§ Mr. GROVESasked the Minister of Labour if he will investigate the circumstances attending the refusal of unemployment benefit to Mrs. T. N. Henderson, 20, Odessa Road, Forest Gate, No. 18,456, who was stood off from a local firm on account of slackness of work, and has submitted documentary evidence of her application for employment at many local firms; and whether he is aware that, notwithstanding the evidence, the applicant has been refused benefit on the ground of not genuinely seeking work?
§ Sir A. STEEL- MAITLANDThe decision in cases of this kind rests with the insurance office, court of referees and umpire, in accordance with the statutory provisions. Mrs. Henderson made a claim to benefit on the 2nd June last, and from that date until the 17th November, the evidence submitted to these authorities of her search for employment did not satisfy them that she fulfilled the statutory condition which requires an applicant to be genuinely seeking work. I have no power to interfere with these decisions. I understand that the claim was allowed from the 17th November last, and benefit has since been paid to Mrs. Henderson.
§ Mr. LANSBURYasked the Minister of Labour why Miss A. L. Jeffrey was refused unemployment benefit by the Hackney Employment Exchange on the 11th November, on the ground that she was not genuinely seeking work, seeing that no evidence was placed before her by the officer who communicated the decision; and will he state the number of years Miss Jeffrey has paid into the fund, the amount of unemployment pay she has received from the fund, the date she last fell out of work and signed on, the date the authorities decided that she was not genuinely eeking work, and the evidence on which their decision was based?.
§ Mr. BETTERTON, pursuant to his reply (OFFICIAL REPORT, 9th December, 1925, Col. 437), supplied the following information:
1437WI assume that the hon. Member refers to the case of Mrs. A. L. Jeffrey, who has claimed benefit at the Stratford Exchange. Her claim was disallowed by the insurance officer on the ground that she was not genuinely seeking work. She appealed to a Court of Referees and the evidence satisfied the Court that Mrs. Jeffrey was making no effort to obtain other work, but was waiting to resume full employment with her old employer. They therefore upheld the insurance officer's disallowance, and the decision is final, unless Mrs. Jeffrey is a member of an association which appeals to the Umpire on her behalf.
Mrs. Jeffreyhas been an insured contributor since August, 1917, and paid contributions equivalent to about four years. She has received benefit in respect of 219 days during this period. Mrs. Jeffrey last fell out of employment on the 6th November; she claimed benefit on the 11th and her claim was disallowed as from the date on which it was made.
§ Mr. LANSBURYasked the Minister of Labour why Miss E. W. Edwards was refused her claim to unemployment benefit on 13th August, 10th October and 21st November on the ground that at the time of each application she was not genuinely seeking employment; what was the evidence laid before the Stepney Committee which led them to arrive at their decisions; and the number of years Miss Edwards has paid into the fund, and the total amount of unemployment benefit she has been paid during that periods?
§ Mr. BETTERTON, pursuant to his reply (OFFICIAL REPORT, 9th December, 1925, Col. 436), supplied the following information:
This claim was for standard benefit and was dealt with by the insurance officer and Court of Referees and not by the local employment committee. The evidence before the insurance officer when he disallowed the claims on the three dates given by the hon. Member was that she had made little effort to obtain employment; that, in the three months to the 20th August, she had made only two applications for employment, and that from that date to the 21st November she had made no personal applications whatever. Miss Edwards appealed against the disallowances by the insurance officer operating from the 13th and 29th August, 1438W and the case was heard by the Court of Referees at the Poplar Exchange on the 29th September. Miss Edwards admitted to the Court of Referees that in the previous week she had made no calls on employers whatever and that she had declined employment in Aldgate on the ground that the district was too rough, although she was prepared to accept employment in Poplar. The court upheld the insurance officer's decisions. Miss Edwards has been paying contributions since November, 1920, and has paid the equivalent of nearly four years' contributions. She has received benefit in respect of 262 days, but as benefit paid prior to 18th October, 1923, does not exhaust contributions, she has still 40 unexhausted contributions to her credit.
Mr. ROBINSONasked the Minister of Labour how many unemployed persons resident in the Elland Division of Yorkshire have been refused extended benefit under the Unemployment Insurance Act; and what is the number who have been refused benefit because they are living with their parents, because the wife is working, and because the husband is working, respectively?
§ Sir A. STEEL - MAITLANDThe number of claims to extended benefit recommended for disallowance by the Brighouse Local Employment Committee, which includes Elland and Greetland, was 320 during the period 25th August to 16th November, 1925. Of these 36 were in respect of single persons living with relatives, 30 in respect of married women living with husbands to whom they could look for support, and one in respect of a married man who could look to his wife for support. Separate figures for other parts of the Elland Division cannot be given, as they are included in the figures relating to the work of the local committees at Bradford, Halifax and Huddersfield.
§ Mr. BUCHANANasked the Minister of Labour the number of men and women who claimed unemployment benefit during the last three months; and the number of claims disallowed on the various statutory grounds, respectively?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDDuring the period 25th August to 16th November, 1,875,232 claims to benefit were made by men and 493,581 by women at
1439WEmployment Exchanges in Great Britain. During the same period 108,273 claims to extended benefit by men and 43,078 by women were recommended for disallowance by local employment committees. During the three months ended 30th November, 69,873 claims to benefit by males and 71,131 by females were dis-
TABLE A. Disallowance of claims to Benefit by the Chief Insurance Officer during the three months ended 30th November, 1925. Grounds for Disallowance. Males. Females. Claim not made in prescribed manner … … … … 117 28 Not unemployed … … … … 2,906 240 Not capable of work … … … … 1,020 795 Not available for work … … … … 223 414 Refusal of suitable employment … … … … 10,587 5,038 Not genuinely seeking work … … … … 13,236 44,524 Failure to attend Courses of Instruction … … … … 64 35 Trade disputes … … … … 2,701 404 Misconduct … … … … 16,137 6,669 Left voluntarily without just cause … … … … 19,897 11,822 Inmate of Prison, Workhouse, etc. … … … … 23 1 In receipt of Old Age Pension … … … … 162 10 In receipt of wages or payment … … … … 2,468 1,089 Other Reasons … … … … 332 62 Total … … … … 69,873 71,131 1440W
TABLE B. Applications for Extended Benefit, recommended for disallowances by Local Employment Committees in Great Britain during the period 25th August to 16tb November, 1925. Grounds for Disallowance. Men. Women. General Conditions. Not normally insurable and not seeking to obtain a livelihood by means of insurable employment 6,186 4,504 Insurable employment not likely to be available 4,658 1,189 Not a reasonable period of insurable employment during the preceding two years 44,658 7,090 Not making every reasonable effort to obtain suitable employment or not willing to accept suitable employment 19,860 9,005 Special Conditions. Single persons residing with relatives to whom they can look for support— (a) Age under 25 years 16,085 5,686 (b) 25 years and over 1,861 932 Married women living with husbands to whom they can look for support — 10,224 Married men living with wives to whom they can look for support 675 — Short-time workers earning sufficient for maintenance 7,610 2,430 Aliens 151 19 Postponed for a definite period 6,529 1,999 Total 108,273 43,078 allowed by the Chief Insurance Officer. These figures relate to separate claims and not necessarily to separate individuals. I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement showing the reasons for disallowance.
Following is the statement: