Slike strani
PDF
ePub

instead of 7 to 7,' or 'I must suspend you for a fortnight.' The worker is not discharged, and is apparently not free to take other work should it present itself. He can, of course, himself give notice to leave. Very often in the case of piece-workers they are required to turn up at work on the chance of there being work, and are kept waiting at the workshop for the whole of the working hours. If they stay away and work comes in, they run the risk of being discharged without notice for being absent from work without leave. These difficulties are to some extent due to the custom of giving and taking notice of a certain length, of which more will be said below. Where a shop works under the system, which is becoming more and more common, of there being no obligation on either side to give notice, then the legal position is simpler. In such a case suspension is in effect a discharge, coupled with an offer of reinstatement when more work comes in, and the workman is free either to take other work or to accept the opportunity of reinstatement. Again in this case the change from a normal week to a shorter week can be made without notice, as a worker who objects to working shorter hours can at once leave without penalty. Where the no-notice system is not in force probably the strict legal position is that the employer is bound to employ his workers for the normal hours until he has reduced the working week by notice to his workers of the same length as is required to discharge them. The present writer has never heard of this being done systematically, though some notice of short time or of suspension is usually given. As the result of a workman standing out for his strict legal rights would in all probability be his dismissal, he is not likely to insist on getting his rights in this matter. On the other hand it might be held that an employer has a right to reduce working hours if the requirements of his business make a change necessary, on giving his workers reasonable notice, leaving what is reasonable to be determined by the circumstances of each particular case, and not merely by the length of notice required to terminate the contract of service.

III. LENGTH OF HIRING and of NOTICE TO LEAVE

Where nothing is said expressly as to the duration of a contract of hiring and service, and there is no custom which fixes it by implication, the law considers that the contract is a general hiring and lasts for a year. This rule is not confined to servants in husbandry, though it is probably derived from the customs of husbandry, and in the pottery trade in particular the hiring of a workman from Martinmas to Martinmas was quite usual. However, this legal rule is of little or no legal importance to-day, as it never overruled the customs of particular trades, and all trades nowadays may be assumed to have their customs.

Where there is a reservation of weekly wages, a weekly hiring will be presumed, unless there are other circumstances pointing to a different conclusion.

Originally a yearly hiring could not be terminated before the end of the year, but shorter customary notices soon grew up, e.g. a month's notice or a month's wages for a domestic servant. So travellers, clerks, etc., not in receipt of weekly wages, have their own customary notices, but it is safer to insert a definite provision in the contract rather than to rely on custom.

It has already been seen that in some employments wages are definitely fixed by the hour, and in these employments it is becoming more and more usual to stipulate only for a few hours' notice. In the building trade, where men are constantly paid off at the end of a job, two hours' notice is very usual.

Where men are employed from day to day, they can by custom be paid off at the end of the day without even an hour's notice.

Reference has already been made to the growing custom of neither giving nor requiring notice. This certainly solves some legal difficulties, but it makes the bond between master and workman a very loose one.

The great point of principle to remember is that, unless there is an express agreement to the contrary, length of notice must be the same on both sides. If the master expects

a week's notice from his men, then the workmen are entitled to a week's notice from the master, and vice versa.

Where piece-work is the custom, and there is no guarantee of a time-wage, it is sometimes claimed that as each piece of work is finished the contract of service comes to an end, and is renewed when the next work is given out. This may be so, but at any rate where the employment has in fact been continuous there would be ground for holding that the contract of service lasts until put an end to by reasonable notice, or an actual disagreement about prices.

In the case of a home worker who takes work away from his employer's premises, the position is simpler, as in general there will be a fresh contract of service on each occasion of fetching work.

Variation of Terms.-It is open to the parties to an agreement at any moment to vary its terms by mutual consent. Thus a workman can consent to take smaller wages, or a master can consent to give a rise in wages, and such variations can take effect immediately if the parties so desire. As an alternative to mutual consent, one party can give notice to the other to terminate the contract, and at the same time can offer a fresh contract embodying variations. This is what a master does when, without obtaining the consent of his workmen, he intimates to them on one payday that commencing from the next pay-day, he will reduce wages. If the workmen stay on, the old bargain will be at an end, and a new one will have come into force. In the same way workmen are not entitled to ' down tools' at a moment's notice, but hand in their notices when they desire variations in their contracts of service. If the masters give way, then at the expiration of the notices the varied contract will have come into legal operation.

If a workman is prepared to submit to dismissal rather than consent to a variation, he can always insist on having the old terms maintained until his contract is legally at an end. On the other hand he may submit to immediate variation without notice rather than risk losing his job.

Terms taking effect after Expiration of the Period of Service. When a servant performs duties which give

him a hold on the goodwill of the business, e.g. a personal acquaintance with its customers or clients or a knowledge of trade secrets, it is usual for the master to protect himself against the risk that the servant, after he has left his employment, will enter into competition with him, and use the knowledge acquired in the master's business to his injury. This is a real danger, and the form which the protection takes is a promise made by the servant when he is engaged, not to compete with his master, after leaving his service, for a definite period and within a prescribed area. Promises restraining a man's power of earning his living are as a general rule unenforceable at law as being against public policy, and it will readily be admitted that contracts in restraint of trade may be dangerous to the public welfare, but in the circumstances we are considering, they are, within limits, very proper safeguards of the master's interests.

The law, therefore, allows them, as an exception to its general rule subject to this limitation, that the future restraint on the servant must not go beyond what is reasonably necessary for the master's protection. An example has already been given on p. 30 in the milk-carrier's case. Here the restraint was limited to a radius of 5 miles from the master's place of business. If the area had been 50 miles it would clearly have been an unreasonable restraint. On the other hand, where the managing director of a company which manufactured Maxim guns submitted on his appointment to a world-wide restraint, and it was shown that the customers of the company were governments in all parts of the world, this area, though it could not possibly have been greater, was held not to be unreasonable, as nothing smaller would have given the Company adequate protection against competition by its former manager. Every case must be judged on its own circumstances, and the reasonable character of the restraint established in regard to them. If this cannot be done the restraint is bad in law and unenforceable.

Note. A further example of restrictions imposed on the hours of employment of adult male workers (pp. 38-39) occurs in the case of certain classes of railway servants. (See the Addenda at the beginning of the book.)

CHAPTER V

THE MUTUAL DUTIES OF MASTER AND SERVANT

So far, in considering the terms of a contract of service, we have only concerned ourselves with its express terms. Some of the most important matters are, however, usually left unexpressed. It may help us to call these 'implied obligations' or ' duties,' rather than terms of a contract.

The main duties of a servant are:

(a) To be ready to work, and to continue at work until the contract is at an end.

(b) To be reasonably competent and careful.

(c) To submit to the necessary discipline of his master's business.

(d) To observe good faith towards his master.

The main duties of a master are:

(a) To find work for the servant, and to continue the employment until lawfully put an end to.

(b) To indemnify his servant from the consequences of acting in obedience to his master's lawful orders.

(c) To pay the agreed wages.

(d) To pay compensation for accidents, as provided by the Common Law and by special statutes.

(e) To observe his general statutory duties as contained in the Factory Acts, the Insurance Acts, etc.

Some of these duties are now so complex as to require treatment in separate chapters, and this chapter will be limited to the examination of the more general duties, and a short explanation of the remedies open to the aggrieved party.

« PrejšnjaNaprej »