§ 44. Mr. ANDERSONasked the Minister of Munitions whether his attention has been called to a case in which a workman employed by Messrs. Hewitt and Kellett, of Bradford, applied to the Court for a leaving certificate on the ground that a member of the firm had employed towards him constant bullying and bad language; whether he is aware that this workman drew attention to a notice posted in the works that any employé using bad language to a superior is liable to a fine of £3 at the Munitions Court; whether this regulation has been officially sanctioned by the Ministry of Munitions and, if so, whether he will take steps to render an employer or foreman liable to monetary penalties who uses improper language toward an employed person?
§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MUNITIONS DEPARTMENT (Dr. Addison)My attention has been drawn to reports on this case, in which, I understand, the workman was refused a certifi- 1978 cate. The model rules sanctioned by the Minister, which can alone be the ground of prosecution before a Munitions Tribunal, provide that no person employed shall "use abusive language in or otherwise interfere with or annoy any other person employed in the establishment." This would apply to all persons employed in the establishment, including foremen. I will make inquiry to see if, as appears to be suggested in the question, the rule posted by the firm differed from the model rule. It is open, of course, to the man, if he so desires, to see whether there are grounds for appeal.