Speaking the other evening, I moved the adjournment. I do not propose, Sir, to continue the debate this evening.
Private Deputies' Business. - Conditions of Sub-Postmasters and Sub-Postmistresses—Motion.
Debate resumed on motion.
I would like, if I may, to intervene at this stage, because, in doing so, it might probably save a considerable amount of time if I remove some of the misapprehensions which seem to exist. Making a statement at this stage places me in a rather unguarded position, perhaps, and gives Deputies an opportunity of speaking after me. I think, however, it is expedient that I should intervene at this stage. The motion, as set down here, shows a considerable lack of preparation and a lack of knowledge on the whole subject. Both the lack of preparation and the lack of knowledge could have been obviated by inquiry before the motion was put down.
"That Dáil Éireann is of opinion that legislation should be introduced immediately which will improve the pay and prospects of sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses and which will entitle them to pension rights...."
Well, legislation is not required for the purpose of improving the pay of sub-postmasters and auxiliary postmen. That can be done without legislation, but legislation would be required to deal with the question of pensions. The question of pensions, as Deputy Norton and many other Deputies must know, is one of general Government policy. It must be dealt with by Finance and not by us primarily. That part of the motion should not have been directed to the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. As it has been, I can deal with it up to a point. It is an extraordinary thing that members of a Farmers' Party should plunge into a motion of this sort, which is really reckless from the point of view of the expenditure of money. It means a larger amount of taxation—that is all that it does mean.
I will take the question of pensions first. The suggestion that the position of auxiliary postman and sub-postmaster should be regarded as pensionable raises a major question of State policy, one that affects not only the Post Office but the whole State service. As Deputies are evidently aware, under existing legislation, to qualify for a pension, an officer must be in possession of a Civil Service certificate and one of the conditions attaching to the granting of this certificate is that the officer must be required by his duty to give his whole time to the service of the State. Auxiliary postmen, who are part-time officers, are thus ruled out, and the same applies to sub-postmasters who, apart from not being required to devote their whole time to official work, come within the category of contractors rather than of direct employees.
Whether the present legislation should be altered so as to admit of the granting of pensions to auxiliary postmen and sub-postmasters is a matter for general Government consideration and not one merely for the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. Obviously, any concession in this connection granted to the Post Office classes could not be withheld from corresponding classes in the State service generally. I must confess I see very little prospect of a favourable Government attitude on the suggestion.
Is it in order for the Minister, without permission, to read his speech?
If the Minister has an important statement to make, the House always concedes that.
I could be pulled up for reading my speech—and I am sure the Chair would do it.
I have no doubt I would, but when the Deputy is making a Ministerial pronouncement. if I have the good or ill-fortune to be here, I shall not.
That is something to look forward to.
I know of no administration which provides pensions for other than full-time staff, and so far as I am aware the same applies in industry and commercial life generally, both here and in other countries. The existing State pension schemes are generous and reasonably comprehensive and, with comparatively few exceptions, the pension schemes in non-State employment are, I think I am correct in saying, by no means comparable. If pensions for part-time State employees come in at all, they will, I imagine, come as a result of some further advance in general social policy, but so far as the present proposal is concerned, nothing that has been said convinces me that there is any case for treating auxiliary postmen and sub-postmasters exceptionally. I have not the least doubt that if I were to make representations to the Government in favour of exceptional treatment, they would not have the slighest prospect of success.
Coming to the question of auxiliary postmen in reference to their employment and pay, I will, with the permission of Deputy Davin, read a little more for him. The proposers of the motion ask as a means of improving the pay of these officers that they be put on the established list; that is, appointed full-time postmen with established status. The Department would be very glad to be in a position to abolish entirely part-time postmanships, but unfortunately it would not be practicable without serious deterioration of the existing delivery service. The great majority of part-time postmen are located in rural areas and the necessity for their employment arises from the incidence of the arrival and dispatch of mails. At most offices it is possible to provide one or more full-time duties either on single routes of adequate length or on a combination of routes, but when these have been built up there generally remain some shorter routes on which deliveries must be made in various directions immediately after the arrival of mails. If part-time men were not employed on these short routes, the residents of one district would have to wait for their correspondence until delivery had been completed in another district.
This alternative to the employment of part-time postmen could hardly be acceptable to the proposers of the motion, who represent rural constituencies, or to rural residents generally and, in any event, the Department could not contemplate such a worsening of the facilities. As Deputy Maguire so very well put it, the public interest must come first. The wholesale abolition of part-time positions would, moreover, result in the displacement of a large number of men, many of them with long service and family responsibilities. Opportunity is taken, on a vacancy arising, to amalgamate part-time posts with a view to forming full-time duties, but the possibilities in that direction are very limited. In any case, if full-time established posts were created in lieu of part-time posts, the positions would have to be filled from competitive examinations conducted by the Civil Service Commissioners. This would necessitate the displacement of the local persons at present employed as part-time postmen. As it is, it is a considerable benefit to persons who are in a small way of business, or who have a small portion of land, that they should have these extra emoluments for doing a part-time job.
The limit of a part-time job is about five and a half hours and the average mileage is somewhere between 18 and 22 miles. The full-time postmen do on an average on any particular route not more than 28 miles. All the talk about 30 miles is an exaggeration. We are examining very carefully the whole system of the routes, because we propose to give a large amount of facilities over the country. We have got, on this year's estimate, an extra £20,000 and that means a certain revision of routes and wherever it is reasonable and possible we propose—it may be the right thing to do—to amalgamate certain posts, but in very many cases it will not be the right thing to do and it may be necessary for us to appoint even more auxiliary postmen than in the past, as we will be dealing with areas in which the population is very sparse.
The wages paid to auxiliary postmen for the number of hours they are employed by the Post Office are good in relation to those paid to comparable workers. If you compare the position of a rural part-time postman with that of an agricultural labourer, you find the labourer's work is much more onerous, his skill is greater and he has to apply it with intelligence. The part-time postmen are recruited through the employment exchange from the unskilled classes.
The present statutory rate for agricultural labourers in rural areas generally is about £2 4s 0d for a 54-hour week, while the rural auxiliary postman would at present be paid from 42/4 to 51/6 for a 30-hour week. In rural areas adjoining urban districts, a higher rate is payable, of course. A large number of auxiliary postmen have some other source of income, pieces of land or other employment.
The general practice at one time was to confine the selection of such officers to candidates with supplementary means of livelihood, but for a considerable time past the policy has been to give preference to men on the employment exchange register with the highest rates of assistance, namely, those whose circumstances are worst. The men are paid reasonable wages for the number of hours work available and these men are free to find outside employment to augment their earnings.
Deputy Norton referred to part-time men at head offices, but I would be interested to know how such men could be employed on full-time work. So far as we can see, it would be impossible, unless these men were paid for doing nothing or for giving service in excess of what is postally justifiable. It is quite wrong for Deputy Norton to say we do not care how the assistants in sub-post offices are treated. The rule which governs that is that they are generally paid whatever is the local rate payable to assistants in the shops of the village or to persons who are paid a certain amount of money and get their food and boarding as well. We try to insist that the rate which is paid by the sub-postmasters is not less than that which is current in the area.
The Department does absolutely nothing about it at all.
That is not so.
You cannot tell me; I know about it.
The position of the sub-postmaster is really that of a contractor. In some cases, it is a tremendous advantage for a small shopkeeper to have the contract for the post office. It brings business into the shop and there is, so far as I can make out, no country I know of where that system is not adopted. It is very difficult to see how there could be any other system, unless we are to have a Government office in every village in the country—which, of course, would be quite extravagant and not at all a reasonable suggestion.
In regard to the defalcations, there are 2,200 sub-postmasters and if you allow for an assistant in every sub-post office you add another couple of thousand. Out of that 4,000, in the last three years there have been only 40 defalcations. In examining the records of those, I find the reasons given, when the prosecutions took place, were, in the main, drink, betting, extravagance on clothes, even the purchase of shop goods and, in one case, curiosity.
They steal their own goods, from their own shops.
This is the evidence that came up in the courts as the reasons why these things happen. We have recognised that, under changing conditions, we should do something to improve the payment of these people and anybody with a little intelligence would know that we would be coming to make some proposals of the sort very soon. I am sure Deputy Norton was able to make a very intelligent anticipation and to chip in just at the right moment. Although he did not put down the resolution, he was able to take full advantage of it. He reminds me of the fable about the fly who was flying around the great wheel of the cart. When the man driving the cart gives a lash of his whip, off goes the horse and the fly says: "See, I did that, I made the wheel go round."
Will you make the postmaster's pay go round? If that is the best you are able to do, you are a woeful storyteller.
The Deputy's speeches make me feel like making a careful selection from them and sending them over to the Folklore Commission to be filed there.
Send something extra to the underpaid sub-postmasters.
His description of the attitude of Ministers reminds me of some kind of Chinese god. His idea of the powers that be is a flaunting image, with fire from the eyes and knives sticking out of its mouth. Anyway, I made a promise some time ago——
You should clear up the last joke before you go on. It is not intelligible to anybody.
Did you ever see a Chinese god?
I will take your word for it.
That is the image you present to the public of a Minister—the principle of evil, something fierce and impossible and extravagant.
You are suffering from introspection this evening.
If the Minister and the Deputy would address the Chair——
He is bringing in stale music-hall jokes. It is not fair of him.
If the Deputy does not take care, I might go back on what I was going to say. I made a promise some time ago when I met a deputation of sub-postmasters and I have had a very careful examination made over a period of time of the payments to the two classes. The disparity between postmasters and sub-postmasters appears to be very unsatisfactory. It took some time to deal with the weighing of the scales. However, it was pretty apparent that nothing could be done for the two years until the emergency had passed and the Standstill Order position changed. Now that it has disappeared and new conditions are gradually coming in, there is the necessity for giving better pay.
You are moving along.
We have got the agreement of the Department of Finance now and obtained the sanction of the Government to abolish the old disparity between the provisional inclusive paid postmasters and the other class, placing the provisional inclusive paid on basic and bonus at full 110 from the 1st November. The changeover is due to the very unique position in which they had been put, with the reduction of 25 per cent. and so on, and it was quite clear that something would have to be done as soon as the Standstill Order would have passed away. There is to be a relation of the scales to all the postmasters and they will be better paid than they were in the past. These conditions will be subject to whatever rearrangement is made when the Minister for Finance brings in his new regulations for the Civil Service generally. I felt it necessary at this stage to deal with these matters so that those who wished to speak on the motion would not be misled and that those who were reasonable would be satisfied with the proposals, as put forward.
The Minister seems to be in good humour to-night. In opening his reply, he said he was rather surprised and bewildered that Deputies who represent the rural areas should ask for an increase for sub-postmasters and auxiliary postmen, indicating that we had not taken into consideration what that would cost the taxpayer, particularly the farmer. A report was published not so long ago about the Minister going to the diplomatic service. He may be very suitable for that but he should not endeavour, in a diplomatic way, to misrepresent our motion in the eyes of the farming community, however diplomatic or slippery he thinks he is. We represent no particular section of the community; we represent all sections within our respective constituencies—farmers, professional men, business men and postmen. We are never opposed to money being spent if it is well spent and there is a return for it, but we are opposed to money being taken out of the pockets of the taxpayer and spent on maladministration. That is the time we grumble, because we are here as custodians of the people's purse.
The Minister went on to say that the auxiliary postman could not get any consideration as regards increase in his wage because, as an auxiliary postman, he had some side-line. We admit that there are auxiliary postmen who have side-lines, but quite a good many, known to the Minister, have no side-lines and are finding it hard to exist. The Minister went on to draw a contrast between the farm labourer and the auxiliary postman. That was, again, because of his foolish idea that we represent the farmers and farm labourers only. He compared the wage of the auxiliary postman with that of the farm labourer and he compared their types of work. He said that the farm labourer had to be an intelligent man and had to have ability and that he had an arduous task to perform. Am I to understand that you can have an illiterate postman and that the task of the postman is not arduous? Picture the Minister setting out on a cold wintry morning on a journey of from 18 to 22 miles——
For several years, I had to ride a bicycle 16 miles every morning.
I can picture the Minister doing that now, with the rain pouring down. The auxiliary postman had to supply his own bicycle in war time in many cases. Owing to scarcity of tyres, he had to walk on some occasions and no clothing was supplied by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. He could not get an oilskin or overcoat. In some cases, he developed tuberculosis and became a burden on his family instead of a help to it. The postman who has to cover a journey of from 18 to 22 miles cannot cycle all the way. He must walk across the fields. Does the Minister suggest that the man is afterwards fit to go into a field to do the work necessary to supplement his wage? Is that the type of employment the Minister sponsors? Is that the wage the Minister thinks should be paid to a young workman, who is, in many cases, married?
I maintain that a postman has a very responsible position. He carries private and registered letters and those who do slip up constitute but a very small proportion of the total number. At the same time, there is a severe temptation in the way of the auxiliary postman. When he does slip up, it is due to the fact that he is in debt or that his "kiddies" are looking for boots or shoes or clothing for which he has not the necessary purchasing power. The only way he can get that is by raiding the letters in his bag. Then, he is brought before the court and publicly humiliated. In addition, he loses his position. Does the Minister realise the temptation which he is placing in the way of an auxiliary postman? Is the only excuse the Minister has for refusing to increase the wage of the auxiliary postman the few miserable thousands of pounds which it would cost the taxpayer? Would he rather keep the auxiliary postman on a wage which gives rise to temptation and force him to do a daily journey of from 18 to 22 miles, one-third of which he must walk?
In the constituency from which I come, the bit of land which these postmen have is very small. The amount of money that can be knocked out of that little bit of land is hardly worth mentioning. If he were a joiner or a painter or craftsman of any kind, the position might be different, but the small farmers of the type in Mayo, Sligo, Galway, West Roscommon, Leitrim and Donegal make very little out of their small holdings.
If they were to depend on what they get out of their land, they would have to go naked and they would have very little to eat. Their children would be starving. To say that men are employed at a very poor wage because of a so-called side-line is to make a lame excuse. The Minister should be ashamed of himself for making it. Let the Minister not think that he is going to deter us from action by drawing a comparison between the auxiliary postman and the farm labourer or by pointing out what the increases would represent to the farmer in the form of taxation. We, as a Party, are not opposed to taxation or to the spending of money if it is well spent and if the community, as a whole, derives some benefit from its spending. It is when the money derived from taxation is utilised for wrong purposes, for maladministration, for an incompetent Minister and an incompetent Department, that we object.
I maintain that if ever there was a body of men who had a case to be considered in relation to their work and their pay, it is the auxiliary postmen. The motion calls for the establishment of these postmen on a full-time basis and for the granting of pensions to them. We support that motion. I admit that it might take a certain length of time to establish them on a full-time basis and I would be opposed to the dismissal of 20 men or even one man in order that 200 men might be established. It is very hard to sack 20 men or even one man for the sake of 200 men because all these men are dependent on the wages they receive, small as they are, but as time goes on, and as men retire, their areas could be re-allocated so as to have two permanent postmen in a district instead of, say, two auxiliaries and one permanent man.
In relation to the salaries of sub-postmistresses and sub-postmasters, the Minister said that Deputy Norton anticipated that he was about to make a move in the matter. I have been in the House for over three years and the Minister has been moving for at least that period. Deputy Norton has been here for a considerable time longer and I suppose the Minister has been moving during all that time also. The Minister is like an irresistible force coming against an immovable object. However, we shall accept his word that he is at last considering the necessity of increasing the salaries of these postal officials, I would ask the Minister to give these officials what he considers a reasonable sum out of which they will be able to pay their assistants a decent weekly wage. Surely in this Christian country, which should be a model to the whole of Europe in so far as decent wages and conditions for the working class are concerned, the wages paid to these unfortunate assistants in this year of 1946 are a disgrace. We decry materialism and the development of Communism but what has given rise to materialism and Communism? The advocates of Communism and of materialism have built their propaganda and their programme on bad economic conditions. It is on that propaganda they get recruits. We should make every effort to remove these grievances if we want to defeat materialism and Communism which are sweeping across Europe to-day. By permitting sweated labour in our post offices we are preparing the grounds for the "isms" to which we so much object. We should be ashamed of the fact that there are women working in some post offices for less than 10/- a week, having to feed and clothe themselves.
The Minister may crack jokes and say that it is not his responsibility, that they are not employees of his, that the sub-postmasters and the sub-postmistresses are their employers. Why is it that the sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses cannot pay these assistants a decent wage? Because the salaries sub-postmasters are getting from the State do not permit them to do so. There are approximately 2,500 sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses in the Twenty-Six Counties and of these 1,500 are in receipt of a salary of less than £1 a week each. They have to provide an office, heat, light, blotting paper and ink, and all the necessary paraphernalia out of that salary. They cannot leave their districts without the permission of the local postmaster. For instance, a sub-postmaster cannot go away for two days at a time. He is tied down.
The Minister may say to me that these men and women apply for the position knowing the circumstances. They do not know the circumstances. I know the case of one man in my own area, in regard to whose appointment I had a row with the Minister, and he regrets very much having taken up this position. He was completely ignorant of the responsibility and the outlay which he would have to meet in taking over the position. He finds to-day that he is practically bankrupt because of the miserable allowance which he receives. It is not sufficient to enable him to meet all outgoings and to pay the assistants in the post office.
We are putting forward this motion, not so much out of consideration for the sub-postmistresses or sub-postmasters but because we know that there are girls employed in these offices who are exploited, not because their immediate employers wish to exploit them, but because the allowances the sub-postmasters receive from the postal authorities are not sufficient to enable them to pay more to their assistants, even if they desire to do so. The Minister may say that these people have other business as a side line. There are some of them who may have such business but there is a very large number who are totally dependent on their salaries from the Post Office. The result is that they are constantly exposed to temptation. Remember that the business in the Post Office has expanded enormously in recent years. Take the post office in Swinford for instance. There are 11 postmen attached to that office. It is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, sub-post offices in the Twenty-Six Counties judged by the bulk of the business transacted and the allowance is not sufficient to meet the outlay on staff.
The business in many of these post offices in the west of Ireland is equivalent in volume to that done in many head post offices here in the city. The business has increased enormously in the past six or seven years owing to the introduction of children's allowances and other social services. I say the Minister should be ashamed of the remuneration paid to these officials and if he has at last wakened up to the necessity for increasing their salaries, it is high time he did so. It has taken him a long time to come to the conclusion that he was really the employer of these people. It is high time that he should pay these people a proper allowance bearing some relation to the importance of the business which they have to transact for the public. A man to become an efficient sub-postmaster requires a high standard of intelligence and unless you offer a proper salary you are not going to get the right type of man.
May I correct the figures which the Deputy mentioned? The total number of sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses is 2,089 and of these only 600 receive less than £1 a week. The average salary is £2 7s. 6d. a week.
Does that cover the whole number?
Yes. There are 2,089 of them and the average is £2 7s. 6d.
That is the average for the whole lot?
The average is £2 7s. 6d.
And how many have less than £1 per week?
600.
I want to refer to one argument—in fact, the main argument—put forward by the Minister against this motion, that the position of the sub-postmaster is equivalent to that of a contractor or sub-contractor to the Post Office. If we assume for the moment that that is the case, does the Minister ask the House to agree that he is relieved of all responsibility if that contract is let on terms which are opposed to decent working conditions? I think he will find that even the members of his own Party will not agree with him.
He might be surprised to know that, in adopting that line of policy, he is acting in contravention of what purports to be Government policy. I must remind him that there is what is known as a fair wages clause in relation to contracts. I give him the case of the Dublin Corporation. We are in the habit of letting out very considerable contracts every week or every month, but, attached to each contract, is a covenant or clause which ensures that not alone fair wages but trade union conditions shall apply to the particular job. If the union or unions catering for the employees on that job complain to the corporation that the clause is not being carried out, the contract is stopped.
The fair wages clause may be taken, generally speaking, as Government policy because it purports to apply to all public bodies, and I suggest that, if it applies to public bodies, there is no reason why a Department of State should be excluded. That is the kernel of the whole question. The Minister needs no reminder from me or from any other member that these contracts we are discussing have been based on conditions which are opposed to decent standards. I think that is generally admitted.
The Minister supports his case by a reference, in the case of auxiliary postmen, to agricultural labourers. I suggest that the less we hear about the conditions attaching to agricultural labourers' or road workers' work the better but, in any case, there is this substantial difference, that the Minister is dealing with a huge business concern which is showing a substantial profit, as indicated by the Estimates presented to the House, which profit is mainly obtained because of the accumulation of wages based on a low standard, as in the case of sub-postmasters and auxiliary postmen.
There is a loss on the postal service. The profit is entirely on telephones.
Telephones still come within the ambit of the Minister. The Department is a business concern showing a substantial profit, and might I suggest to the Minister that he has heard across the floor of this House time and time again complaints in relation to these two grades? His own members behind him will give him the impact of public opinion on the position of the sub-postmaster. They would not stand for it and the public will not stand for it. I suggest that even at this very late stage—I am glad to learn that he proposes to make a revision of the scales—he should bear in mind, so far as sub-postmasters are concerned, the implications of what is known as the fair wages clause and to see to it that the revision which is to take place will permit the sub-postmaster to give decent conditions to those he employs.
I support the motion in so far as it urges the Minister to make the living conditions of sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses throughout the country more reasonable. I am glad to learn that he proposes to do something about the matter by way of revision, and it is to be hoped that that revision will take the form of a substantial increase. I do not like to hear the Minister making his case on the point that the Post Office end of his big concern is run at a loss. The fact of the matter is that the sub-postmaster or postmistress is now a State institution and has to deal with nearly every sort of thing under the sun. The smallest post office pays old age pensions and handles considerable sums of money. Take the case of the sub-post office, which is a money and telegraph office as well, in a village of 600 or 700 people. The sub-postmaster or sub-postmistress in that office has a whole-time job. The office handles children's allowances and old age pensions, issues dog licences and radio licences and pays unemployment assistance. Unless the total of these activities reaches a certain figure, the sub-postmaster gets no additional pay worth while—1/- or 2/- a week, if that much.
All this business has been imposed on them within the last 20 years, but in a great many cases the pay they receive has remained static. How can the Minister or anybody else expect satisfactory service from an over-worked and under-paid servant? There are cries of holy horror and criminal proceedings are taken when one of these people, through stress of circumstances, deals loosely with State funds. It is only a step-father would blame them because they are working under conditions where the temptation is great and responsibility for their fall is upon the Minister or upon the employer who has them working under such conditions. We have had sad cases, and I hope we will not have any more, but the only way in which they can be avoided is by paying ample wages for services rendered. I agree with Deputy O'Sullivan when he says that the fair wages clause should be given effect to.
The Minister also says that these people are sub-contractors to the Post Office, but we know that that is not so, in practice. They are actually employees of the Post Office and the Minister takes very good care with regard to those who get the appointments. I admit that, when a post office in a district becomes vacant, there is great "polling" for it, as they say in the country, and great work to get it. Why? Because the economic conditions of the country are such that it is something that helps. It is the economic conditions of the people that force them to accept that pay. If there is a vacancy for a caretaker of a golf links at £1 or 30/- a week, there are hundreds of applications for it. The fact that there are some amenities in these places and better conditions than they are living under at present induces the people to apply for these positions.
I do not want unduly to stress the situation, but for the last six or seven years many people in the country had not paraffin oil or candles. They certainly had no electric light. Even in the small post offices they had hardly any artificial light. Finally there was some effort made to provide it. Therefore, if a person got a post office appointment he had some chance of having light. The whole thing is that the young people in the country are not satisfied with the conditions obtaining there. Even when they become aware of the circumstances under which they have to work in the post office they do not want that work either. It is one of the things that show how bad the conditions are in a great many parts of the country.
I consider that sub-postmasters or postmistresses generally must be of a high standard as there have been so few defalcations. For people of such a high standard, the pay is miserable. The Minister defends it on the ground that they are sub-contractors to the Post Office. It is essential that their conditions should be improved. It is also essential that the Minister should make a certain minimum of furniture available in these offices. In a great number of these offices you will find only a desk or a counter for the transaction of business. That does not help either the post office officials or the public. It is almost impossible to get work done properly under these conditions. Then, if anything goes wrong, the sub-postmaster or postmistress is blamed.
For these reasons, I support the motion and urge the Minister that, in re-adjusting the salaries and conditions of employment, he should be generous to the highest degree, because this is a very important service. If the Minister does improve their conditions it will be accepted by the people generally as a long required improvement in the conditions of these people.
It is a sign of grace anyhow to see this motion put down by two Deputies of the Party opposite. It is a sign of grace to see a departure from their general parsimonious policy with which some other Deputies have consistently disagreed since the initiation of that Party. When I saw the motion, it occurred to me that the element of intelligent anticipation entered into it very largely. As a matter of fact, I think it went a little further. I was reminded of the type of man who retires to a room, takes down a dictionary and looks up some most extraordinary word, and then, when he is quite sure he has it right, comes down and bets another person £10 that he will not spell this very extraordinary word correctly. I am sure that Deputies of the Party opposite know that our sympathy is with the sub-postmasters and postmistresses in this matter. I think they also knew what the Minister's intentions would be in the circumstances.
I must say straight off that the first part of this motion has my full sympathy. We must admit that the type of work done by sub-postmasters or postmistresses is a very high type of work. There must be strict accuracy and there must be constant watchfulness. They have the responsibility for taking in and guarding a large amount of money. It is work that is really trying on the nerves and tempers of the people that carry it out. These people have our sympathy. We must also admit that there have been increased duties placed upon them. Some of these are quite newly added and there has been a big extension in some of the old duties. The work entailed by children's allowances, food vouchers, turf vouchers, wireless licences, old age pensions, widows' and orphans' pensions, army pensions and the Savings Bank is very extensive. I wish to congratulate the Minister on the fact that he is going to deal as justly and as generously as our circumstances will permit with the sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses.
Of course, apart from these duties, we must admit that the overhead charges have increased very much on sub-postmasters and postmistresses. If it is a case of securing premises for the carrying on of this work, the cost is very much higher than it was previously. Rates also have been increased and the remuneration of assistants and many other factors have raised the overhead charges of these people. We are very glad indeed that they are to benefit now by the Minister's intentions.
As regards pensions, I think that would be a very difficult problem to deal with. A great number of these people enter the service late in life. If you bring them in at a reasonably early age and if you give them what would correspond to whole-time wages and secure them a pension, the only fair thing to do would be to have these posts filled by competitive examination. Sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses throughout the country would be the last to thank the proposers of this motion for a suggestion of that sort. The people who would pass such an examination would not be able to furnish the premises required for the conduct of the business. The only alternative would be that the State would have to supply the premises in all cases. The volume of business done at these offices would not, of course, warrant such action on the part of the Government.
There has been a suggestion that there should be amalgamation of areas so as to give auxiliary postmen a larger wage. The great majority of these men, as well as the great majority of sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses, take these positions as being a valuable auxiliary to their primary way of living. If you amalgamate areas it means that you must get rid of a certain number and that is a thing we cannot contemplate with any degree of pleasure or approval. Then, supposing you do carry through amalgamation in two or more districts, the area to be covered is so large that deliveries will be late. If amalgamation were proposed, a great number of auxiliary postmen would not wait to be displaced. If amalgamation were insisted upon you would see a great many resignations, and it is my opinion that hundreds of people who are employed as auxiliary postmen would simply refuse to carry on because the increased work would interfere with their main livelihood.
