asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will state upon what evidence the court of referees decides that an unemployment assistance recipient is not conscientiously seeking work.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Unemployment Assistance Recipients.
In examining whether an applicant for unemployment assistance satisfies the statutory condition which requires him to be genuinely seeking employment suitable for him the courts of referees have regard to all the material facts of the case including such matters as age, physique, education, normal occupation, place of residence, family circumstances, opportunities of employment, and personal efforts made to obtain employment. Each case is considered separately and sympathetically by the court of referees and the applicant is given every assistance in presenting all the circumstances of his case.
Is the Minister aware that during recent months there have been numbers of men cut off unemployment assistance in the City of Dublin? Actually, in the city at the moment there are not, and during the past few months there have not been, opportunities of employment for those men.
Is the Minister aware that not alone for the past few months but for many years back the attitude of some of the chairmen of the courts of referees has been gratuitously insulting and unsympathetic to persons seeking assistance?
How can an unemployed man give any proof of seeking work to the officers? The person he seeks work from will not give him a letter to say that he is seeking work and that he cannot employ him. We have numbers of letters saying that they cannot prove that they are looking for work. I think Deputy Lehane has the same experience. There seems to be harsh treatment under that heading.
May I explain to the Deputies concerned that these cases are dealt with by a court of referees which consists of representatives of the employers and representatives of the workers, with an independent chairman, a man who stands apart from both and endeavours to hold the scales evenly as between the viewpoint of the employers and the viewpoint of the workers' representatives? That court is not interfered with in any way by the Department. It has complete and absolute jurisdiction in the matter of determining whether an applicant is or is not genuinely seeking work.
In order to give Deputies a picture of the real position, and so that they may not be carried away by any extravagant statements made on this matter, it might be well if I were to give them some information. In the year ended 31st March, 1949, 3,176 cases of this type were considered by the Dublin Court of Referees and disallowance was recommended in 221 cases only during that period. That does not bear out the allegations which have been made. As I say, the final discretion in this matter rests absolutely with the court of referees. That court has full power to allow the claims and full power to disallow the claims. However, even after that, there is still an appeal to the umpire if a representative of the insured worker desires that there should be an appeal to the umpire who, again, is a statutory officer subject to no departmental control whatever.
Will the Minister say whether this court of referees make their own regulations or do they just administer the regulations?
As I explained to Deputy McCann in answer to his original question, each case is considered separately and sympathetically by the court of referees and the applicant is given every assistance in presenting all the circumstances of his case. In other words, the court of referees has full power to say whether it is satisfied that the applicant is genuinely seeking work.
How can he prove it to the court? Unless he brings a document, he cannot prove it.
May I say to the Deputy that the production of a document is deprecated by the court because it establishes nothing? The absence or presence of documents does not enter into the matter.
Why do they put the onus of proof of that nature on the applicant, the person who appeals to the court?
There is no obligation on the applicant to prove that he cannot get work. He goes to the court, and tells of his efforts to get work. The court have regard to the factors to which I have just adverted and then a sensible person — the chairman — I do not know whether it is any use to Deputy Lehane to say that in this case the chairman is a lawyer — comes down one way or the other, in favour of the applicant or against the applicant. He has complete authority to come down on either side. I take it he is influenced in the long run by what the facts are, having regard to all these factors.
Is the Minister aware that it is the independent chairman that comes in for most of the criticism from those appearing before him?