§ 42. Mr. EDWARD WOODasked the President of the Board of Trade whether estate joiners and woodmen employed in sawing are in all cases insurable under Part II. of the National Insurance Act?
The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Robertson)The case of estate joiners is covered by the answer given on 17th July to the hon. Member for the Eastbourne Division of Sussex. As regards woodmen employed in sawing, the nearest decision already given by the Umpire is No. 203, which lays down that contributions are not payable in respect of "workmen employed by timber merchants owning or working sawmills and engaged wholly or mainly in the work of converting timber or logs into planks, boards, or scantlings." Though the decision does not directly relate to estate woodmen, it would seem a reasonable inference that such woodmen, if engaged on the kinds of work specified, would also be excluded. It will, however, be understood that I have no power to give a binding decision on such a matter, which is one for determination in case of doubt by the Umpire. As a number of questions have been raised as to the position under Part II. of the National Insurance Act of certain classes of estate workmen, I will, by leave of the House, take this opportunity of making a statement which may be of some practical service in guiding employers and workmen at the outset. I must repeat that I have no authority to give any binding decision whether contributions are payable in respect of any individual workmen or class of workmen, that being a matter solely determinable in doubtful cases by the Umpire. The questions raised relate to the position of certain classes of workmen employed on private estates in country districts as regards their liability to compulsory insurance under Part II. of the National Insurance Act. So far as such workmen are clearly employed in insured trades, no doubt arises, for there is no 682 question that under the Act estate workmen employed in insured trades are liable to contributions equally with workmen engaged on similar work employed by way of trade or business. What occupations are within the insured trades is, of course, a matter for determination in case of doubt by the Umpire. The questions that have been raised are therefore solely concerned with the position of workmen partly employed in insured trades and partly in other occupations, as, for example, estate carpenters, masons or labourers employed on private estates in rural districts, sometimes in building and repairing cottages, and at other times in fencing, gate-making, road repairing, quarrying, or other non-insurable work. It is to be noted that the Act (Section 97) makes special provision for persons in rural districts who are only occasionally employed in insured trades. I am now referring solely to districts of a rural character. In such a district the question whether or not at any particular time contributions are payable in respect of any particular workman—namely, an estate carpenter—depends on whether at the time the principal occupation of the carpenter is in connection with building or other insured trade or with some non-insurable occupation—namely, the making of fences. In many cases the workman's principal occupation will be clear from the nature of the occupation which he holds himself out as following. In other cases it will be determined by the nature of the work on which he has recently been engaged—that is, not merely in the current week or month, but over a substantial period such as a, year. Thus there will be no need, as some have supposed, for the employer to forecast the kind of work on which the workman is likely to be engaged at some future time. The question to be decided in a doubtful case is whether he is or is not a workman who, on his past record, would be reasonably described as a building operative or as engaged in some other insured trade? If this question is answered in the negative no step need be taken to insure him, though by mutual agreement between employer and workman he may be treated as an insured workman.
§ Mr. LANE-FOXIs it required to insure these men before the decision is given, and what is the position of a man whose past record is of a very mixed kind, and how are we to know until some more definite decision has been given?
§ Mr. LANE-FOXAre the workmen to be made to pay this contribution, which in some cases is entirely unnecessary, until a decision has been given?
Mr. ROBERTSONThe answer will show that if a workman is insured and is non-insurable the contributions will be returnable.
§ 47. Captain CLIVEasked whether an estate carpenter who is employed, as the occasion arises, sometimes at work that is insurable and sometimes at work that is uninsurable under Part II. of the National Insurance Act, will require to be insured only for the weeks when he is engaged at insurable work; and will he receive unemployment pay for the weeks when he is not so engaged?
Mr. ROBERTSONContributions under Part II. of the National Insurance Act are payable only in respect of periods during which a workman is employed in an insured trade. It is also provided, under Section 97 of the Act, that occasional employment in an insured trade in a district of a rural character does not make a workman liable to compulsory contributions if his principal occupation in the district is not in an insured trade. In reply to the second part of the question, I would refer to Section 107 (1) of the Act, the effect of which is that a workman cannot obtain benefit, as being unemployed, while he is following any remunerative occupation in an insured trade or any other occupation from which he derives any remuneration or profit greater than that which he would derive from the receipt of unemployment benefit under Part II. of the Act.