I thought it really funny to see and to listen to Deputy Cafferky. He made actual scenes in this House, which showed that he considered the very appointments that he is decrying here to-night to be very valuable appointments. Nothing else could explain the extraordinary ebullitions from that Deputy. By the extraordinary scenes he created, he plainly indicated that he thought these were very valuable positions.
I am glad that the Minister is about to improve the circumstances of our sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses. They well deserve it. But I cannot say that I think this motion was an honest motion. I repeat that I believe there was a very large element of intelligent anticipation in it. I am quite sure that the country will understand and appreciate that the Minister is doing this thing quite independently of this motion.
And he has been doing it for 20 years.
Moreover, if the sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses throughout the country study that motion and read into it its proper implications they would be the very last people to thank the Deputies who set down the motion.
In view of the Minister's statement I wish to thank the Minister——
For his good intention?
——for his very fine statement that he is going to increase the wages of sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses. I take this opportunity of thanking the Minister for the gentlemanly consideration he has given my various representations during the last two years with reference to sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses. I have always found the Minister most sympathetic and anxious to raise the status of these people. His announcement to-night comes as no surprise to me because, long before this motion was tabled by the Clann na Talmhan Party, the Minister had been working on this question. We welcome his statement to-night. A number of sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses have represented to me that when it is possible again to have clocks installed in the post offices the Minister should favourably consider doing so. The post office clock is regarded as showing the correct time and would be a benefit to the people in the area as well as to the post office.
In every area there is a number of part-time postmen who take up those jobs as young men. Possibly a number of them may have other occupations. When they have served for 15 or 20 years and have given satisfactory service, if a permanent post should arise in the district, I do not see why they should not get favourable consideration. The Minister explained to-night that they must have passed a Civil Service examination. I would ask the Minister favourably to consider taking their long service into consideration. If a man has given 15 or 20 years' service, he should get a permanent appointment if the opportunity arises.
I want to draw your attention, Sir, to the latter part of the motion standing in my name and in that of Deputy Blowick. The first part has been dealt with exhaustively by all the speakers. I want to draw your attention to the fact that we want some consideration for the rural auxiliary postman. They are a very deserving section of the community and are nobody's darling. After years of hard work, requiring a great deal of physical effort and endurance and a high standard of honesty and efficiency, their services are dispensed with and they are thrown on the scrap-heap by the Government, at the age of 70. Their only reward is the old age pension. It is a very miserable and ungrateful way to treat men who have given such loyal and such long service.
We are asking in this motion that they should be placed on the established list with a view to getting a pension and perhaps better remuneration than they have at present. If there is some fundamental reason why that cannot be done, I would appeal to the Minister to consider the advisability and the equity of giving those men a retiring gratuity, something to cheer them up in their old age. We find in the country that a number of them are worn out after long years of work, that they are dispirited and that many of them are in a bad way suffering from rheumatism. They are now thrown on the scrap-heap with the old age pension of 10/- a week, and with no recognition from the State. I strongly urge on the Minister that he should consider the advisability of getting a fund placed at his disposal which would enable him to give those men a retiring gratuity. I hope that my request will be favourably considered.
I strongly support the motion and believe that every consideration should be given to the claims made on behalf of sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses, especially in view of what we have heard from the Minister as regards the small income they receive for the responsible work they are doing. Great credit is due to them for the manner in which they have done that work over a long number of years. That I suggest is one of the main reasons why the Minister should do something immediately to improve their conditions. If he does that it will enable those people to give better conditions to the assistants they employ. In view of the small income they receive at present they are not able to pay their assistants a proper wage. There is the danger that, if the assistant does not get a decent wage, he will not be able to resist temptation if it comes his way. The assistant has to feed and clothe himself and must have enough money to enable him to make life worth living. In all fairness the assistant in a sub-post office is entitled to a wage that will enable him to get some little enjoyment out of life.
With regard to the post office services generally, they are of the greatest importance to the people as a whole. The messages that come to this country from all parts of the world are entrusted to the post office officials for delivery to the people. The post men visit all areas of the country and are obliged to do so no matter what the weather conditions may be. In view of that, I think the time has come when all those people should get consideration from the Minister. That may mean the expenditure of more money. In my opinion these officials earn their money well, and if the proposal before us involves extra expenditure I do not believe that the people as a whole would object to it, if it means that the conditions for those under consideration are made more comfortable than they are to-day. I think the people would agree that they should be paid fully for the work they do in the Post Office service.
