GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS SUPERANNUATION FUND BILL (REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE, TOGETHER WITH MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.) (MR. GILFEDDER, CHAIRMAN.)

Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1902 Session I, I-07

1.—7.

1902. NEW ZEALAND.

GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS SUPERANNUATION FUND BILL (REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE, TOGETHER WITH MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.) (MR. GILFEDDER, CHAIRMAN.)

Beport brought up 19th August, 1902, and ordered to be printed.

OBDER OP REFERENCE. Extract from the Journals of the House of Representatives. Friday, the 18th Day of July, 1902. Ordered, " That a Seleot Committee, consisting of sixteen members, be appointed, to whom shall be referred the Government Railways Superannuation Fund Bill, five to be a quorum ; the Committee to consist of Mr. Collins, Mr. Fisher, Mr. Fowlds, Mr. W. Fraser, Mr. Gilfedder, Mr. Graham, Mr. Guinness, Mr. Massey, Mr. Millar Mr Pi'rani' Mr. G. W. Russell, Sir W. R. Russell, Mr. E. M. Smith, Mr. Wilford, Mr. Witheford, and the Mover "—(Hon Sir J. G. Wakd.) v

I—l. 7.

1,—7.

REPORT ON THE GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS SUPERANNUATION FUND BILL.

The Government Eailways Superannuation Fund Bill Committee, to whom was referred the above-mentioned Bill, have the honour to report that, having duly considered the same, they recommend the Bill be allowed to proceed subject to the amendments shown on a copy of the Bill attached hereto. M GILPBDDEKj Chairman. 19th August ~1902.

2

1.—7.

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

Thursday, 7th August, 1902. William James Edwabds examined. (No. 1.) 1 The Chairman.} What is your name in full ?—William James Edwards. 2 What office do you hold?-I am the general secretary of the Amalgamated Society of Bailwav Servants of New Zealand, and res.de at Christchurch. I may say that the great objection taken to the superannuation, as set forth in the Bill which has been circulated among the members of Sβ railway service, is that it appears that due provision is not made for the retirement o f the nldPi mTmbers of the service. A uniform percentage of 3 per cent, is there stated ; but the members\l7eZed to pay, according to their age, In increased premium, whereby some provision could be made for the older members to retire, and get more adequate retiring-allowance than is provided Zin the Bill which has been circulated. At our conference, held at Inveroargill some five months ago, a scheme of premiums according to age was adopted and was sent through Mr Eonaine for the due consideration of the Minister for Eailways. From the remarks by the M°nX as reported in Hansard, it would appear that at that time he had not been furnished whh our'conference scheme of sliding scale of contributions, which was a matter of surprise o us provision is not made for the older members of the service being retired-and as I say, go thr ugh m its pVeseni form the'men seem to be quite prepared to pay the h>gher premiums fubmitted to the General Manager for Eailways by the conference of the society 3 Ron Sir J G. Ward.] Those rates were 3 per cent, up to thirty yeais of age, oper cent. With regard to that point: there are twenty-eight men in the PetoneWorkBhops wto havfbee'i in the service from twelve to twenty-five years I think, and wenty-faur AdZ-non are those figures correct ?-I could not say exactly, not having a D.-3 xeturn with pensioner superannuation understand that the suggestion is that at the start the Superbe deferred for one, two, or three years, if necessary ?-Yes ; the members

3

L—7.

4

[WILLIAM JAMES EDWAKDS.

