§ 118. Mr. ROBERT RICHARDSONasked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the assistant traffic superintendent at the Belfast Telephone Exchange made a private call on a subscriber's line on the 11th January last; that the call originated at a vacant board at the Exchange, and that this gentleman alleged that jocose remarks were made to him, and on the following day singled out two operators in connection therewith; can he state why the officer in charge was not asked for a report on the incident until the 21st February, and will he indicate the nature of the report then made; and whether, in view of the nature of this statement and the emphatic denial of the operators, he will require the Postmaster-Surveyor to withdraw the unfavourable expression of opinion he has made in regard to these two ladies?
§ The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Sir William Joynson-Hicks)The facts are as stated in the first part of the question. The officer in charge was questioned at the time, but stated that she was some distance away from the operators concerned. It is clear from the reports that one of the two operators committed grave irregularities; and I see no reason for taking exception to the Postmaster-Surveyor's warning that serious consequences would follow if a similar case of irregular working were definitely brought home to either of them.