Wichita eagle., 1888-11-16
MASTER AND SERVANT.
POINTS CONCERNING THE RELATIONS
OF EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYE.

POINTS CONCERNING THE RELATIONS
.oF EMPLOYER AND EMPLoYE.
A Contract for Services and Its RESPONSE
bilities-Redress for NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
and Hazardous ccupations-Purchases
Made by Servants-Notice Required.
HAS person who is hired by the year any
claim on the employer for care or attention
during illnessP'
Legally, no. The illness of the servant
breaks the contract, and the employer may
engage other help The employee cannot en-
force any claim to the place again after re-
covery. The reason for this Is that the
employer cannot jeopardi1e his business in
terests by holding place open for an indefi
mite time. He is supposed to keep no more
help than he needs, and is not required to
tnrn away good servant who has taken the
place OF one who has been obliged TO give up
the work on account Of illness. This rule is
not, however, strictly adhered to, IS employ
ers are quite likely to make places for former
employees. especially if they have proven
themselves capable and trustworthy"
''Are an employers heirs bound to con-
tinue a contract with servantsr
They are not The contract for service,
and all responsibilities attaching to it, are
Cancelled by the death Of either party This
is an implied condition in ali contracts for
service"
HAS an employer any redress for injuries
to his property through willfulness or negh-
gence on the part Of the servantsf'
None; that is, none OF any actual benefit
to him. There is a provision of law that
provides for certain acts mis(lemeanors or
malicious mischief; but unless the servant
has property, 1t is only waste of time to in
stitute legal proceedings, unless the 0tfense
is one that demands punishment on the
ground of protection to public interests"
IF servant hires for a given time, to do
certain kind a work, and, when tried, is
found incapable, can the employer be COM
PEELED to pay wages or keep the person IN
said employment until the time contracted
for expires.s
Certainly not. Inability to perform tbs
labor agreed upon cancels the contract. The
servant may not receive any compensation
for labor not properly performed If, how
ever, after failing in the task agreed upon,
he is kept at work that he can do, he must he
paid for the time SO consumed and at a rate
adjudged fair for such occupations. For
example: Should you hire a man at given
sum, Is cook, and keep him employed for
some weeks as errand boy, you must pay him
the wages agreed upon; but should you then
put him into the cooks place. and find him
unable to do his work properly, he cannot
demand cooks wages if no returns volun-
tarily to his position as errand boy. His
failure to cook as agreed has made new
contract necessary"
Are employers held responsible for acct
dents to servents from dangerous surround
ingsr'
"lf servent engages in an occupation
which is hazardous TO life or limb, and does
not know Of his danger, OF is not warned Of
it, the employer is responsible. If the ser
want is aware of danger, and continues in the
service, he does so at his own personal risk.
For example: Men who work in powder or
dynamite mills, and similar places, do so
with full knowledge Of their danger, and
take the responsibility upon themselves"
so the servant, when he takes position
with knowledge of its dangers, may be said
to contribute to his own injuries or mis-
fortunesr'
Precisely so; and, in the same way, if
he uses tools or appliances that no
knows to be unsafe, he exposes himself
to injury and canno. recover damages in
case of personal harm He may leave the
service if he fears to work under such cir
cumstances; but should be remain, he alone
is responsible for resulting injury"
us an employer held accountable for the
acts Of his servantf
ITO an extent he is, while tho servant is
engaged in the direct line of his duty; but he
is not accountable for damage done whiis
the servant is pursuing his own pleasure or
convenience. For Instance: A delivery
wagon ran over a child Il was proven that
the driver had taken the wagon out without
orders, to carry some articles for members
of his own family Therefore the owner was
not held for damages, the vehicle not being
engaged in his business or under his orders,
as it was held that under such circumstances
the man was not his servant"
''Is an employer responsible for debts con-
tracted by servants while in his employ and
acting as his agentsl"
Under ordinary circumstances the court
would hold them accountable II a servant
is in the habit of going to store to purchase
articles for the use of the family, and has done
SO at the masters orders, he is accountable for
such debts until the tradesman is notified to
the contrary. Notice Of this sort should always
be given; otherwise, servants might change
places and continue to buy articles, having
them charged to the late employer until some
circumstance brought out the fac. that the
buyer was no longer so employed"
But the servant would be held account
able, suppose'n
Certainly, for nisdeneanor, and might
be subject to fine or imprisonment, or both"
Is 6 \ u in Deunrsstls Monthly