asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs whether, in view of the circumstances which led to the retirement in December, 1954, of an assistant inspector attached to the General Post Office, Cork, and in view of the fact that this man was given no opportunity of attending and defending himself at an inquiry into such circumstances, and that his reputation and integrity have been affected as a result, he will now authorise the holding of such an inquiry.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Retirement of Cork Post Office Inspector.
The man concerned was afforded ample opportunity of pleading on his own behalf before I took disciplinary action against him. The facts of his case were, however, crystal clear and I see no reason whatever for the holding of an inquiry as suggested by the Deputy.
Is the Minister aware that the circumstances leading to this man's retirement were due to his own desire to protect the public service from the waste of time by boy messengers under his control? When he ultimately did retire he retired under great stress and under threat of dismissal or downgrading. Is the Minister further aware that the only method of investigation into the charges against him was by minute from other officers in the service and, further, that since his retirement he has been living under a cloud that something untoward had happened during his period of office? Would the Minister institute an inquiry at which this man could attend and at which those who made charges against him would also attend?
I had hoped for this man's own sake that it would not be necessary for me to say anything about the circumstances of his departure from the service. As, however, I am being pressed by the Deputy in the matter I shall state the facts briefly as follows: he came under very serious disciplinary notice in 1952 for grossly insubordinate conduct and for making unwarranted charges against his superior officers. He barely escaped downgrading on that occasion and he received a most emphatic warning as to his future conduct. I may say that he furnished an apology on the occasion in question and gave an undertaking as to the future. In November, 1954, he again came under notice for grave offences culminating in gross insubordination which resulted in his suspension from duty. On his giving an unqualified written apology and a firm undertaking to obey instructions in the future, I restored him to duty and decided that his case would be met by downgrading to the rank of postal sorter and the issue to him of a final warning of dismissal. At this stage, he voluntarily gave notice of his retirement on account of age. In view of this and having regard to his long service I suspended, as an exceptional act of clemency, the decision to downgrade him and permitted him to retire with the rank of assistant inspector. Far from being dissatisfied with the treatment afforded him, he should count himself fortunate in having been allowed to retire with the rank of assistant inspector and with superannuation allowances related to the salary he enjoyed in that grade instead of in the grade of postal sorter.
Is the Minister further aware that when this man voluntarily retired, he did so because he could not afford the downgrading that faced him from the point of view of maintaining his family and further is he aware that it was conveyed to him that, if he persisted in this agitation, he would be dismissed and that he never received the detailed inquiry which he requested?
I can assure the Deputy that every possible investigation was made in his case and every consideration was given and the decision taken was the only one that could be taken.