HC Deb 23 June 1925 vol 185 cc1314-5W
Mr. W. BAKER

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that a Northwich sorting clerk and telegraphist has been appointed overseer at Holyhead; that an officer who has been acting overseer at Holyhead for 15 years has been passed over; that two vacancies for acting superintendents at Stafford have been filled by officers from Holyhead and Crewe; that a dozen eligible officers at Stafford have been passed over without applications for the posts having been invited; that such promotions are not in accordance with the agreement on reciprocal promotion; and of the dissatisfaction that has resulted among the staffs; and whether he will state why such action was taken, and if it is the intention to carry out the terms of the agreement on reciprocal promotion?

Viscount WOLMER

I am aware of the circumstances to which the hon. Member refers. It was necessary to fill the vacancies in question at Stafford and Holyhead by the transfer of men from other offices, as there were no fully qualified local candidates available. I cannot agree that the action taken was not in accord with the agreement regarding reciprocal promotions. The qualifications of all the eligible local officers were fully considered in each case, and there was no necessity for inviting applications as suggested.

Mr. BAKER

asked the Postmaster-General whether he will inquire into the recent promotion to the overseers' grade at Hanley Branch Office (telegraphs), Stoke-on-Trent; and whether he is aware that the vacancy, together with another for assistant superintendent, was declared on 31st March, 1925, one day before the agreed promotion report came into force; and that under the promotion report the particular appointment would not have been possible in view of the fact that several fully-qualified senior men were available for the appointment?

Sir W. MITCHELL-THOMSON

The promotion to the post for an overseer (telegraphs) at Stoke-on-Trent which became vacant on the 31st March last was correctly made under the old procedure, and I can find no ground for the suggestion that a different selection would have been made if the case had been due to be treated under the procedure prescribed in the report of the Sub-Committee on Promotion. None of the officers senior to the officer actually selected was fully qualified for promotion.