18. Mr. MONTAGUE BARLOWasked whether, prior to the amalgamation, at the lowest rate then payable, the sum of £3 would have been paid to Customs port clerks for sixty hours' overtime?
§ Mr. MASTERMANAt the lowest rate, namely, 9d. an hour, the sum payable for sixty hours' overtime would have been £2 5s.
19. Mr. M. BARLOWasked whether, when the seventh hour was added in 1888, the new condition was imposed upon the then existing Customs clerks only upon promotion from the grade upon which at the time they happened to be placed?
§ Mr. MASTERMANThe increase in 1887 of the actual attendance from six to seven hours every day was applied gradually to the then existing clerks as they attained an increase of salary by promotion to a higher grade or appointment to a post carrying a special allowance.
§ Mr. MASTERMANI will consider that.
20. Mr. M. BARLOWasked whether, notwithstanding the fact that collectors' offices are at present and are to continue staffed on the basis of a daily attendance of seven hours, the attendance required from Customs port clerks at Manchester, Liverpool, and elsewhere before overtime is payable has been increased from seven hours daily, or forty-two hours weekly, seven between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., to a liability to serve forty-eight hours weekly, without regard to the former limiting hours, 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.; and whether, notwithstanding the increased liability, amounting to 280 hours yearly, the sole monetary grant given to Customs port clerks of the second class (lower section), and which can be taken as compensation whatever be the actual principle on which it is granted, is a sum of £3, which was based on the former average overtime of the class and is equal to the payment for sixty hours' overtime at the lowest rate formerly payable?
§ Mr. MASTERMANMy right hon. Friend discussed this matter very fully with a deputation from the officers con- 2188 cerned on the 3rd May last, and announced that the Board of Customs and Excise will continue to staff collectors' offices on the basis of a normal seven hour day, extra attendance being only required when necessary.
21. Mr. M. BARLOWasked whether pre-1908 candidates for Customs port clerk ships were informed that, if successful, they would be liable to perform duties not clerical?
§ Mr. MASTERMANI must refer the hon. Member to the answer to a similar question which he addressed to my right hon. Friend on the 18th December last.
Mr. M. BARLOWWill the Chancellor of the Exchequer take this matter into consideration, in view of the statement of the Financial Secretary in June, 1908, when the two staffs were fused, that every endeavour would be made to see that neither should suffer?
§ Mr. MASTERMANI would like to see that question on the Paper.
22. Mr. M. BARLOWasked when the Customs port clerks may expect an answer to their petition presented to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury on 29th January, 1912, and containing many points not referred to by the Chancellor in his interview with the representatives of the Customs port clerks on 3rd May, 1912?
§ Mr. MASTERMANMy right hon. Friend is rather surprised at the suggestion conveyed in the question that this petition has not been answered. Not only was it carefully considered by him, but as the port clerks know very well, he allowed their representatives to place their views before him orally at considerable length, before he announced his decisions to the deputation in May last.
23. Mr. M. BARLOWasked whether, except in a few isolated instances at minor ports, the Customs port clerks performed only indoor clerical duties prior to the amalgamation; whether, when a clerk was required for service at a minor port to undertake duties other than clerical, it has been the practice to secure the consent of the clerk concerned before making such appointment; and whether, when he stated that the collectors' offices would be staffed on a basis of a normal day of seven hours, it was his intention to safeguard the Customs port clerks against an extension of their normal day if employed on outdoor duties without their consent?
§ Mr. MASTERMANCustoms clerks, although mostly employed on indoor clerical duties, were always liable to be employed on outdoor duties at certain ports, the number of which has varied from time to time in the past. It was not the practice to obtain the consent of a clerk before appointing him to a port of this kind. The contingency referred to in the last paragraph has not, so far as I am aware, arisen.