Elmore County Republican. [volume] (Mountain Home, Idaho) 1910-1915, 1913-07-19

act Of disobsdience. A farm lahorsr
who refused TO work during harvest
time til 8 O'Clock was held properly
dismissed. - was also : coechmAn
who, against his employers expssss
orders. carried friends Of his own
In his employers carriage. A travel
Ing salesman who refused to comply
With the request q his employer TO
return his samples. the superintend
ent who refused 10 obey his super
ior's orders to reinstate an employee.
and the teacher who refused to rein
state pupil who was Instructed to
do 80 by the school board, were Ill
held to be properly dismissed for
such single acts 81 disobediehce
Numberless examples might b dis.
covered Of instances Of disobcdienca
that have been held to justify ! dis
+
missal.
Not only may 9 master dismiss :
disobedient servant. but hs may
also sue that servant and secure dam
ages for any injury which may have
been caused by reason Of the SER
rant 4 disobediehce.
While the general rule ID that the
disobedience Of any order b :
breach Of the duty which the en-.
ployee owes to the employer. and o
i justification for dismissal, there
are certain circumstances which will
Justify 4 servant In his disobedience.
"a servant need not obey m order
which ID unreasonable, but m en-
ployee should be very certain that
the instruction would be deemed OBJ
viously and certainly unreasonable BY
. normal person before he disobeys
for that reason. Nor need servant
obey instructions which are unlawful.
Neither may an employee be dis
missed Tor failure to obey orders In
structing him to perform services
which are not properly within the
duties for which he was employed.
A servant may not be dismissed
for the failure to obey an order IN
regard to a matter OF small import
ance and 80 trivial that the con-
tract Of employment is not affected.
II the disobedience was unintsntion-
al, and in regard to matters OF no
Importance. and the instructions
were In regard to matters Of mere
detail and not Of q character to re-
Quire in ell circumstances. strict
obedience the law viii generally
insist that there 10 not sufficient
grounds for the severing Of the re-
lation Of master and servant.
A master may dismiss servant
though the act in question was not
actually injurious to hint ID
enough that there was = failure to
obey In matter Of importance. or
q wilful disobedience Of any char
acter Of q proper order.
As before stated. . servant may
not be dismissed for failure to obey
an instruction requiring services Of
q kind different from those which he
was hired to perform. An employee
10 bound to perform the duties he
was engaged to do and no. others,
Thus boy hired to care for sheep
and assist at hay time, cannot be re-
CURED to perform the additional duty
Of taking charge Of several cattle
In the winter. A ballet dancer who
has been engaged a. premiere dan.
seuse cannot bs compelled to take IN
inferior position In the ballet, nor n
a lady's maid expected to milk COWS,
But the masters rsqaiifements must
be clearly beyond the scope Of the
servant = employment to justify = re-
fusal. Thus man hired Tor general
work On Q farm y, not justified IN
abandoning his employment because
he IL sst to cutting flax with 1
machine and thinks this too hard
WORT, nor becauas he Il required TO
carry bricks.
The hours at which . servant IL
required to work arc not infrcQusnt-
~ flied BY the terms Of tie agree.
ment between employer and en-.
ployee. The length of . working day
may also be prescribed BY law. II
may be understood from the nature
Of the employment. but 1 servant can
not be required to work 1t unreason.
able times, nor for periods. which
considering AL the circumstances, are
excessive.
A. to holidays the laws Of the
state control. Other days OF may
be recognized and understood by Gus
tom or stated in the contract. Sum
day IL usually . legal holiday, or UNI
derstood n holiday. yet II may
not be- in exceptional callinss -
those OF seamen or railroad EN-.