CIVIL SUPERANNUATION, COMPENSATION ALLOWANCES, AND GRATUITIES. (Hansard, 1 May 1923)

§ Major Sir BERTRAM FALLE

I wish to raise one or two points on this Vote regard to pensions granted to dockyard men. These pensions are paid subject to certain conditions. The pensioner must reside in the British Isles, he must have attained to 60 years of age, or retire on account of mental or physical infirmity. These pensions do not amount to more than £150 a year in the case of an unmarried man, and £200 a year in the case of a married man. All those people who are in receipt of these superannuation allowances consider that this in many cases may be unfair to them. The fact that they must reside in the British Isles prevents the older people migrating as they might wish to do with their dependants. If they leave this country they become immediately ineligible for the amount, and, although the sum is not a large one, it is frequently sufficient to keep a family together. Then they consider that at the age of 60 they ought to be given that sum, whatever it is, without any further trouble, and they also think the limitation of their means to £150 if unmarried, and £200 if married, is a little unfair. [HON. MEMBERS" Agreed!"] I hope the Government will agree to it also, and that those three causes of trouble will be removed from a very deserving number of people.

There is another point I wish to raise, and that is the question of workmen's compensation. There are several Compensation Acts, the last being in 1913. Compensation is based, of course, on the pre-War wage, and it is absolutely and entirely insufficient. The compensation was fair according to the standards which prevailed before the War, but now if you base it on the pre-War wage the compensation is quite insufficient., and the Government have shown no great alacrity to bring in a new Act. There was, as you are aware, a special Act for the dockyards. It was supposed to be not less 1285 good than the Workmen's Compensation Act itself, but even as it is, if it be a shade better than the old Act, it is not enough for the present day, and I wish to urge the Government as much as I can to take this matter in hand as soon as possible. If a man lost the fingers of his hand he was given 4s. 6d. a week. If he be a skilled man, he can no longer follow his trade, and 4s. 6d. a week does not help him even towards his rates, and certainly not towards his rent.

I know a case in which a man had his shoulder blade broken. When the shoulder blade healed, they told him that he was practically as good a man as before, and he is in receipt of 5s. 6d. a week. He cannot raise his hand above his arm, and, as he is an engine fitter, he naturally cannot continue at his old trade. 5s. 6d. a week given to a man in that condition is absolutely ludicrous, and it ought promptly to be remedied. There is another point I wish to make. There were men who retired from the yards in 1919. Some were retired at 75 per cent. of their pay and others were retired at 40 per cent. The established men retired at 75 per cent., while most of the hired men retired on 40 per cent. But not all the hired men, for by a mistake which does not usually occur at the Admiralty—by a small mistake a number of hired men who should have received 40 per cent. on leaving at November, 1919, were given 75 per cent. If we lived in a perfect world, A, B and C would not complain if D and E received more money than themselves, but in this world as it is, if one man out of 20 gets a larger increase of pay and compensation than the 19 then the other 19 think they have been rather badly treated. That is one of the things in human nature that you cannot fight against. Although the matter has been before the Admiralty for months, I do not say years, the men who are aggrieved are still active, and they are still coming up 'here in deputations. Their object is to get the Admiralty, if possible, to accept their views, and at any rate to investigate the matter a little more closely.

The differentiation between the hired men and the establishment men is particularly unfortunate in this matter, because all these men worked faithfully during the War, and many of them wished to go out and fight, but they were not 1286 allowed to do so. They did not get leave to go to the War. It is true, of course, that while they were there they received large—in fact, immensely large wages, but that is no reason why, when they retire at the age of 60 or 65, they should not receive compensation—it is rather a question of bonus than compensation—that they should not be bonused up to the full amount to which they are entitled. The establishment men do not see why they should get less than these men. The question is a complicated one, because in the early stages of the War some of the 40 per cent. men benefited more than the men getting 75 per cent., but that is very exceptional. I hope the Admiralty will pay attention to this matter.