§ Mr. Ovendenasked the Secretary of State for Employment how many firms with over 20 employees in the Gravesend area and the Medway employment district currently employ more than 3 per cent. of disabled workers; how many are exempt from the quota obligations; how many are neither exempt nor complying with the quota obligations; and how these figures compare with the position 12 months previously and with the national figures.
§ Mr. John GrantI am informed by the Manpower Services Commission that the information requested is compiled annually at 1 June and is as follows in respect of firms which employ 20 or more employees and are therefore subject to quota:
of unemployed disabled workers in the Gravesend employment office area, the Medway employment district and Great Britain, together with those of 12 months previously, are as shown in the table below. Figures are given separately for those unemployed disabled persons registered under the Disabled Persons Employment Act 1944, and for those unemployed disabled persons who have chosen not to register under the Act. It is not possible to give a percentage for those people not registered.
303W
Gravesend Employment Office Area Medway Employment District Great Britain 8 9 8 9 8 9 February 1979 February 1978 February 1979 February 1978 February 1979 February 1978 Unemployed registered disabled people 154 155 879 1,050 65,448 73,861 Unemployed registered disabled people as a percentage of register of disabled persons 17.1 17.2 16.8 19.6 13.2 13.9 Unemployed unregistered disabled people 105 108 516 476 74,041 73,543
§ Mr. Ovendenasked the Secretary of State for Employment how many capital grants have been approved in 1978 in the Gravesend area and the Medway employment district, respectively, to assist employers in the employment of disabled workers; what were the total sums involved; and what are the figures for England and Wales as a whole.
§ Mr. John GrantI am informed by the Manpower Services Commission that no applications for such grants have been received in 1978 from employers in either the Gravesend area or the Medway employment district, and therefore no payments have been made. In 1978, 43 capital grants totalling £30,344 were approved for payment to employers in England and Wales.
§ Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for Employment what was the latest annual figure for the number of disabled people placed in jobs by the Disablement Resettlement Service; and how many disablement resettlement officers were employed by the Employment Services Agency of the Manpower Services Commission during the same year.
§ Mr. John GrantI am informed by the Manpower Services Commission—MSC—that in the year ending March 1979, placings of disabled people into employment by the disablement resettlement officers—DROs—of the Manpower Services Commission are expected to be between 58,000 and 59,000. This compares very favourably with the figures of 54,000 in 1977–78 and 50,500 in 1976–77. I believe that such encouraging results, achieved in prevailing economic circumstances, are in part a reflection of increasing DRO contact with employers, arising from the 1977"positive policies"campaign of the MSC, supported by the national advisory council on employment of disabled people304W and endorsed by the Government. Moreover, these figures exclude the increasing numbers of disabled people who have been placed through the self-service facilities provided in MSCs jobcentres.
The number of DROs employed by the employment service division of the MSC in 1978–79 was 512. This number has remained constant over the past two years.
§ Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for Employment what proportion of those completing courses in employment rehabilitation centres in 1978 had (a) found a job and (b) moved on to a further training course within three months of completing their course.
§ Mr. John GrantI am informed by the Manpower Services Commission that the latest available information relates to the period January to March 1978. Of those who completed employment rehabilitation courses in that period 26.3 per cent. found jobs within three months; 7.6 per cent. were in training and a further 110 per cent. had been accepted for training but had not get started their courses.
Further figures covering the period April-September should soon be available and I shall write to my hon. Friend with this information as soon as possible.
§ Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will update the table given in the written answer, given to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Perry Barr, Official Report, 28 February 1978, c. 169–70, regarding sheltered employment of disabled persons to the latest date for which figures are available.
§ Mr. John GrantI am informed by the Manpower Services Commission that the information requested is as follows: 305W
306W307W
Sheltered workshops administered by Wales Scotland Southern and South-East South-West and Western Eastern West Midlands East Midlands Yorks. and Humber.* North-West North Great Britain Local authorities 312 324 376 499 79 268 84 311 232 130 2,615 Voluntary bodies 130 613 627 213 158 169 111 254 306 62 2,643 Remploy factories (including home-workers) 1,258 817 875 579 178 599 329 947 1,330 982 7,894 Sheltered industrial groups—formerly known as industrial enclaves — 7 19 18 16 — 29 25 34 11 159 *The Yorkshire and Humberside figure includes South Yorkshire, previously given in the East Midlands figure.
§ Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for Employment how many prosecutions have been brought under the Disabled Persons (Employment) Acts of 1944 and 1958 since 1944: and what has been the outcome of each prosecution.
Year Relevant section of 1944 Act Result 1948 … Section 14—Failure to keep, preserve or produce proper records. Case dismissed. 1948 … Section 9(2)—Taking or offering to take into employment a person not registered as disabled—contrary to the provisions of the quota scheme. Admonition. 1949 … Section 9(2)—Taking or offering to take into employment a person not registered as disabled—contrary to the provisions of the quota scheme. Fine of £20 imposed. 1949 … Section 9(2)—Taking or offering to take into employment a person not registered as disabled—contrary to the provisions of the quota scheme. Fine of £2 imposed on each of two charges. 1964 … Section 9(5)—Discharging without reasonable cause a registered disabled person—contrary to the provisions of the quota scheme. Fine of £50 imposed. 1973 … Section 9(5)—Discharging without reasonable cause a registered disabled person—contrary to the provisions of the quota scheme. Fine of £100 imposed. 1974 … Section 9(5)—Discharging without reasonable cause a registered disabled person—contrary to the provisions of the quota scheme. Case dismissed. 1975 … Section 9(2) Fine of £5 imposed on each of two charges. 1975 … Section 9(2) Fine of £25 imposed on each of two charges. 1975 … Section 9(2) Fine of £100 imposed on each of two charges.
§ Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for Employment how many employers are not fulfilling the requirement to employ 3 per cent. registered disabled; how many permits have been issued to such employers; how many have failed to apply for a permit during the previous 12 months; and how many of the total number of permits were block permits and how many were individual
Year Number and percentage of employers not fulfilling the requirement to employ 3 per cent. registered disabled 1960 … 24,974 38.2 per cent. 1961 … 25,340 38.6 per cent. 1962* … 15,389 42.1 per cent. 1963* … 14,899 42.1 percent. * In 1962 and 1963 a survey was made in respect of all firms with more than 500 staff but only a selection of firms with less than 500 staff—but which nevertheless had a quota obligation. The figures for the years 1962 and 1963 are therefore percentages based on the number of firms reviewed in those years and not on all firms subject to quota. 308W
Number and percentage of employers not fulfilling the requirement to employ 3 per cent. registered disabled Year To whom permits had been issued during the previous 12 months To whom permits had not been issued during the previous 12 months 1964 … 15,479 23.9 per cent. 13,792 21.3 per cent. 1965 … 18,510 27.9 per cent. 12,528 18.9 per cent. 1966 … 19,662 30.0 per cent. 11,999 16.3 per cent. 1967 … 21,228 32.5 per cent. 12,948 19.8 per cent. 1968 … 21,021 32.9 per cent. 13,298 20.8 per cent. 1969 … 20,647 32.6 per cent. 14,455 22.9 per cent. 1970 … 22,150 34.9 per cent. 14,246 22.4 per cent. 1971 … 21,534 34.4 per cent. 14,848 23.7 per cent. 1972 … 25,875 43.0 per cent. 8,919 14.3 per cent. 1973 … 25,554 44.2 per cent. 8,225 14.2 per cent. 1974 … 23,030 41.8 per cent. 10,076 18.2 per cent.
§ Mr. John GrantI am informed by the Manpower Services Commission that 10 employers have been prosecuted since 1944. The nature of each prosecution and the result were as follows:—
permits at the latest available date for each year since 1960.
§ Mr. John GrantI am advised by the Manpower Services Commission that information is not available in the precise form requested. Such information as is available is set out in the tables below and relates to employers of 20 or more workers as at 1 June in each year:
309W
Number and percentage of employers not fulfilling the requirement to employ 3 per cent. of registered disabled To whom permits had been issued during the previous 12 months To whom permits had not been issued during the previous 12 months Year Bulk permits Individual permits Both bulk and individual permits 1975 … 19,605 1,577 429 10,729 36.9 per cent. 3.0 per cent. 0.8 per cent. 20.2 per cent. 1976 … 19,838 1,247 273 9,707 39.1 per cent. 2.5 per cent. 0.5 per cent. 19.1 per cent. 1977 … 20,258 1,141 304 10,060 40.1 per cent. 2.3 per cent. 0.6 per cent. 19.9 per cent. 1978 … 20,425 919 441 8,661 42.4 per cent. 1.9 per cent. 0.9 per cent. 18.0 per cent. Employers not employing their quota of registered disabled people are required to obtain permits only if they wish to engage workers who are not registered as disabled.
§ Mr. Rookerasked the Secretary of State for Employment what were the total numbers of disabled people employed in sheltered employment by (a) Remploy, (b) workshops for the blind, (c) local authorities and (d) voluntary organisations; and what was the number employed in enclaves, at the latest date for which figures are available.
§ Mr. John GrantI shall reply to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.
§ Mr. Teddy Taylorasked the Secretary of State for Employment if he is satisfied with the working of the legislation on the employment of disabled persons and if he has any plans for further legislation.
§ Mr. John GrantThe Manpower Services Commission is currently reviewing the quota scheme—which was established by the Disabled Persons (Employment) Act 1944—with a view to submitting recommendations to the Secretary of State as to the best way of helping disabled people to get and keep worthwhile jobs. The views of interested parties will be sought by means of a discussion paper which will be issued by the employment service division of the Commission by about the end of April.
§ Mr. Ovendenasked the Secretary of State for Employment what percentage of disabled workers is employed by the Med-way and Gravesend borough councils, respectively.
§ Mr. John GrantI am informed by the Manpower Services Commission that the information requested is not available in respect of all disabled people. However, at 1 June 1978, the latest date for which information is available, 2 per cent. of310W the total staff of Medway borough council comprised registered disabled people. The figure for the new Gravesham borough council—which includes the former borough of Gravesend—was 2.8 per cent.