§ Mr. BATEYasked the Minister of Labour the number of persons in the County of Durham who have applied for and been refused unemployment benefit since 1st January, 1925, including those whose benefit has been stopped?
§ Mr. BETTERTON,pursuant to his reply [OFFICIAL REPORT, 17th December, 1925, Col. 1662], supplied the following information:
During the period 15th January to l6th November, 1925, the number of applications for extended benefit considered by local employment committees in the County of Durham was 276,449. Of these, 260,835 were admitted and 15,614 were recommended for disallowance. Statistics of applications for standard benefit are not available.
§ Mr. KELLYasked the Minister of Labour the number of persons who applied for extended benefit in each month of the present year at the Roch-dale Employment Exchange, and the number and percentage of cases in which benefit was refused?
§ Mr. BETTERTONpursuant to hits reply [OFFICIAL REPORT, 9th December, 1925, col. 438], supplied the following information:
APPLICATIONS for Extended Benefit considered by the Rochdale Local Employment Committee. Period. Cases Considered. Cases Rejected. Rejections as percentage of Case Considered. 1925. 13th Jan. to 9th Feb. 1,025 59 5.8 10th Feb. to 9th Mar. 875 29 4 .5 10th Mar. to 13th Apl. 1,137 39 2.6 14th Apl. to 11th May 972 31 3. 2 18th May to 8th June 955 86 9.0 9th June to 13th July 1,323 86 6.5 14th July to 24th Aug. 1,652 65 3.9 25th Aug. to 14th Sept. 1,042 168 16.1 15th Sept. to 12th Oct. 1,731 485 28.0 13th Oct. to 16th Nov. 1,390 234 16.8 Total for period 13th Jan. to 16th Nov. 12,102 1,282 10.6
§ Mr. RILEYasked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that Mr. Joe 2171W Morley, of 30, Albion Street, Batley, who is now 69 years of age and who had worked for one firm for 40 years, but is now unemployed, has recently had his unemployment pay stopped on the ground that there was no prospect of his being able to obtain employment; that the work which this man did was a special job known as leak tank work; that there are very few openings for such work, and that it is practically impossible for him to get a similar job; and will he, under the special circumstances, exercise discretion and have the man's unemployment benefit restored?
§ Mr. BETTERTONThe claim was for extended benefit. My right hon. Friend has no discretion to grant such benefit when the statutory conditions are not fulfilled. The local employment committee came to the conclusion that the conditions were not fulfilled, and, after considering all the facts, I hold the same view.
§ Mr. LANSBURYasked the Minister of Labour how many women entitled to standard benefit have been refused such benefit during each month from 1st January to 31st October this year, inclusive, also the number of women re-
A.—APPLICATIONS FOR BENEFIT FROM WOMEN in Great Britain, disallowed by the Chief Insurance Officer during the period January to October, 1925. Reasons for Disallowance. Jan. Feb. Mar. April. May. June. July. Aug. Sept. Oct. Applications not made in the prescribed manner. 19 13 22 14 12 12 11 7 12 9 Not unemployed 119 109 77 111 87 117 182 295 90 72 Not capable of work 413 403 519 485 482 387 192 225 300 239 Not available for work 553 374 489 421 370 343 511 167 193 106 Refusal of suitable employment. 2,146 2,089 1,482 1,170 1,127 915 l,940 1,345 2,275 1,336 Not genuinely seeking work. 2,341 2,745 5,139 6,896 7,835 8,161 13,406 10,487 21,160 12,322 Failure to attend courses of instruction. 18 13 5 17 6 3 3 3 3 11 Trade disputes 36 20 682 1,060 273 86 151 1,812 312 54 Misconduct 1,790 1,599 1,761 1,612 2,091 1,615 2,975 1,629 2,794 1,895 Left previous work voluntarily without just Clause. 3,410 3,432 3,661 3,325 3,349 2,870 4,452 2,592 4,384 3,779 Inmates of prison, work-house, etc — — 2 — — 2 23 — 1 — In receipt of Old Age Pension. 2 10 3 1 1 — 5 4 2 3 In receipt of wages or payment. 246 239 311 303 324 257 303 220 356 336 Other reasons 11 3 17 18 10 6 6 10 52 5 Total for month 11,104 11,049 14,170 15,433 16,067 14,774 24 470 18,796 31,934 20,167 NOTE:—The figures include applications for Extended Benefit as well as Standard Benefit but the relative proportions of these two types of cases are not known.
2172Wfused extended benefit during the same period; and will he at the same time state the reasons for disallowance, giving the totals for each month.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND,pursuant to his reply [OFFICIAL REPORT, 7th December. Col. 34], supplied the following information
The tables below relate respectively to disallowances of benefit by the chief insurance officer and by the local employment committees.
