§ 36. Mr. JOHN WARDasked whether the attention of the First Lord of the Admiralty has been called to the fatal accident of a workman employed on the new dock works, Rosyth, as the result of a fall from the staging; whether the life-buoys were over 200 yards from the scene of the accident and covered with iron piping, preventing their use; and what action he proposes to take to have life-saving apparatus always at hand in case of similar accidents in the future?
§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara)My attention has been called to the fatal accident in question, and as the result of local inquiries, it has been ascertained that although a lifebuoy was hanging in its proper place 11 yards from the site of the accident, an old lifebuoy under some pipes 9 yards away was utilised instead. Lifebuoys are, and have been, maintained on the staging for a considerable time past.
§ 37. Mr. WARDasked whether the attention of the First Lord of the Admiralty has been called to the fact that the Government contractors at Redford Barracks now pay navvies and labourers a minimum wage of 6d. per hour; and if he can state how long the contract at Rosyth is?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI am informed that the Government contractors for Army works at Redford Barracks are now paying navvies and labourers a wage of 6d. per hour. The contract date for the final completion of works at present in hand at Rosyth is 31st May, 1917.
§ 38. Mr. WARDasked whether the First Lord of the Admiralty will consult with the War Office as to what is the proper rate of wages for navvies and labourers in 1475 the Forth district and induce the contractors for the Admiralty to refrain from continuing to be the lowest wage employers in the district?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI see no reason for consulting the War Office as proposed. The suggestion contained in the last part of the question, more than once made by my hon. Friend, is not in accordance with the facts. I may add that when my hon. Friend suggested on 24th March that as a result of a strike in the locality, 6d. per hour has now become the rate current in the district for competent workmen, I sought the advice of the Fair-Wages Advisory Committee as to the facts. I am now awaiting a further communication from them on the matter.
§ 41. Mr. JOHN WARDasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to an agreement signed between the trades unions and the Builders' and Contractors' Association, on 24th June, at Portsmouth, by which the wages of navvies and labourers are advanced a halfpenny per hour on and after 1st July, 1913; and whether his Department are taking any action to secure the observance of such agreement by the contractors employed in Portsmouth Dockyard in accordance with the Fair-Wage Resolution of the House of Commons?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI understand that an agreement has been arrived at as suggested in the first part of the question. Should the new conditions be applicable to the cases of the labourers engaged by contractors in the dockyard, and should any representations be made to me in the matter of compliance with the Fair-Wages Clause as an outcome of this agreement, I will have inquiry made.
§ Mr. WARDIs it not the business of the Department to find out what are the wages in the localities and see that they are enforced in proper time?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAThe agreement which has been come to comes into operation to-morrow. I do not require to inquire, because the matter does not arise until to-morrow, and then I shall have to see whether it is applicable.
§ Mr. WARDAre we to' understand from the observations of the right hon. Gentleman that the contractors in the dockyards are treated differently from contractors outside?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI will have to see whether they come under this agreement between the trade unions and the Builders and Contractors' Association.
§ 44. Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that dissatisfaction exists in the Royal yards with regard to the probationary system introduced on the 1st June last with regard to the employment of skilled labourers; that the probationary period is regarded as opening the door to the employment of ordinary labourers for skilled work without extra remuneration; and whether he is in a position to make any statement on the subject?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAUnder the concessions to workmen which came into operation on the first day of this month, it was decided to retain the rate of 23s. a week for skilled labourers as a probationary rate, all men who had at that time been a, year or more on the rate being moved up to 24s., with a possibility of rising to a maximum of 28s., and a special rate maximum of 31s. The only statement I can make about the recent concession to the skilled labourers is that, as it stands, it is estimated to cost £19,000 a year.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKECan the right hon. Gentleman give any precedent for paying skilled men at the same rate as unskilled men?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAThe hon. Gentleman had better give notice of that question.
52. Sir C.KINLOCH-COOKSasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to the rates of pay received by storehousemen employed in the works department of the Royal dockyards; whether he is aware that these men have heavy responsibilities and important duties to perform, and that special qualifications are required from them, that assistants are often required to take the position of seniors, and that while the assistant have a superior rating they are not able to reach the maximum pay of skilled labourers, while their average rate of pay is very little in advance of a skilled labourer's wage; and whether he can see his way, in view of the rise in the cost of living, to make some addition to the weekly emoluments of storehousemen as a whole?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAThe question of the assistant storehousemen in the various Departments is under consideration, but I cannot give any undertaking in the matter.