HC Deb 21 April 1913 vol 52 cc13-4 P
19. Mr. BARNES

asked the Postmaster-General what exceptional reasons are there to justify the extension of the ago limit beyond sixty years for pension in favour of an assistant superintendent at the north-western district office; and whether, having regard to the stagnation of promotion, he will discourage such applications for extension?


It is considered desirable in the interests of the Department to retain the services of the officer in question for the present. While I am empowered to call upon any officer to retire on reaching the age of sixty, it is not the rule to enforce retirement at sixty if an officer is thoroughly efficient, and his retention is in the interests of the service.

20. Mr. BARNES

asked the Postmaster-General whether he will explain why a sorter in the London postal service who has been acting as overseer at intermittent periods for the past six years and continuously for the last twelve months, for which latter period he has received substituting pay for the higher class, has recently been informed that he is incompetent; and whether he is aware that such action indicates either that an inefficient officer has been kept to duties and paid for the same, or that he is fully qualified and is being unfairly treated to make room for a junior officer who has done comparatively little acting, but is somewhat of a favourite?


The officer to whom the question is understood to refer has not been informed that he is incompetent. He has performed overseers' duties as substitute with varying degrees of success, and, while he cannot be promoted so long as better qualified officers are available, his trial has been prolonged in his own interests in order to afford him every opportunity of proving his fitness for promotion. It is hoped that a definite conclusion will be reached soon. There is no ground for the suggestion of unfair treatment or favouritism.