HC Deb 19 July 1888 vol 328 c1760
MR. CLANCY (Dublin Co., N.)

asked the Postmaster General, Whether he is aware of the existence of the practice of fining postmen so much as two or more days' pay for comparatively trivial acts of misconduct, such as late attendance; and, if so, whether he will consider the propriety of substituting some other punishment for such offences, in the case especially of rural postmen, whose weekly wages are only 16s. a-week or under?

THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (Mr. RAIKES) (Cambridge University)

I am not aware that postmen are over fined for trivial acts of misconduct, nor on the part of a postman can I regard want of punctuality as coming under that description. For acts of misconduct which are not trivial the practice of fining postmen as a mitigated form of punishment is one to which the Department is constrained to have recourse as a means of enforcing discipline; and I do not see my way to replace it by any other method.