INJURED WORKERS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20364, 19 September 1929, Page 13

INJURED WORKERS.

INCREASE IN COMPENSATION.

LABOUR MEMBER'S PROPOSAL.

MINISTERS INDICATE SUPPORT.

[BY TELEGRAPH. —PRESS ASSOCIATION.] WELLINGTON, Wednesday. The second reading of liis Workers' Compensation Amendment Bill was moved by Mr. E. .T. Howard (Labour — Christcliurch South) in the House this

evening. Mr. Howard said the bill did not contain all that Labour wanted in connection with workers' compensation, but it did meet immediate demands. Tho bill contained fivo principal points. At the present time a worker had to be incapacitated for three days before ho was entitled to compensation, and the ,bill reduced this period to two days. He hoped that the time would coino when compensation would be paid immediately following injury.

Another provision sought to grant full wages, instead of tho present 66 2-3 per cont., to injured workers. Another point referred to tho present stipulation that medical and surgical expenses should not exceed £l. Tho bill asked for full medical and surgical attention. A fourth principle dealt with compensation for partial or complete incapacitation and sought to do away with the present basis of payment in accordance with the wages of an injured worker. The bill asked that compensation should be paid to a worker or his dependants regardless of his average weekly wage.

Restriction ol Amount.

| The last point was designed to do away completely with tho "common employment" principle, under which a worker was restricted to compensation to the extent of £IOOO. He referred to separate cases in which two men in different places met with similar accidents. One man was killed immediately and his dependants received £2500 damages. In the other case, where tho man lingered in agony for three weeks before death, his dependants were established to be entitled only to payment under the Workers' Compensation Act because death was not immediate. Tho limit under this Act was £IOOO, and in this particular case the legal costs and other expenses after the case had been taken to the Privy Council reduced the amount which tho widow received to a very small sum. The Hon. T. M. Wilford said he was in favour of amending the present Act by removing the limitation of compensation to £IOOO, and by providing for full medical and surgical expenses in a case of injury. Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Reform —Gisbornc) said he did not agree that an employer should bo called upon to bear all the responsibility in a case of accident. He thought tho bill should go before the Labour Bills Committee. The author of the bill had apparently only one object, namely, to secure advantages for the workers, and he did not, consider the effect on industry. The bill would havo far-reaching effects. Humanitarian Legislation.

Mr. W. E. Parry (Labour—Auckland Central) complained that there had been crises in which workers or dependants had been deprived of compensation bocause their employers had not insured them and had become insolvent. Ho claimed this emphasised tho need of compulsory insurance by employers, as provided for in tho bill.

The Hon. W. A. Veitch said ho thought the bill, as a humanitarian measure, would receive the sympathetic consideration Of the House. Tie would like to see it go before tlio Labour Bills Committee. Ho said that the humanitarian proposals at present before the Government would, if all wore passed into law, cost tho State £1.000.000 a year, and the Government had to keep that fact in mind. Mr. Veitch stated that in conjunction with one other member of tho Ministry he had given a good deal of consideration to the question of workers' compensation, and he anticipated that when the bill was before the Labour Bills Committee he would receive a number of valuable suggestions. Ho trusted that tho present, bill, after it had passed through the hands of tho Labour Bills Committee, would bo received sympathetically by the House.

Tho bill was read a second time on tho voices and referred to tho Labour Bills Committee.