Vital Factors in Labour Deferment
Page 35
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Many Men Valuable to Road Transport are Lost to the By Forces Through Ignorance of Correct Deferment Procedure " Tantalus" ACASE of unusual interest, as also of supreme importance—by reason of the principle involved— to employers whose undertakings are scheduled under the Essential .Work Order, was recently before the Court of Appeal.
It transpired that an employee, who was the appellant, had been absent through illness and on his return, when reporting for duty, had been put on less important work, with a resultant reduction in wages. The contention of the employer was that the original job was ne longer available when the man resumed, work. .
The case had been before the County Court judge,. who held that the man was not entitled to sue for wages. The only remedy, therefore, was for proceedings to be taken against the employer for breach of the Essential Work Order. The Court of Appeal decided that a workman who could not, under the Order, be discharged or voluntarily leave his employment was entitled to be paid the normal wages for the job which he had been doing although he had been transferred to less important work.
Lord Chief Justice Scott, who fotind all the facts to be in the workman's.favour, said he was satisfied that the employer, taking advantage' Of the man's illness, had deliberately put another individual into his job. He stated that to accede to the employing concern's contention that, by reason Of what it did, the man's job was no longer available., would be to reduce the Essential Work Order to a farce and to render it dependent on any' employer's whim.
The County Court judge's view that the employee in question had no right of action against his employer was a misconception. The Order preserved the contractual rights of the parties and did not deprive the employed person of his contractual, right to sue for wages. Judgment with costs, therefore, was found in favour of the workman; but leave to appeal to the House of Lords was granted'. • Therefore it will be appreciated that, should the House of Lords uphold the ruling of the Court of Appeal, the obligations of employers under the Essential Work Order will assume a deeper and wider significance than, hitherto, has been realized.or understood.
Rule by Order Receives Setback For some time past there has been evidenced considerable concern and apprehension regarding the growing practice of legislatibn by Order—a proceeding that obviated bringing the matter before the House of Commons.
There are in actual operation some 2,000 Statutory Rees and Orders made under the Defence Regulations. Each of these is backed by the fullforce of -the law though many have never been 'considered by Parliament. It is worth while, therefore, to record the recent victory against this practice won in the House of Commons.
The occasion was one which concerged the M. of W.T., who—it was alleged by several speakers—would, under an Order in Council, be given the power of a dictator. The debate was strong arid it was apparent that appeasement would it satisfy the House. Although the Parliamentary Secretary to the M. of W.T. gave an uncteitaking to withdraw the Order and to replace it with another more acceptable to the House, the offer . was rejected. .
Now this measure of success points a moral to the road-haulage. fraternity which should be taken to heart. It demonstrates very clearly that when there is a sufficient number of Members of Parliament actively to support a cause, they can win the day. Therefore it is ' more than ever essential for the hauliers to be united in one solid body; so that—being free frorl. diverse interests —their cause can be 'sponsored more successfully even by Members in the House.
In this, the fourth year of war, there are still considerable misunderstanding and lack of knowledge on the part of employers of labour as to the correct deferment procedure to be followed. This refers not so much to the first application for deferment, but, more particularly, to cases where a further period is desired.
Submit Deferred Application in Time It is necessary in such instances that a new application, on Form N.S.300, be submitted at least 15 days before the expiry date of the current period of deferment. This is of the utmost importance, as failure to comply with the conditions leads the District Man Power Board to assume that an employer does not wish to retain the particular worker in question. The latter is withdrawn, consequently,, for service with the Forces or for.transfer to industry. Unless the Board is in receipt of Form N.S.300, adjudication cannot be made.
This does.not mean, however, that the N.S.300 should be sent direct to the Board; such is not the
procedure 'laid 'clown. The form should be sent to the addreg of the Allocation Office of the Ministry of Labour and National Service. This address is to be found on the card, N.S.2, which everyone receives at the time of registering under the Military. Service Act. Upon receipt of Form N.S.300 it is the obligation of the Allocation Office to forward this to the particular Board concerned.
In a machine so huge as is the present Ministry of Labour organization there must be some "slip-ups" and, in fact, there are. It is advisable, therefore, always to retain a copy of Form N.S.300, so that in any instance where this should fail to reach the Board, there is Material evidence to prove compliance with the pro ' cedure and so enable the necessary action to be taken.
Another point to be noted is that in relation to applications which have been rejected by the Board. In such cases employers are notified officially on. N.S.207, which states that any appeal. against the decision must be niade within six days of the date of post mark. Many employers fail to observe this condition.
An error which is frequently made at the time of completion of Form N.S.300 relates to inadequate and incorrect deicription of occupation. Take, for example, the occupation described as that of "Technical Representative" with no amplification and no details of the duties involved. It might be assumed by the Board that the occupation thus described would be connected with salesmanship; and in that event the chances are that the application would be rejected on the grounds that the work was not of national importance. In point ,of fact, the duties involved could be of a highly technical char, acter and, moreover, of supreme importance to the war effort. With regard to applications generally, support should be obtained, whenever possible, from the Government Department concerned. In the case of appeal this is essential.