asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs if he is aware that a person who is employed for a period as an established postman on probation and who is then forced to retire from this employment owing to ill-health is deprived of social welfare benefits owing to the fact that the post of established postman, even during the probationary period, is not insurable employment; and whether, in view of the hardship and injustice caused in this type of case, he will ensure that in future probationary postmen of this type are regarded as being in insurable employment, or are adequately compensated for the denial to them of social welfare benefits.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Insurability of Probationary Postmen.
40.
Established postmen, on probation, in common with other established civil servants are insured under the Social Welfare Acts only in respect of widows' and orphans' pensions. The question of extending such insurance to include other benefits would be a matter for consideration in relation to the Civil Service as a whole.
Would the Minister not try to initiate discussions to ensure that persons such as are mentioned in the question will be adequately covered in times of unemployment or ill health?
I have already told the Deputy it is a matter for the Civil Service as a whole and, as such, is one for the Minister for Finance.
Will the Minister not ensure that his employees are covered, or will he not approach the Minister for Finance to see that they will be so covered during illness or unemployment?
Matters of that kind are dealt with in a different manner. As the Deputy knows, they are discussed with representatives of the workers concerned.
The Minister is evading his responsibilities. Here is a man appointed as a postman on probation. After two years he was deemed to be unable, because of illness, to carry out his duties. He was not insured under the Social Welfare Acts and therefore was not entitled to benefits. Therefore, this employee of the Minister was forced to have recourse to home assistance.
That may be. I am accepting the same responsibility as every Minister for Posts and Telegraphs has accepted heretofore.
We are progressing. This is 1964. If I or somebody else made a mistake ten or 15 years ago the Minister should not go on ad infinitum—
It is not a question of a mistake.
Does the Minister not consider such a person should be covered?
That is not the question.
It is the question that is down here. Do I take it the Minister will not do anything about it?
The Deputy may not take any such thing. It is a matter for consideration in relation to the entire Civil Service and, as such, is one for the Minister for Finance. There are other probationary civil servants on the same footing. As I have told the Deputy, there is a method by which matters of this kind can be brought up in a general way.
Surely the Minister would not call a casual postman a civil servant.