Page images
[ocr errors]

This she refu-ed to do, but offered to accept a position as manager in some other store. The employer failed to furnish another position, and Miss Cooper thereupon sued to recover on her contract. From a judgment in her favor the company appealed, the appeal resulting in the judgment of the court below being affirmed, as appears from the following quotation from the opinion, as delivered by Judge O'Brien:

The contentions of the respective parties as to the terms of the contract were fully submitted to the jury; but the instructions were to the effect that, if the contract of hiring was that plaintiff was to be employed as manager, she was not required to accept employment as saleswoman. Defendant claims this as error, arguing that there is practically no difference in such employments, inasmuch as the manager of the department acts also as a saleswoman, her duties as manager being merely additional responsibilities, and that relieving the plaintiff of them involved no degradation or loss of caste, and imposed upon her no duties which were dissimilar to some of those formerly performed by her.

The authorities seem to support the conclusions upon this subject given in Wood's Master & Servant, section 127. The servant, discharged in violation of the contract of hiring, prima facie is entitled to recover the agreed wages for the full term, subject to his duty to be reasonably diligent in seeking other employment of a similar kind, and, if obtained, the compensation received therefor is to be deducted from the aggregate agreed amount. - By other employment is meant employment of a character such as that in which he was employed, or not of a more menial kind."

Under the evidence in this case, we consider it a very close question whether the positions of manager and saleswoman in one of defendant's departments are so dissimilar that an employee, when tendered the same salary, is not required to accept either (Squire r. Wright, 1 Mo. App. 172), but have concluded that, if the master deliberately enters into a contract providing for the employment of another as manager, the employee has a right to insist upon retaining that grade, in the absence of any showing which would justify the master in reducing the rank of the servant. The grade of the employment may have been the inducing cause for this contract. When the change was proposed, the season for obtaining positions of that character had advanced, and while, perhaps, a very slight cause might have been sufficient to have justified defendant's action, we think, in the absence of a showing of some cause, the defendant must be held to have broken the contract.

CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT_TERN-RENEWALBREACH-ASSIGNMENT OF CLAIMS--Allen 1. Chicago Pneumatic Tool Company, Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 91 Vortheastern Reporter, page 887.-In this case James S. Allen, jr., sued the company named under an assignment by one Hammack to recover salary and commissions due said Hammack as an employee of the company. From a judgment in Allen's favor the company appealed, the appeal result

ing in the affirmation of the judgment of the court below. The facts appear in the opinion of the court as delivered by Judge Hammond, which is as follows:

The main questions are: First, what was the nature of the contract under which Hammack, the plaintiff's assignor, was at work at the time he received notice of his dismissal? and, second, what is the nature of the assignment?

1. The only written contract was that of February 15, 1906. By this contract the defendant agreed to employ Hammack, the plaintiff's assignor, for a period of one year from its date, and to pay him as salary $2,100 $ per year,” payable in equal monthly installments at the end of each month, and also to pay him a certain commission upon certain sales, “this commission to be paid quarterly, payable on the 20th day of the month succeeding the end of each quarter." It is further provided that, if this commission does not amount “to a net total of fourteen hundred dollars ($1,400) for the year," then the defendant is to make good such deficiency" to Hammack, “ payable in cash at the end of the year.” The last paragraph is in the following language: “ It is further agreed that in the event that either or both parties do not desire to renew this agreement at the time of its expiration that notice be given in writing of intention not to renew at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of this agreement." In short, this was a contract for one year from its date, at a yearly salary of $2,100, with an additional compensation of at least $1,400 as commissions for the year, with a provision that if either or both parties did not desire to renew it notice should be given thirty days prior to its expiration.

