WORKERS RECEIVING DOLE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21387, 15 July 1931, Page 11

WORKERS RECEIVING DOLE

CASE OF DOCKERS (From Our Own Correspondent.) LONDON, May 21. The Port Labour Committee has issued a report, which shows how dock workers exploit the dole. Of the committee, Sir Ronald Maclean, M.P., is president, and its members include Mr Ernest Bevin, Mr Ben Tillett, M.P., and Sir James Sexton, M.P. (representatives of the dock workers). The committee reports that from 1921 to 1929 inclusive £6,000,000 was paid into the Unemployment Insurance Fund by employers', employees, and the State on account of the “Dock, , Harbour, River and Canal Service ” in Great Britain. During the same period the amount of benefit paid to workers in the service was £22,000,000! *' A sample analysis of the London workers showed that 50.9 per cent, drew benefit at some time during the year, the average amount, being for 92 days, but that only a small proportion were, registered as wholly unemployed during any week in which benefit was drawn. After examining the provisions of the Acts the, committee were “not surprised” to find cases of men “earning £4, £5, £6 or even more during two or three days’ or nights’ work, who had also received benefit during the same week.” “No witness before us,” they add, “ attempted to defend this practice, except on the ground that it was within the law.” r . i; 7 SUGGESTED REMEDY. On the question ■of the “dole,” as applied to the industry, there are differences of opinion.'Mr Bevin, Sir James Sexton, Mr Tillett, Mr D. W. Milford, Mr T. W. Condon, and Mr D. Hillman submit a scheme providing for a minimum weekly income, pensions, registration and distribution of employment under one statutory authority. The money would, be- found under the scheme by a' levy on the goods handled. On the other hand, Sir Alfred Booth, Mr C. Cullen, Mr C. P. Leach, Mr C. S. Page, Mr, S. C. Parkin, and Mr James S. Spencer urge the principle of separating relief from insurance, and recomr mend a scheme to ensure that casual workers who earn high wages in a few days should not draw benefit immediately they are unemployed, and to remove the present inducement to evade employment in order to maintain “ continuity of unemployment.” They sug : gest further,, that transitional benefit at the direct charge of the Exechequer should be paid for a limited period only, on the basis of family needs, with strict conditions with regard to the acceptance of suitable work or training.