asked the Minister for the Public Service the pension and the gratuity payable to an industrial civil servant on a retiring wage of £45 after 40 years' service (and no Army service) who commenced employment on 1st April, 1936, (i) if he had been absent from work due to illness in each year for the full period of paid sick pay applicable to established civil servants, and had been given such paid leave, and was not otherwise absent and (ii) if he had been absent from work due to illness for the same periods, but was allowed paid leave in accordance with the sick pay scheme applicable to industrial civil servants from 1st June, 1967, and was not otherwise absent.
Written Answers. - Industrial Civil Servant.
67.
Sick leave with pay is reckonable for pension purposes in the case of both established and industrial staff. Sick leave without pay does not reckon in either case. The maximum amount of sick leave with pay which an established officer can receive is 12 months in aggregate in any period of four years. He could, in theory, therefore, over a period of 40 years have a maximum of ten years' sick leave with pay.
Under the sick pay scheme for industrial staff an industrial civil servant can receive full pay for up to 13 weeks' sick leave in any period of 12 months' service. He could, theoretically, therefore, if the current scheme for industrial staff had applied during his full 40 years' service have received in all a maximum of ten years' sick leave with pay. The pensionable service reckoned in each case would be the same.
The amount of reckonable service could vary very considerably depending upon the actual pattern of sick leave. For example, the greatest disparity would occur where the two officers each had a continuous period of 12 months' sick leave. In such a case an established officer, provided he had no sick leave in the previous years, would get sick leave with pay for the full period and thus that period would be reckonable for superannuation purposes. The industrial employee would be paid for only 13 weeks and the balance of 39 weeks would not, therefore, be reckonable.
The question postulates the same retiring pay in each case and, accordingly, the pension and gratuity ultimately payable would be directly proportionate to the reckonable service at retirement.