§ 4. Mr. Woofasked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that the practice of many industrial firms in keeping a week's wages in hand imposes unnecessary hardship on men how, having been out of work, take up employment with such firms, that many such firms refuse to make advances to employees in respect of the payment of wages due to them, and that in consequence many men have to seek help from the National Assistance Board; and if he will consult with employers on this matter with a view to introducing legislation to protect workmen against such hardship.
§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour (Mr. Peter Thomas)This problem was discussed with representatives of employers and trade unions on my right hon. Friend's National Joint Advisory Council in 1952, and the British Employers' Confederation took steps to bring it to the attention of employers. Subsequently there was a marked drop in the number of men who had to seek help on this account from the National Assistance Board. The situation is kept under review and does not appear to call for further action at the present time. If, however, the hon. Member would like to write to me about any difficulties which are arising, I shall be glad to look into them.
§ Mr. WoofI will take advantage of the hon. Gentleman's offer. Is he aware that this Question arises out of com- 4 plaints made to me following a recent statement by the Chairman of the National Assistance Board to the Magistrates' Association at Carlisle? Does he appreciate that thousands of workmen endeavour to retain their dignity, pride and honesty but on some unfortunate occasions are embarrassed by being forced to go to the National Assistance Board because of the attitude of some employers who refuse to grant their request for part of their lying-on wages? Is he aware that this creates undue hardship and a demand on public moneys? Finally, will the Parliamentary Secretary agree to worth-while consultations taking place with his right hon. Friend the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance in an endeavour to improve the position?
§ Mr. ThomasI said that I should be pleased to hear from the hon. Member about any cases he has in mind. I realise that the practice of holding the first week's wage and refusing to make an advance may cause hardship in certain cases and, indeed, as the hon. Member said, may cause some wasteful Government expenditure. I hope that employers who keep a week's wages in hand and do not make advances will reconsider their policy in instances where this causes hardship.
Mr. LeeI join the hon. Member in that last sentiment. Does he believe that it is necessary for employers to retain a week's wages in hand? I understand the old basis for it, when the office equipment was not as modern as it is today. It was then very difficult. Perhaps he will also consider putting to the N.J.A.C. the general thought that employers may care to look again at their arrangements to see whether they can cut down the number of days' pay they keep in hand.
§ Mr. ThomasThis matter was considered by the N.J.A.C. and, following that, there was a request by the B.E.C. to its constituent members in 1952. After that request the number of cases was cut down considerably. Apart from the complaint of the hon. Member for Blaydon (Mr. Woof), there have been no complaints since then and we have no reason to believe that the improvement has not been maintained.