asked the Minister for Social Welfare why an insured person (name supplied) has been deprived of unemployment benefit since April, 1968.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Unemployment Benefit Claimant.
27.
The entitlement to unemployment benefit of any individual claimant depends on the fulfilment of certain statutory contribution conditions. In the present case, these conditions were not satisfied, on a claim from the 23rd April, 1968, because of the failure or neglect of an employer to pay contributions in respect of employment from August, 1966 to April, 1967. The benefit lost by the insured person through this default is a legal responsibility of the employer concerned and the insured person has been advised of her statutory rights to recover the amount from him, if necessary, through the courts.
Is the Minister aware that this is a widow in very poor circumstances, unemployed now, and that the employer who refused to stamp her cards gave an assurance to the Attorney General's Office that he would pay £2 per week compensation, that he failed to comply with this agreement and nothing has been done about it except that the lady was told that if she wanted to do anything about it, she would have to sue the person herself. As she is in an impoverished condition, she is unable to pursue the matter. Would the Department take up the case on her behalf? This is a serious situation that an employee can be deprived of unemployment benefit due to the failure of an employer. In this case the employer is in business again——
The Deputy is making a speech.
I would ask the Minister to consider this case in view of the special circumstances.
The Minister has this case under consideration. The lady in question has a contributory widow's pension and has no dependants, but apart from that, she has her rights, which I would hope to safeguard. With the best will in the world my intervention in this case would not seem to hold out much prospects. We have already taken action and got a decree for a certain amount but have since been unable to recover the £2 weekly payment, not in respect of this case but in respect of the non-payment of contributions on a previous occasion. We are now seeking to enforce the court order, and in the meantime I think it would be futile, so far as the immediate benefit to the contributor here is concerned, to take any further action, but I am pursuing the case.
Is it not stated on the cards that it is an offence for an employer not to stamp cards?
Yes.
Where a court order has been made and cannot be enforced as in the case of this man, who is not bankrupt, who is in business again, thriving, and not fulfilling his obligation under the agreement with the Attorney General's Office——
Under the 1922 Act the Minister has the right to take action to recover moneys due on contributions in respect of employees. That has been done in this case. A court order was obtained and an arrangement made whereby a weekly sum was to be paid, but it has not been honoured. At the moment we are seeking to enforce that order, so the case is not being neglected.
Question No. 28.
How long does it take to enforce the order?
Would Deputy Dr. O'Connell please allow Questions to continue?
As long as the legal machinery takes.