members of the Second Division of the North Island on the Board, owing to the preponderance of members of the Second Division over those of the First in the service. 10. Mr. Wilford.] How do you mean—" preponderance " ?—ln numbers. The First Division is much smaller numerically than the Second. 11. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] In any case you recognise that whatever Board is constituted it can govern only under the law itself—there is no power for the Board ?—There is practically no power for it. Of course, there are members who look upon the General Manager being there as undesirable, but I think that reasonable members of the service agree that there are certain officers of the Department which it is necessary should be there. 12. I presume that the employees recognise that where the State has a grave responsibility— which it has, quite outside of the men themselves—it must have direct representation on the Board? —Yes. They simply desire that the Second Division should be represented as I have indicated, if possible. They suggest that five should form a quorum. I mention that because it was decided by the conference. 13. I showed you the proposed alterations in the Bill—the alternative scheme?— Yes. 14. You have considered it ?—Yes. 15. Is there any objection to it?— None whatever, beyond this: that we would like the premiums reduced. We think it is a very reasonable scheme indeed if we can get the premiums reduced somewhat. Mr. Wilford: I would like to ask the opinion of Mr. Edwards and the men with reference to clause 23 ? Hon. Sir J. G. Ward: I might explain that I propose to add to clause 23 a provision that while any member is in receipt of any payment under the Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act he shall not also receive payments under this Act. Witness : Our conference suggested that clause 23 should be struck out altogether, but since we have discussed the matter with Sir Joseph Ward we think that the clause is not so objectionable as it might at first appear. 17. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] If the clause were struck out payments might still be made to members of the service under the Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act, for that Act applies to them ?—Yes. As the clause stood it was thought that a man might receive under the Compensation Act much less than he would under the Superannuation Act. 18. Mr. Guinness.] What organization do you represent?— The Amalgamated Society of Bailway Servants. 19. Where is the society's head office ? —ln Christchurch. We have branches right through the service, which include all members of the service who choose to join. 20. You have district branches throughout the colony ?—Yes. 21. Have you taken the opinion of all these district branches on the Bill?— The matter was brought up at the conference held at Invercargill in March last. The Superannuation Bill had been printed by the society and distributed among the members, who had three months' notice before the sitting of the conference, and the delegates were instructed how to vote or give the opinions of the members; and they ruled upon this matter at the conference. It was the conference that suggested the sliding scale. 22. But this Bill is different from the one that was circulated last session and considered by your conference ?—Yes ; it is practically an adoption of the suggestions of the conference. 23. Do you think that sufficient provision is made in clause 7 to create the necessary levy from the men who have been in the service a considerable time and who are likely to retire shortly ?—We think that with the premiums we have suggested it is possible to make ample provision for pensioning off those members; but that is only our opinion. A large amount of data that we would have liked to have got to work up statistics from we cannot get; and a lot of departmental records, containing information as to the ages of the men likely to retire, and so on, are not available. But we fancy that with the premiums suggested the fund could be worked. The statistics we originally compiled in support of our requests were based upon the Government subsidy, but the State now guaranteeing the fund our statistics do not exactly apply. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward: I might state for the information of the Committee that if this new clause 7 is accepted on these lines as the one for the Bill I propose to ask my colleagues to give a direct contribution from the State the first year. My own idea is that it should be £10,000 or £15,000. 25. Mr. Guinness.] With regard to clause 23, suppose that a person gets a superannuation and has met with an accident just before retiring : do you think it a fair thing for the State to stop his superannuation while he is getting, perhaps, only a small allowance under the Workers' Compensation Act ?—No, we do not think it would be fair that a member permanently incapacitated for duty should receive an amount which would be considerably less than he would receive under the Superannuation Fund. 26. Mr. Collins.] Do I understand you to mean this : providing the amount received under the Workers' Compensation Act is less than a man would receive under the superannuation scheme it should be supplemented so as to bring it up to the higher amount ?—Yes. I think the maximum superannuation is two-thirds of a man's pay for a period. Well, if he got £2 a week for the rest of his life, that would probably be more than equal to what he would receive through an award under the Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act. 27. Mr. Guinness.] I want to draw your attention to this : a person who gets a superannuation under this Bill gets it for length of service; what he gets under the Workers' Compensation Act is a recompense for some injury. Why should the one be set off against the other? Have you considered that question ?—No, I do not know why one should be set off against the other. It is a question whether you can agree that a man should receive the two. If so, so much the better.

WILLIAM LOCHEAD BAEB.j

5

1.—7.

