asked the Minister for Defence if he is aware that army sergeant, Harry Donaghy (Reg. No. 6653), served for thirty years in the National Army, and was discharged with an exemplary character; and that when he applied for a job with his Department, sweeping the roads at McKee Barracks, he was refused the position which was given to a man who never served a day in the Defence Forces; and, if so, if he will state why the sergeant was not given the job.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Employment of Ex-Army Man.
64.
All vacancies for employment of the nature referred to in the question are filled through the medium of the employment exchanges. This practice was followed in this case, but as Mr. Donaghy's name was not submitted by the employment exchange authorities for consideration for employment, it was not possible to consider him for the vacancy.
Does it not seem to be manifestly an unsuitable situation that in relation to a sergeant of our Army, who has 30 years' service, who is discharged with an exemplary character and who applies for employment in the barracks where he served, that somebody who never did a day's work in the Defence Forces is preferred before him? Surely some provision should be made for ex-servicemen to be given some special consideration in connection with such employment, at least from the point of ensuring that if the employment exchange has not sent up his name, his name will be considered, if he wishes it to be considered, in consideration of his service to the national forces?
I think Deputy Dillon must be aware that successive Governments have required employment of this sort to be recruited from the lists supplied by the labour exchange. I take it that is for the purpose of reducing the list of registered unemployed and, consequently, reducing payments of public assistance.
There is a further consideration in cases of this sort. Usually—in this case it is so—the man is of such an age that it is hardly likely his name would be included in the list in the exchange. The fact is his name was not included. That is the reason why he was not considered for employment.
Will the Minister for Defence not agree with me it would be reasonable and appropriate for him to make representations to the Minister for Social Welfare, or whoever is responsible, if an ex-service man with an exemplary discharge after 30 years' service wishes to have his name considered for positions of this character? Even if the branch manager has not sent up his name, an ex-serviceman ought to be entitled to have it considered. If the present regulations do not provide for that, should they not be changed? Or are we to tell ex-servicemen of exemplary service in the Army that this is a matter of no consequence or interest to the Government and the State they spent their lives serving? I suggest to the Minister that is wrong.
This is becoming a debate.
The Minister is defending himself behind a regulation, the nature of which I could debate very eloquently but I do not debate it. The Minister's position is all cod. This is a common way of distributing jobs among the boys. All I am asking is that the operation of distributing jobs among the boys be suspended when an ex-serviceman asks for employment in the barracks where he spent his life in the service of the State.
That is all very well, but has the State not an obligation to the people who have only very intermittent employment? After all, this soldier had constant employment over a long period of years. Certainly his sort get preference, but he was not nominated by the Exchange. It is for that reason that the man mentioned in the question was not considered for employment.
Would the Minister say if, in fact, Mr. Donaghy intimated he was an applicant for the job, would somebody tell him he could not be qualified unless his name was in the labour exchange?
Deputy Tully knows that, with the help of Deputies like himself, all these men know what the regulations are. None of them is so ill-informed as not to know that in cases of this kind, his name must come through the labour exchange. It is for that purpose the labour exchanges were established.
Surely the Minister is aware that there are men 30 years in the Army who do not know an awful lot about these things?
This has passed beyond the stage of question and answer. It must be brought to an end.