HC Deb 13 July 1948 vol 453 cc1000-2
34. Lieut.-Colonel Kingsmill

asked the Minister of National Insurance whether he is aware that outworkers in the gloving industry are classed as self-employed; and whether, as this operates as an undue burden upon them, he will amend the regulations to enable them to be classed as employees.

The Minister of National Insurance (Mr. James Griffiths)

Outworkers are not employed under a contract of service but under a contract for services and therefore fall into the class of self-employed persons under the Act. There is power to make regulations to modify the nomal classification in particular cases, but the National Insurance Advisory Committee recommended that outworkers were properly insurable as self-employed persons and, having regard to the difficulties of administering unemployment benefit in their case, should not be transferred by regulation to the employed class. I have accepted the Committee's view. An out-worker whose total income is less than £104 a year will be able to claim exception from liability to contribute but may, if he wishes, contribute as though he were a non-employed person. Many out-workers are married women who need not contribute whatever their earnings or income.

Lieut.-Colonel Kingsmill

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that until the new Act came into force the employers paid their share of the contribution, as did the employees, and that by his ruling now the employees' rate of weekly contribution will go from 1s. 10d. to 6s. 2d. a week? Is this not a very undue burden on them, and will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the matter?

Mr. Griffiths

It is a very difficult matter. Perhaps I might point out that these outworkers were never covered for unemployment insurance, and, that is what makes the difficulty now. I invited the National Insurance Advisory Committee to look carefully into this matter to see whether it would be possible to bring these people into Class I, as we did with the share fishermen, by making suitable arrangements about unemployment benefit. The Committee were satisfied that we could not do that, and because of that they made their recommendation, which I felt compelled to accept.

Brigadier Peto

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the great need for the encouragement of women to go into industry, and is he aware that this is hardly encouraging to women, who are in this case practically the whole of the outworkers, to go into that industry?

Mr. Griffiths

These women work at home and do not go into the industry. However, I appreciate the point which has been put. If there had been any possible way, or if any way is discovered, by which we could admit them into Class I, while avoiding the obvious abuse of the Unemployment Fund which is possible, I would gladly reconsider the matter.

Mr. Chetwynd

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many disabled persons are in this category and that serious hardship is being caused to them by this increase of contribution?

Mr. Griffiths

There would be an increased contribution into whichever class they came. That is part of the National Insurance Act. Let me put it quite frankly—the National Insurance Advisory Committee, who have a very wide experience in this matter, have definitely recommended that they cannot think of any practical arrangement which could be made to admit outworkers as Class I. We were able to do that in the case of the share fishermen, and if it were possible here I would be glad to do it, but after careful consideration the Advisory Committee cannot recommend it.

Mr. Beecham

Are we to understand from the Minister's reply that he is prepared to reconsider this grading? It is a very important matter because I understand the Government are trying to encourage work done in cottage homes for the benefit of the community, and is it not a fact that it will have an increasing effect on a large number of people working in rural areas?

Mr. Griffiths

I said I would be prepared to reconsider it if a practical scheme could be devised. So far none has been devised, and that is why I have had to accept the recommendation of the Committee.