HC Deb 28 April 1926 vol 194 c2014

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that there are many established men, discharged at the age of 60, whose applications to extend their service for a few months in order to complete an extra full year's pensionable service, are refused; and whether, when this concession cannot be granted, he will consider giving these men a refund of the weekly deduction from the wages of established men in respect of the odd months of their service which are not counted towards their pension?


The retention of established men over the normal age for retirement involves the payment of wages in addition to enabling the men to increase their service for the calculation of retiring allowances. Men who can be economically employed may be and frequently are retained beyond the age of 60 years for periods not exceeding three months to complete an additional year of pensionable service; but there can be no general undertaking to allow such retention, and where it is not allowed there can be no additional payment, in respect of any difference between the wages of men on the hired and established lists, respectively, for the odd months of service not counted for pension.


Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this is not a request that men generally should be allowed to stay on; and is it not the case that if they have not completed a full year's service they get no advantage whatever of the contributions from their wages towards pension, and, further, is it not very unjust in particular cases that they should not be allowed to complete their time or alternatively have some refund of the monies deducted?


I will consider that matter.