§ MR. C. E. SCHWANN (Manchester, N.)
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that a clerk named Minors, employed in the Central Telegraph Office, having been absent several times on sick leave, and his illness having been certified in accordance with the regulations, by a duly qualified medical man, he has now been informed that in future no pay will be allowed him, when absent, on the certificates of private medical men; and whether this decision is in contravention of the sick-leave regulations of the Post Office which are published to the staff?
§ MR. HANBURY
Mr. Minors was absent on plea of illness on 12 occasions in the past two years, six of the absences being for one day only, without medical certificate, and on five of the remaining occasions a private medical certificate only was furnished. The medical officer-in-chief examined Mr. Minors, and reported that he saw no reason why Mr. Minors should not give 648 regular and useful service in future. The numerous sick absences for short periods were regarded by the medical officer as unsatisfactory, and Mr. Minors was accordingly warned that no pay could be allowed in future for sick absences uncovered by certificate of the medical officer to the Department. The decision in this case in no way contravenes the regulations of the Department.