1 & 2 Wm. 4, c. 37, s. 9, was expressly repealed by 47 & 48 Vict. c. 43 before the extension by the later statute (50 & 51 Vict. c. 46) to Ireland; that the statute then existing and in full force and virtue, depleted of the minimum of £5 for a first offence, was the Act they had to administer; that under the statutes quoted there was now no minimum penalty for a first offence. 2nd. That the “wages” of Theresa Dixon were 1s. 4d. per diem, and that there was no deduction made from the “wages” on 10th February, 1906, save for a quarter day, when she was admittedly absent from the factory—a wage which she did not earn; that the 2s. per week was given as a bonus or prize in special consideration for full time of 55¹/₂ hours kept by the worker each week; that it would not be computed as “wages,” as it was not given for excellence of nor for extra work, but was a premium for full time, and that therefore no fine had been inflicted.

The Solicitor-General (Redmond Barry, K.C.) and Dudley White, for the complainant:—

The 2s. was a sum that the employee was contractually entitled to receive on completing a certain number of hours work in the week, and consequently was wages. The words “sum...