DISABLED WORKERS

Grey River Argus, 23 July 1926, Page 5

DISABLED WORKERS

N.Z. COMPENSATION RATE. LABOUR SEEKS INCREASE. (Special to “Argus.”) WELLINGTON, July 22 Mr H. E. Holland, in speaking in the House on the second reading of Mr E. J. Howard’s Workers’ Compensation Amendment Bill, claimed that it was not too much to expect that a worker should receive 100 per cent of his wages while he was off duty through accident. Why, he asked, should the women and children be made to suffer? The soldiers who had fought in the war were treated on a far better basis than those injured in an industrial battle. Mr A. Hamilton (Wallace): “There was a big difference in the wages, t hough. ’ ’ Hon J. A. Young: “Would not the payment of 100 per cent lead to malingering?” Mr Holland: “There will always be found a case of malingering here and there, but the workers of this country arc as honest as the hon gentleman who j\ma<le the interjection.” Mr Holland said the New South Wales Workers’ Compensation Act was the best the world had ever known, and under it all the manual workers were included up to those who , received £750 for the year, and the grounds for compensation were much wider. . This bill, he said, proposed to amend the main Act to raise the pension from’

58 per cent of the average weekly earnings to 100 per cent, the full wage of the pensioner. The bill also proposed that, instead of a percentage of the earnings, those receiving compensa tion should receive a percentage ot £l,OOO so that all would be on an equal basis It was further proposd to remove the limit of £lOOO for common damage enabling the applicant to proceed for any amount. Mr Howard said the measure had become a “hardy annual,” and would I probably be relegated to the waste paper basket eventually. The Minister for Labour said Mr Howard could not. even in his wildest imagination, expect the measure to pass. . , ~ J