Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 10 Dec 1947

Vol. 109 No. 5

Committee on Finance. - Local Government (Superannuation) Bill, 1947—Recommittal.

Agreed that the Bill be recommitted for the purpose of the amendments on the Order Paper.

I move amendment No. 1:—

In page 10, line 25, to delete the words "twenty-one" and substitute the word "eleven", and in line 28, to delete the word "twenty" and substitute the word "ten".

The purpose of moving this amendment is to try to provide for the position which exists at present in regard to the officers and servants of the Dublin Fire Brigade. I understand that in the case of an officer or servant of the brigade who is compelled to retire after ten years' service through physical inability to continue in his employment, the corporation has power to give certain added years' service. In the section as it stands it is proposed, of course, to give added years of service when the officer has completed 20 years and in respect of service in excess of 20 years, in fact, to double the allowance. Our submission would be that the provision which would apply in respect of the case which would arise under Section 23, sub-section (2), paragraph 3, under which an officer who has become incapable of performing his duties by reason of permanent infirmity of mind or body and has not less than ten years of pensionable service, should apply to officers of the Dublin Fire Brigade, so that added years could be granted if the local authority felt that course justified, subject, of course, to the sanction of the Minister.

I am unable to accept this amendment as I think the proposals contained in the Bill are very generous. The basis taken in the Bill is that which is conceded to officers and servants who have the charge and care of patients under the Mental Care and Treatment Bill of 1945. It is the usual concession for posts necessitating early retirement. The position is that if a fire brigade officer enters the service at 21, and retires at 55 he will get full pension, that is forty-eightieths. A person who enters at 20 and retires at 50 on any of the usual grounds of retirement such as ill-health and who has not been removed from office for any cause such as misconduct or unfitness would also be entitled to the full pension. I think that, in justice, we cannot go any further than we have already done in the Bill and I suggest the Deputy should not press the amendment.

I admit the force of the Minister's argument in relation to the actual terms of the Bill but, in so far as the Bill has been recommitted, would he not consider the position in relation particularly to officers in the service of the fire brigade, owing to the nature of their employment, its strenuous character, their exposure to physical exhaustion and the inclemency of the weather, which has a particular effect on their health? If my information is correct, it has been the practice of the Dublin Corporation where a retirement takes place through ill-health after completion of ten years' service, to give certain added years' service. Would the Minister consider the possibility of dealing with this particular matter on its limited scale rather than on the broader scale suggested in the amendment? I appreciate that our amendment applies rather widely, but if the Minister would be prepared to allow the Corporation to give added years in the particular cases which I have mentioned it would meet us.

The point which the Deputy is making is already provided for.

Where the officer retires due to ill-health. I think if the Deputy will turn to Section 21 he will see that.

That requires a minimum of 20 years' service.

Well, it does; that is true. I move to report progress.

Progress reported; the Committee to sit again.
Top
Share