asked the Minister for Social Welfare if, in view of the fact that some of the busmen involved in the present transport dispute could be considered to have been locked out, he will give consideration to payment of unemployment benefit to them.
4.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Social Welfare Payments.
3.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why busmen who were locked out were refused social welfare payments.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 and 4 together.
The determination of the title of any person to payment of unemployment benefit, in a trade dispute situation, including a lock-out or otherwise, is not a matter for me. Such decisions are a statutory function of deciding and appeals officers appointed for the purpose under the provisions of the Social Welfare Acts.
Three claims to unemployment benefit recently made by busmen affected by the present shut-down of the CIE bus service in Dublin city were submitted to a deciding officer as test cases. The deciding officer disallowed the claims on the ground that the claimants did not satisfy the provisions of section 17 (2) of the Social Welfare Act, 1952, as amended, governing receipt of unemployment benefit where employment has been lost by reason of a stoppage of work due to a trade dispute at the place of employment. One of these cases was brought to appeal in pursuance of a contention of lock-out. The appeals officer confirmed the disqualification for benefit in that case following an oral hearing at which the claimant concerned and his trade union representative attended and gave evidence.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary saying that where men find their employment is cut off, even though they are willing to work, because of the action of fellow-workers in the same establishment, such persons are not qualified to receive unemployment benefit.
No. As I stated in the first part of my reply, it is not a matter for me. In fact, the Minister is specifically precluded under the Act from interfering with a decision of this nature which is made by a deciding officer or on appeal by an appeals officer. These decisions are made strictly in accordance with the legislation passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas.
Would people other than busmen who are working for the same company who are laid off be entitled to unemployment benefit?
It would not be possible for me to determine any case on the basis of the general statement contained in the Deputy's question. Any case that comes to the head office of the Department is referred to an appeals officer. The Minister has no jurisdiction in this.
I have allowed a number of supplementary questions in this case. I am calling on Deputy MacSharry for a final supplementary.
Does the Parliamentary Secretary agree that the Act does not deprive people, such as those mentioned in the question, from unemployment benefit?
It would not be proper to generalise with regard to any interpretation of the Act. The purpose of appointing deciding officers and appeals officers is to ensure complete impartiality so far as any ministerial direction is concerned. That impartiality is exercised completely by the people who hold these positions.
I am calling Question No. 5.
Can the Parliamentary Secretary state——
I have called the next question. I have allowed several supplementary questions on this matter.