With regard to the first table, i.e., disallowances by the chief insurance officer, it should be noted that they were not necessarily final; there was in each case a- right of appeal to a Court of Referees, and in certain circumstances to the Umpire. Separate statistics of the results of appeal in women's cases are, however, not available. Taking all disallowances (mules and females) together the number of claims allowed on appeal was between. 11 and 12 per cent.
It should further be noted that the figures in both tables relate to separate applications, and not necessarily to different individuals.
2173W
B.—APPLICATIONS FOE EXTENDED BENEFIT FROM WOMEN refused by Local Employment Committees in Great Britain during the period 13th January to 16th November, 1925. Reasons for Disallowance 13th Jan to 9th Feb.,1925. 10th Feb. to 9th March, 1925. 10th mar. to 13th April, 1925. 4th April to 11th may, 1925. 12th May to 8th June, 1925. 9th June to 13th July, 1925. 14th July to 24th Aug., 1925. 25th Aug., 14th Sept., 1925. 15th Sept., to 12th Oct., 1925. 13th Oct. to 16th Nov., 1925. Not normally insurable and not seeking to obtain a livelihood by means of insurable employment. 2,408 2,305 2,190 1,570 1,720 2,246 1,778 969 1,488 2,047 Insurable employment not likely to be available. 648 837 1,019 851 755 917 1,001 414 331 444 Not a reasonable period of insurable employment during the preceding two years. 3,518 3,090 3,232 2,430 2,248 3,404 3,689 1,896 2,314 2,880 Not making every reasonable effort to secure suitable whole time employment. 5,503 5,435 6,595 5,475 5,220 5,548 6,971 2,726 2,937 3,342 Single person residing with relatives to whom they can look for support. Not operative during this period. 1,604 2,771 2,243 Married women living with husbands to whom they can look for support. 2,649 4,038 3,537 Short time workers earning sufficient for maintenance. 661 1,040 729 Aliens — — — — — — — 9 7 3 Recommendations postponed for a definite period. 57 106 111 106 167 167 231 657 657 685 Total 12,134 11,773 l3,147 10,432 10,110 12,282 l3,670 11,585 15,583 l5,910
§ Mr. STEPHENasked the Minister of Labour the number of men and women, respectively, who have been placed in employment through Employment Exchanges during the last three months;
2174W
NUMBER of men and women placed in employment by Employment Exchanges in Great Britain during the three months ended 9th November, 1925, and the numbers on the registers at 7th September, 5th October and 9th November, respectively:— — Number placed in employment.✶ Number on Registers at end of period.† Men. Women. Men. Women. 1925 Five weeks ended 7th September … 59,566 28,641 1,054,141 215,488 Four weeks ended 5th October … 47,701 24,329 1,035,752 192,031 Five weeks ended 9th November … 66,973 30,118 963,319 171,737 ✶ These figures include placings in which the work of the Exchanges was limited, e.g., obtaining for an employer former employees or placing the same men on relief work in alternate weeks. These numbered in the three periods Men 13,796, 11,525 and 15,232 respectively, and Women 7,120, 6,062 and 8,014 respectively. On the other hand, the figures are exclusive of placings of men in casual occupations, such as dock labourers, coal porters, which numbered 2,453 in the first period above, 1,859 in the second period and 2,273 in the third. †These figures include considerable numbers of short time workers, etc., who, though unemployed at the date of the return, were still in the service of an employer. and the number of people registered as unemployed during the same period?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND, pursuant to his reply (OFFICIAL REPORT, 16th December, Col. 1446), supplied the following information
2175W
§ Mr. STEPHENasked the Minister of Labour the number of men and women, respectively, who have claimed unemployment benefit during each of the last three months at Bridgeton Employment Exchange, Parkhead Employment Exchange, Southside Employment Exchange, and
APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENDED BENEFIT considered by the Local Committees at Bridgeton, Parkhead, Glasgow Southside and Glasgow Central Employment Exchanges respectively during the period 25th August to 16th November, 1925. — 25th August to 14th September. 13th September to 12th October. 13th October to 16th November. Men. Women. Men. Women. Men. Women. Bridgeton—: Considered … … 609 364 1,176 628 1,393 554 Admitted … … 433 239 913 480 1,077 447 Disallowed … … 176 125 263 148 316 107 Parkhead— Considered … … 948 150 1,486 308 2,024 297 Admitted … … 738 91 1,397 182 1,754 198 Disallowed … … 210 59 89 126 270 99 Glasgow Southside— Considered … … 1,944 463 2,045 322 5,480 828 Admitted … … 1,840 268 1,874 207 4,589 509 Disallowed … … 95 195 171 115 891 319 Glasgow Central— Considered … … 1,745 407 2,051 468 2,569 630 Admitted … … 1,452 222 1,726 331 2,105 395 Disallowed … … 293 185 325 137 464 235 Statistics of applications for Standard Benefit are not available.