§ Mr. RAFFANasked the Postmaster-General whether the maximum wage for postmen in the districts of Leigh, Tyldesley, and Atherton is 23s. per week, being a reduction of 1s. per week on the maximum paid prior to 1st January, 1908; and whether, in view of the cost of living in these urban areas, he will consider the advisability of transferring this district from Class 4 to Class 3, so that the earnings of the postmen affected may approximate more nearly to a living wage?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELThe facts are as stated in the first part of the question. The cost of living index number for Leigh, furnished by the Board of Trade, is 92, which is considerably below the average, and on a strict reading of the Parliamentary Committee's recommendations Leigh would have fallen into Class V., and the maximum pay of future entrants to the postmen's class would have been reduced by 3s. a week. Atherton and Tyldesley were classed by analogy with Leigh, and there would be no justification in either case for improving the classification at present. The scales of pay of postmen were fixed on the basis of the report of the Parliamentary Committee, and in addition they enjoy certain privileges, uniform, boot allowance, sick pay, pension, etc., the actuarial value of which is estimated at about 7s. a week, besides being eligible for good conduct stripe allowances up to a maximum of 6s. a week. The total remuneration of a postman in a Class 4 office is therefore much larger than the wage payment quoted by the hon. Member, and rises to a maximum of about 36s. a week. I am unable to agree that the postmen do not receive a living wage.
§ Mr. NEWMANDoes that 7s. also apply to postmen in suburban districts?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELYes, Sir, generally. I am not sure that it is not 2133 rather higher. It varies with the wages and the actuarial value of the pensions which is based on a wage payment.
§ Sir HILDRED CARLILEasked the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the threatened strike of Post Office officials; and whether he can make any statement to allay the uneasiness felt by the public in consequence?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELI do not think that there has been any probability of a strike of Post Office officials. No appreciable number of established civil servants would be likely to terminate their employment by adopting such a course. Even the suggestions of a strike which appeared a few days ago in some of the newspapers have now ceased, and any uneasiness which may have existed is already allayed.
§ Mr. CLYNESIn view of the acceleration of the inquiry asked for sometime ago by the postal service, may I ask whether he is aware that a frequent cause of serious trouble and grievance amongst the postal service is the prolonged delay in dealing with grievances presented to headquarters, and whether he can take any action to accelerate their settlement?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELYes, Sir; I have already taken action.
§ Sir FORTESCUE FLANNERYasked if the sum of £1,064,000 which was provided for the salaries, wages, and allowances of sub-postmasters in the Estimates, Revenue Department, for the year ending 31st March, 1911, was sufficient for the purpose; whether more or less than that amount was expended; and by how much the amount actually expended differed from the amount estimated?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELThe estimate of £1,064,000 for wages, salaries, and allowances of sub-postmasters for the year 1910–11 was part only of a total of upwards of eight and a quarter millions voted under three sub-heads, C 1, 2, and 3, for the salaries, etc., of provincial establishments generally. The total of these three sub-heads cannot readily be analysed, and I am unable to state precisely by how much the amount actually expended on the purposes mentioned by the hon. Member differed from the estimate. I may say, however, that on this total there was a balance of 2.6 per cent., and probably there was a similar margin in the part appropriate to sub-postmasters.
§ Sir FORTESCUE FLANNERYasked if sub-postmasters generally have been instructed to obliterate stamps on parcels; whether this is an additional duty introduced since the Hobhouse Report was adopted; and, if so, to what extent it is intended to improve the remuneration of sub-postmasters in consequence?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELThe duty of obliterating stamps on parcels posted, which was introduced experimentally at some sub-offices as far back as 1906, has recently been entrusted to all sub-postmasters. For many years sub-postmasters had been required to date-stamp the labels on parcels, or if they had no date-stamp to write the name of the office and the date. The additional work involved is inconsiderable, and it is not proposed to make any additional payment on that account to sub-postmasters.