asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether he is aware that allowances given to railway workers who have been dismissed since the railway amalgamation scheme are considered inadequate; that Thomas McGrane, 31 Upper Dominick Street, Dublin, who had forty-three years' service, was dismissed on April 18th, 1925, and was granted 7s. a week during the pleasure of the directors, which has not yet been paid; and whether he will make representations to the company with a view to increases of superannuation in such cases.
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - ALLOWANCES TO RAILWAY WORKERS.
SEAN O LAIDHIN
I have no control over the payment of superannuation to railway workers, and compensation for those discharged in consequence of amalgamation is fully provided for in the Third Schedule to the Railways Act, 1924. As I have explained in answer to a number of previous questions, that Schedule does not contemplate my intervention in any questions as to compensation arising under it.
Is the Minister aware that directors who were only twelve months acting as directors have received something like £450 per year? Contrast that with the case of a man who has had forty-three years' service. who was dismissed last April and was granted seven shillings a week, which was to be paid during the pleasure of the directors, but who has not yet been paid any money. If all the directors were to die, in such event it is quite possible the workers would not receive a penny at all. Surely the Minister does not consider it fair that such conditions should exist. Why should the Government allow such great hardship to be inflicted on the workers as is being inflicted under the amalgamation of railways?
I can only act as a result of and in accordance with legislation, as the Deputy must understand. No matter what my private opinions might be regarding the position as between directors and employes, it has no direct bearing on the case.
Has the Minister power to take up the case of any individual who has been victimised under an Act which has had the consent of the present Government, an Act which went through the Dáil and became law through the efforts of the present Government? Those employes have been victimised and penalised, and they have no redress. They have to rely on the directors.
Of course they have a redress. Any person who considers himself victimised has redress in the Third Schedule of the Railways Act. That does not call for my intervention.
Are you powerless to act on behalf of those employes? Have you no power to compel the railway directors to increase the superannuation given to employes?
I have already stated that; but that does not finish the matter, and it does not leave the parties without redress. They have redress in accordance with the Third Schedule of the Act. It is not for me to take action on it.