§ MR. STEWART WALLACE (Tower Hamlets, Limehouse)
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury how many clerks on the intermediate class of Customs outport clerks, created in 1885, being in receipt of special allowances, have since October, 1891, declined promotion to the first class of clerks on the ground that the minimum salary of the first class, as fixed by Treasury Order of 6th March, 1880, or at which they were proposed to be appointed, was less than the income (derived from salary and allowance) they were receiving on the lower class, the difference being such that they could not afford to lose, and how many since 1885 have accepted such promotion, at a loss of immediate income derived from salary and allowance; whether such minimum of the first class became inferior to the income of the subordinate class, derived from salary and allowance, owing to the concessions made in 1885 and 1891 in view of loss of prospects, increased responsibilities, &c., and whether such reasons ought to operate to prevent loss of income on promotion; whether he can see his way to avoid detracting from the grace of the said concessions by directing an increase of such minimum salary, so that no clerk in receipt of a special allowance, as authorised by the Order of 1880, shall lose in immediate income by accepting promotion to the first class; and whether a Petition was received by the Treasury in 1893 from certain clerks at the Customs outports; if so, when a reply is likely to be given thereto?
§ THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Sir J. T. HIBBERT,) Oldham
Since October, 1891, eight clerks of the 21 second class of Customs outport clerks have refused promotion to the first class, and 12 have been actually promoted, of whom three suffered a small immediate loss by promotion. Since 1882 the responsibilities of the outport clerks as a body have decreased, and the concessions of the Treasury referred to were made on account of slowness of promotion, and not of increased responsibilities. The special allowance is granted in addition to salary to a clerk for acting as collector in the absence of that officer, and if such clerk is promoted to the first class his promotion involves transfer to another port, and the payment of the allowance to his successor, who actually performs the duties recognised by that allowance. To add any part of the special allowance to the promoted clerk's salary would be to pay, to that extent, twice over for the same duties. I have not seen the memorial referred to, but I will inquire how the matter stands.