Hammack worked under the contract for the year. No notice of a desire not to renew was given by either party, and Hammack, after the expiration of the year, continued his work as before until October 30, 1907, when he was notified by the defendant that on account of financial conditions and the great decrease in business there would be a " discontinuance” of employment as to him on the next day. Thereupon letters passed between him and the defendant as to this matter; the former insisting that his contract was in force until Feb

uary 15, 1908, and the latter that the contract had terminated February 15, 1907. From the fact that no notice was given before the expiration of the first year the trial court had the right to infer that there was a disposition to renew the contract, and from the additional fact that Hammack without any other express arrangement, either written or oral, continued to work as before, with the full knowledge and approbation of the defendant, the court could properly in fer that it was the understanding of the parties that the contract was renewed. If renewed, then the new contract, like the old, was a contract of hiring for a year, with compensation for the year, to be paid quarterly as before, with the same right in either party to give notice within thirty days of its expiration that there was no further desire for renewal. Any other contract would not have been a "renewal” of the original contract. The evidence amply justified a finding that at the time the plaintiff was dismissed he was working under a contract for the year beginning February 15, 1907. (Dunton v. Derby Desk ('o., 186 Mass. 35, 71 X. E. 91, and cases cited; Maynard v. Royal Worcester Corset Co., 200 Mass. 1, 85 N, E. 877.) In this last case there is a quite full discussion of the law bearing upon this subject, and we need only to refer to it for a statement of the underlying principles.

2. What is the nature of the assignment from Hammack to the plaintiff? It is dated January 4, 1908, which was some weeks before the expiration of the second year. At that time there was due llammack all arrears of salary and of commissions up to that time, and the second contract was still binding upon the defendant. Upon the breach of the contract by the defendant there were before Hammack at least two courses. He either could regard the contract as broken and at once sue for damages for the breach, or he could hold himself out as ready to work under it, wait until the expiration of the year, and then sue for compensation as fixed by the contract less reasonable deduction of what he could have earned. There was evidence that he intended to take the latter course, for he notified the defendant that he held himself subject to their working orders up to February 15, 1908. And although he testified that he endeavored to seek other employment, yet the trial judge could well find upon the evidence that he intended to hold the defendant as liable for the compensation by the terms of the contract, and not merely to sue thereon in damages for the breach,

Under these circumstances the assignment was made. It covers “ all claim which I now have or may hereafter have against [the defendant]

due me for services and commission as salesman,

whether such claim for services and commissions have accrued, or may hereafter accrue under the written agreement made by me with said company dated February 15, 1906, or under any oral renewal thereof." It does not purport to be an assignment for damages for breach of the contract. In a word it was simply an assignment of all sums then due under both contracts with whatever afterwards should become due for services and commissions (which were in the nature of future earnings) under the renewal contract which was then existing. Such an assignment is valid according to its terms. (Citizens' Loan Association *. Boston & Maine R. R., 196 Mass. 528, 82 V. E. 696, 14 L. R. A. (X. S.) 1023, 124 Am. St. Rep. 581, in cases cited.) It is to be noted also that the declaration in this case proceeds upon this theory as to the nature of the assig ment. It makes no claim except under the terms of the contract. The assignment of the sums due for services and commissions must be held to include also interest accrued or to accrue. It follows that the rulings requested were all properly refused.

[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]

Accidents, industrial, and workmen's compensation :
Regulations as to--


136, 176 Switzerland

340, 346 Accidents, industrial, employees injured by, in France

217 Age of admission to employment : Austria.

5, 14, 32 Belgium

93, 94 France

153 Germany

241, 242, 246, 253, 272, 277 Italy

316, 317 Switzerland

342-344, 351, 359, 360, 364, 365 Age of admission, employment of children under : Austria

27, 33, 34 Belgium

115, 116 France

183-194 Germany

309, 310 Apprenticeship laws, cantonal, of Switzerland.

351-358 Apprentices : Regulations, etc., as to employment ofAustria.

4, 28-30 Belgium

137 France

171 Germany

259, 260 Switzerland.

351-358 Austria : Age of admission to employment--

5, 14, 32 Apprentices, regulations, etc., as to employment of

4, 28-30 Children employed industrially and number employed illegally

27 Children illegally employed, at night

35 in dangerous or unhealthful occupations.

36 under age of admission

27, 33, 34 Continuous operations, regulations as to employment in

10, 11, 17 Employees under 16 years of age in inspected establishments, 1897 to 1908_ 22 Enforcement of child-labor laws.

25--38 Factories, etc., regulations as to child labor.

14-17 Factory and workshop regulations.

13, 14 History of child-labor legislation.

3-7 Hours of labor, regulations as to--

5, 6, 12, 13, 18 Hygiene and safety, regulations as to.

12 Inspectors, labor, organization and work of..

21-38 Mines, regulations as to child labor in

17-19 Nature and extent of child labor, discussion of.

38-92 Night work, prohibition, etc., of..

