HC Deb 27 March 1913 vol 50 cc1819-20
40. Mr. J. P. FARRELL

asked if the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the principal teacher of Ennybegs national school, Roll No. 14,472, was informed by the Commissioners of National Education (Ireland), that he had been promoted to first-of-first grade from 1st April. 1909, for highly efficient service; that this teacher had to wait one year and three months before he received the salary attached to the higher grade, which according to Rule 105 (a) should have been paid on promotion; that the violation of this rule caused the teacher to lose £15; that the satisfactory service given from 1st April, 1909, to 30th June, 1910, is not counted in awarding his next triennial increment, thereby causing a further loss to this teacher during the four years ending 31st March, 1913, of £12; if this holding up of his service violates Rule 108 (b); and whether this teacher was informed in January, 1911, that his first promotion notice was to be regarded as cancelled and to date from 1st July, 1910, and, if this cancelling of the first notice is contrary to Rule 104 (a), was the rule sanctioned by the Lord Lieutenant; and, if so, will he recommend that the vested rights of this teacher be respected?


The Commissioners of National Education inform me that Mr. Michael McEvoy, the principal teacher of this school, qualified for promotion to the first section of the first grade from 1st April, 1909, but he cannot receive payment of salary at the rate attached to that grade nor can his service begin to count towards his next triennial increment until a vacancy occurs. Awards of increment are made under Rule 108 (b), but these increments of good service salary can only be granted to teachers already in receipt of their grade salaries for at least three years. He was not told that he was to regard the first notice of promotion as cancelled. Rule 104 (a), which was approved by the Irish Government and the Treasury, lays down the conditions of promotion, but such promotion cannot take place unless there are vacancies.


When do the Treasury propose to give sufficient money to do away with this practice?


That question had better be put to the Chief Secretary on Tuesday when he returns.