There was a great pressure of work in all these sub-post offices during the period of the emergency. There was a good deal of work in connection with the telephone service. In addition to that, there is work in connection with the issue of dog licences, wireless licences, the issue of money orders for the Land Commission, the payment of old age pensions, widows' and orphans' pensions and the children's allowances. All that means that the sub-post office assistant has to work very long hours. The working day is usually from 7.30 in the morning until 7 o'clock at night, but it very often happens in connection with the use of the public telephone that the assistant has to work until 10 o'clock at night. For all these reasons, I support the motion and hope that the Minister will give it favourable consideration. I was glad to hear the Minister intimate that he is going to give consideration to the whole scheme of remuneration in these sub-postoffices. I believe it is his duty to do so. I would impress on him that he should take into consideration the amount of work that has to be done in them, and should be generous when he comes to make his decision. The new rates should be such as to make those people feel that they are going to be repaid in some way for the services which they have given in the past.
I was not in the House for the Minister's statement on this very important motion, but I have been pleased to learn that he is prepared to reconsider the question of salary scales for the important officials referred to in the motion. The Post Office service is really the most important that we have. The officials in that service carry out their work with satisfaction to all the citizens. These sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses have, in my opinion, a very genuine grievance, and I welcome the opportunity which is being given to the House by Deputy Blowick's most reasonable motion to have those grievances discussed here.
From my experience of the officials. I think they have a very genuine grievance, as Deputy Browne has pointed out. Most of those sub-post offices, as the Minister is aware, have to be opened in the morning at 6.30 and sometimes 6 o'clock. The early opening is dependent upon the arrival of the mail. Where the mail arrives at 6 o'clock in the morning the post-master must be present to supervise the sorting of the mails. That is his responsibility. If anything goes wrong he is responsible for it. Every sub-postmaster and sub-postmistress must be present at the sorting of the mails on the arrival of the mail bags at the post offices. In most of the offices in my constituency the mails are sorted at 6.30 in the morning. Throughout the day there is a continuous postal service. At 6.30 in the evening, or sometimes 7 o'clock, when the post office officially closes down, somebody has to remain in charge of the public telephone until 10 o'clock at night. I think that such continuous attendance is absolutely unjustifiable particularly at the very low rate at which these officials are paid. No Deputy and no taxpayer would object to an increase being given to these people. Every year money is voted to the Minister's Department and nobody would object to an increase being given out of that fund to these people, who have a genuine grievance and who give good service even under present conditions. In my opinion the Post Office gives better service than any other State Department. I can say in all sincerity that the officials of that Department have at all times carried out their duties in a most efficient and capable manner.
If the Minister were asked to give specific instances and figures as to the number of sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses who have been dismissed from their employment during the past four years the number would be pretty high. The main reason why these people have been dismissed is because they got into financial difficulties, and because they were in a position where they were handling public money and where they were paid at such a low rate that they were unable to resist the temptation to put public funds into their own pockets. The result is that they had to be dismissed, and quite rightly so. But it must always be taken into consideration that the dismissal of these people is not entirely due to their succumbing to a temptation when they found themselve in adverse circumstances. The blame really rests upon the Minister inasmuch as he permitted such a state of affairs to continue. If these people were paid an adequate wage the temptation would not be there and they would not tamper with public funds.
A tremendous amount of work has to be carried out by these sub-post offices. There they handle all the old age pensions on Friday. There they have the unemployment assistance paid out over the post office counter. There they have dog licences taken out over the counter, widows' and orphans' pensions, money orders, postal orders, wireless licences and so on. It is absolutely essential that the work of the post offices should be carried out efficiently because of the importance and value of such work to the community as a whole; and because of the value and importance of the work done by the sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses the Minister should ensure that these officials are paid adequately for their work. He should deal with them as generously as he can. The Post Office is the only link between the town and village throughout the country. It is a wonderful organisation and, on the whole, the work of the Post Office is done exceedingly well by good and competent officials.
With reference to the question of auxiliary postmen, I think it would be of great assistance if this whole matter were reconsidered now. These postmen have given good and valuable service and they hold positions of responsibility and trust. They are important servants of the State. They should be recognised as State officials and they should be given adequate pension rights. We have quite a large number of auxiliary postmen. Most of them are married men with families. When the emergency arose and the call went forth for volunteers for the L.D.F., L.S.F., and Red Cross, there was an overwhelming response from the auxiliary postmen. They were quite prepared to give their services to the State when the country was threatened from outside. I think they are worthy of very special consideration. The cost of living has gone up considerably and those men have a genuine grievance. The increases given to them during the emergency were nothing like commensurate with the cost of living. I think the Minister should give very favourable consideration now to their demands. These postmen render service to every citizen in the State—traders, industrialists, business people, the State service itself and various others. The industrial and commercial community is entirely dependent on the efficient service given by these men. I think they deserve every support in their demand and they deserve all the cooperation they can get. In a lot of the rural areas these men have not been provided with any protective clothing. I think the Minister should make an effort to provide all these postmen with uniforms and protective clothing. I move the adjournment of the debate.
Debate adjourned.
The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Thursday, 21st November, 1946.