5, 15, 16, 19, 28 Notices relative to provisions of law, etc., to be posted by employers.

6 Overtime work, regulations as to.

12. 13 Penalties for violation of child-labor laws.

20, 21 Prohibited occupations.

15, 18 Rest periods, regulations as to.

5, 12, 13 School attendance, regulations as to.

5, 6, 17, 20 School children at work.

41-92 Sunday and boliday work, regulations as to

9-12 Violations of the child-labor laws, number of

27, 34, 35, 38 Wages of children.

44, 45, 51, 52, 61-63 Work books, certificates, etc., regulations as to

14 Workday, maximum, and rest periods, regulations as to

12, 13 Workshop and factory regulations.

13, 14 Belgium : Agencies for enforcing labor laws and decrees.

111-11.) Age of admission to employment--

93, 94 Apprentices, regulations, etc., as to employment of

137 Children employed industrially

138-143 Children Illegally employedovertime

133-13.5 under age of admission

115, 116 without certificate or work book

117, 118 Employees and establishments subject to labor laws.

131 Enforcement of labor laws and decrees.

115-130 Home industries, extent of

143 Hlours of labor, regulations as tocano

98-104 Hygiene and safety, regulations as to-

113 437


Inspectors, labor, organization and work of..

Law of 1889, legislative and administrative modification of the.
Mine employees, number of

Nature and extent of child labor, discussion of
Night work, prohibition, etc., of.

Notices relative to provisions of law, etc., to be posted by employers..
Overtime work, regulations as to--

Penalties for violation of labor laws

Prohibited occupations--

"Protected persons in industry, number and per cent of. Rest periods, regulations as to

Sunday or holiday work, regulations as to..

Violations of labor laws and decrees_.

Wages of children_

Work books, certificates, etc., regulations as to.

etc., regulations as to.)

Child-labor legislation in Europe-.





Workday, maximum, and rest periods, regulations as to-.
Bohemia, school children at work in.
Cantonal legislation in Switzerland affecting child labor, discussion of..
(See also Classification of cantonal child-labor laws of Switzerland.)
Carniola, school children at work in..
Certificates, work books, etc., regulations as to.

(See Work books, certificates,





Children, illegal employment of. (See Illegal employment of children.)
Children industrially employed:

[blocks in formation]

Children, wages of, in Belgium_.

Classification of cantonal child-labor laws of Switzerland.

All employees, laws applying to..

Apprenticeship laws


111-115 97-111 136 130-143 95, 96, 99, 103, 104, 135, 136 96, 97 95.96


Female employees, special laws concerning.

Hotel, tavern, and restaurant employees, special law for protection of
Nonadult employees, laws for protection of-

Occupations dangerous to health, safety, or morals, laws concerning condi

tions of work in..

98-104, 110, 111

98-104, 110, 111



[blocks in formation]

41-92 404-413 137, 142 349-372




366, 367

School attendance, laws regulating.

Sunday work, laws regulating-

Continuous operations, regulations as to employment in:




Courts, the, and the labor laws in France...

Combinations in restraint of trade--boycott..

Contract of employment


Decisions of courts affecting labor:

Antitrust law of Mississippi-constitutionality-combinations in restraint

of trade-boycotts

consideration- release of claim for damages-breach.

reduction of rank as violation-duty of employee to seek other employ


term renewal-breach-assignment of claimsEmployers' liability

acceptance of relief benefits-constitutionality of statute. course of employmentfellow-servants-liability of foremen-course of employmentrailroad companies-interstate commerce-federal statute -construction_. Hours of labor

10, 11, 17

171 256 224-231

414-416 414-416


432, 433

433, 434 434-436

419-422 416-419


422, 423

employment of women-constitutionality of statute of Illinois--police



railroads periods of service and rest-federal statute-construction-- 425, 426 railroads-regulation of commerce by state law-effect of federal


423-425, 426-428 railroads-violation of statute by employees as affecting claims for

damages-state and federal regulation.

Railroads safety appliances-commerce-state regulation_
Sunday labor-recovery of compensation for contracts to be performed on
Employees, number of:


under 16 years of age in inspected establishments, 1897 to 1908. Belgium

at work in mines_.

in establishments inspected, 1895 to 1907.

426-428 430, 431

431, 432

25 136 131

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »