§ Lord H. CAVENDISH - BENTINCKasked the Postmaster-General whether he will state the list of scheduled offences in his Department which are punishable by fines; whether, in addition to the list of standardised punishments, discretionary powers are given to impose fines for offences which are not clearly defined in the schedule; whether he will state the offences for which stoppage of one or more days' pay is authorised; whether the imposition of a fine is regarded as finally exonerating an officer for a particular offence, or whether such punishments 1937W have in addition a cumulative effect for arrestment of increment; and whether, in the case of figure mistakes in telegrams, the actual message form on which the error is alleged to have occurred is always produced before a fine is imposed?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELFrom time to time irregularities in the performance of duty have been scheduled as normally punishable by small fines or periods of compulsory extra duty, and I will furnish the Noble Lord with details of these. The list, however, does not purport to be an exhaustive statement of all offences for which fines may be imposed. The complexity of Post Office work would make the compilation of an exhaustive list almost impossible, especially in view of1938W the fact that the degree of blame attaching to the same irregularity must frequently vary with the circumstances of individual cases. The imposition of a single fine would not of itself entail deferment of an officer's annual increment, but should such irregularities be frequently repeated in the course of an incremental year, the question of deferment of increment would necessarily arise. The stoppage of one or more days' pay is a punishment reserved for serious offences, and would normally result in the deferment of the ensuing increment. It is the general practice to let an officer who has made a figure error in a telegram see the actual message form before a fine is imposed.