§ 37. Mr. W. BAKERasked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that dissatisfaction exists among the staff at Croydon on account of the appointment of an indoor officer to the position of inspector of postmen, with the consequent passing over of the assistant inspector, who was nominated by the staff and by the chief inspector; that the efficiency of the staff's nominee was not questioned; that urgent revision work will fall to him in spite of his non-appointment; that the staff are apprehensive that the promotion has been influenced by considerations other than merit, and that it indicates a departure from the policy of the Postmaster-General to promote outdoor officers to outdoor supervising posts; and whether, in the circumstances, he will have the whole question reconsidered?
§ Sir W. MITCHELL-THOMSONI am aware of the circumstances of the case. The duties of the vacant post involve 1787 an important share in the organisation and control of a large and expanding staff, and it was essential, in the interests of efficiency, to appoint a man with unquestioned qualifications. The officer whose name was put forward by the staff, whilst efficient on his own duties, had not sufficient experience of control and organisation for the higher post. It is not the case that he will be called on to perform work not proper to his grade on account of the new appointment. The selection was based solely on merit, and implies no departure from the recognised policy of filling outdoor superintending posts as far as possible by the promotion of outdoor staff.
§ Mr. BAKERWill the right hon. Gentleman consider the possibility of giving a compensatory appointment to the outdoor staff who have been deprived of this opportunity?
§ Sir W. MITCHELL-THOMSONI should like notice of that question.