§ 36. Major WHELERasked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the Government calling up for military service a considerable number more men from agriculture after 1st January, 1917, the War Office have any special scheme of substitution of labour for agriculture, by which only men with previous practical experience in agriculture will be substituted where men are being taken from farms on which they are essential for the efficient cultivation of the land?
§ Mr. FORSTERThe Government's scheme of substitution is the substitution of certain classes of soldiers who are not fit for general service, and who were engaged in agriculture before joining the Army, for men who are fit for general service, but are still engaged in agriculture.
§ 44. Captain C. BATHURSTasked the Secretary of State for War whether substitutes for existing farm workers provided through the tribunals from the Army at home will remain under military control and revert to the Army in the event of the particular employment to which they are allotted coming to an end, or whether it will be open to these substitutes to leave such employment at their will for some other employment which may appear to them more attractive or remunerative?
§ Mr. FORSTERA man relegated to the Reserve as a substitute remains in civil life as long as he engages in a particular occupation. If he leaves that occupation for something else which appears to him more attractive or remunerative, he is clearly not fulfilling the condition under which he has been relegated to the Reserve.
§ Captain BATHURSTDoes that mean that it is open, to him to pass from the service of one employer to the service of another employer without passing back under military control and without his commanding officer having anything to say as to his prospective employment?
§ Mr. FORSTERI understand my hon. and gallant Friend asks if it is possible for a man to pass from one employer to another?
§ Captain BATHURSTYes.
§ Mr. FORSTERYes, he can pass from one employer to another as long as he continues to be engaged in the same branch of industry.
§ Captain BATHURSTIs it not a fact that it will entirely defeat the whole object of this arrangement if a person who does not need him so much in the national interest obtains him to the detriment of one who is doing his duty to the public to the utmost?
§ Mr. FORSTERI do not think that it does defeat the object.
§ Mr. PRINGLEHave they to be in the service of a particular employer?
§ Mr. G. FABERIf he is allotted to a particular district ought he not to be kept in that district, where, presumably, he is wanted more than in another district?
§ Mr. FORSTERIn any case there are more employers than one in one district.
§ Mr. PRINGLEWill the hon. Gentleman take steps to see that no soldier is made the servant of a particular employer?
§ Mr. FORSTERYes, I think that is being done. As I have said before, we do not compel a man to serve one particular master. We release a man to be engaged in some particular form of employment, and as long as he is engaged in that particular form of employment it is open to him to pass from the service of one employer to the service of another employer.
§ Mr. HOUSTONHave not a number of employers been prosecuted for inducing a man to leave another employer's service?