§ MR. STEADMANTo ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that a telegraphist, named Evershed, in the Central Office, London, applied for an exchange from night duty for one month, commencing July, on the ground of illness of his mother, and of the fact that he himself had barely recovered from a long period of sickness, and that he provided a competent substitute; whether seeing that although he furnished a medical certificate showing he was unfit for night duty, the Deputy Controller compelled him to perform the work and declined to accept the substitute, he will 1331 investigate the circumstances, and explain why the request for an exchange was refused.
(Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The telegraphist in question had been allowed to exchange from night duty so freely that he had not performed any night duty for several years. It was not considered desirable that a particular officer should be thus indirectly exempted from night duty in permanence, and further substitution was therefore refused, after it had been ascertained by medical examination by the chief medical officer that there was no valid reason of health to prevent this officer performing night duty.