HC Deb 22 March 1923 vol 161 cc2804-5W

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that 20 members of the Lincoln Boilermakers, Iron and Steel Shipbuilders Society, were recently asked by the Lincoln Employment Exchange to accept employment at Ilkeston at 52s. a week; that this was regarded as insufficient by married men who had families to keep, as living from home would cost them approximately 25s. a week, and that in 13 cases there were refusals, and that for the remaining seven who were passed to go to Ilkeston there were only two vacancies; whether the 13 men who refused to go to Ilkeston will be disallowed any benefits; and with what object 20 men were asked to go to Ilkeston for two vacancies, and 13 who refused have been disallowed benefits?


The claims to unemployment benefit of 14 riveters registered at the Lincoln Employment Exchange were disallowed by the Insurance Officer because the men refused to be submitted to two vacancies at Ilkeston which could not be filled by the local or neighbouring exchanges. The question whether the statutory conditions for the receipt of benefit are satisfied in any particular case is determined under the Unemployment Insurance; Act, 1920, by the Insurance Officer, Court of Referees and the Umpire. In 13 of the cases of refusal appeals have been heard, and in three of them the claims have been allowed in view of special circumstances. The other cases have been disallowed by the Umpire whose decisions are final and not subject to review by me. The remainder of the men interviewed consented to the submission of their particulars, and one was accepted and is now in employment. With regard to the last part of the question, I would point out that if a man who is drawing benefit refuses even to be submitted for a job which is primả facie suitable, it is necessary to test the question whether he satisfies the statutory requirement of showing that he is unable to obtain suitable employment.