28. I want to know if you, on behalf of the railway servants, are willing to give up that right ?—No. But that is a matter for you to consider in justice to the members. 29. You urge on this Committee that Parliament should do that ?—I would rather the members of the society themselves gave an opinion on that point. lam only the secretary. 30. Hon. Sir J. O. Ward:] You are aware that the Bailway Department makes provision under the Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act for all its employees ?—I thought it was only those on the casual staff, but it is extremely gratifying to learn that all employees are now covered. 31. Supposing that under the Workers' Compensation Act as it is at the present moment a man met with a serious accident and was incapacitated, thus being entitled to a direct payment of, say, £400: do you not consider that it would be a fair thing that until the time arrived for determining whether he was to go on the fund for good he should in the meantime receive the £400 without going on the Superannuation Fund when it came into operation ?—With regard to this question, I think that all that the men look for is something fair. They want provisions which will act fairly all round. That is the spirit of the majority of the men. There are some, of course, who would demand right up to the hilt, without reason. William Lochead Babe examined. (No. 2.) 32. The Chairman.] What is your name in full ?—William Lochead Barr. 33. What office do you hold in the executive ?—I am the treasurer of the Amalgamated Society of Eailway Servants. 34. Mr. Pirani.] Are you in the service now?— Yes. 35. The Chairman.] What evidence do you wish to give with regard to the proposed superannuation scheme ?—I think our secretary has gone pretty well into it; but the evidence that I proposed to give was that the Bill as it was would not be acceptable unless it made some provision for the older hands in the service. 36. Have you seen the new Bill?— Yes. 37. Do you consider that it meets the requirements and the desires of the railway servants? Give us your opinion with regard to the provisions of the new Bill ?—Yes, I think that Bill meets the requirements very well. I may state that the conference we had at Invercargill adopted the scale that is in the new Bill; but we had a meeting with the representatives of the First Division, and they adopted another scale. I think the scale adopted by the conference would meet the requirements pretty well; it is pretty much on the same lines as the Police Provident Fund. The only thing is that some members seem to think that 10 per cent, is too high, but I think it is recouped by the retrospective time that is to be counted to their credit. I certainly think the new Bill is a very great improvement, and I am quite confident that it meets with the approval of the majority of the old hands in the service. 38. Are there any other points that you wish to refer to —the constitution of the Board, for example?—l think the Board provided for in the Bill is quite sufficient. I have no objection to the Board at all. I approve of the Bill generally. 39. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] You approve generally of the amended Bill ? —Yes. . 40. Mr. Guinness.] Whom do you represent ?—The Amalgamated Society of Eailway Servants —the whole New Zealand society. 41. What office do you hold?—I am the treasurer in the executive. 42. Mr. Edwards, who has just given his evidence, is the secretary and you are the treasurer? —Yes. 43. Have you considered clause 23 of the Bill?—-Yes. Our attention was drawn to it, and we came to the conclusion that the compensation clause would not prevent a man from still drawing his superannuation. Ido not know whether that is a correct rendering of the clause or not. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward : I may say that I have told the members of the deputation the addition I proposed to make to the clause — i.e., that while a person is in receipt of payments under the Compensation Act he shall not draw on the fund. 45. Mr. Pirani.] You said just now that there was a difference of opinion as to the scale ?— Yes. 46. That the representatives of the First Division wanted a reduced scale ?—They do. 47. But that the Second Division are satisfied? —The Second Division agreed with the First Division, because theirs was certainly a more liberal scale; but the scale adopted prior to that at the conference was the scale that is in the Bill. 48. What I want to get at is that the objection to the scale in the Bill has come solely from the First Division, and with that objection the others have naturally agreed ? —That is the case. William Beid Haig examined. (No. 3.) 49. The Chairman.] What is your full name ?—William Beid Haig. 50. Do you hold any office in the executive of the society ?—I am president of the Amalgamated Society of Bailway Servants. 51. Have you considered the new Bill?— Yes ; pretty well. 52. You might tell the Committee what is your opinion and the opinion of the executive with respect to it ?—I take it that you refer to the Bill which has been handed to us—the amended Bill. My opinion is that the Bill is a satisfactory one; but the opinion of the executive is that the slidingscale contributions from the members who may join the fund are rather heavy. We think the 10 per cent, rather heavy; but before going further I should like to make myself clear that at the Invercargill conference of the Amalgamated Society of Bailway Servants the delegates considered the Superannuation Bill very carefully, and to get over the difficulty, as far as providing for the senior members of the service was concerned, we adopted the sliding scale.

6

[WILLIAM REID HAIG.

1.—7.

53. Mr. Pirani.] That is your scale which is in the Bill?— Yes; but over and above that we ask the Government "to subsidise that sliding scale by 3 per cent. Since coming up here we have found that the Government have virtually adopted the conference's sliding scale, minus the 3-per-cent, subsidy. . , 54. They guarantee any deficiency ?—I am aware of that; but m the Bill the fund was to be subsidised by a Government subsidy of 3 per cent. To overcome that difficulty the Government have decided to guarantee the fund. But since coming up here and having a conference on the matter with the delegates of the Eailway Officers' Institute we think that the premiums are rather heavy, especially for members of forty and upwards. We think that if we could get the Government to subsidise the payments by those members by 2 per cent., so as to reduce the payments by them from 10 per cent, to 8 per cent., it would make it easier for the older hands. 55. In addition to the guarantee ?—Yes. The subsidising of members at forty years of age would practically work out in twenty years. The contributions would come down to 3 per cent. all the same. „ , 56. The Chairman.] Have you anything to say with regard to the constitution ot the .Board, clause 12?— We would like a slight amendment made there—i.e., the members of the Second Division, seeing that they would probably be the larger number on the fund, would like to have four representatives of their division. . 57* Mr. Wilford.] Either have four representatives, or take out the General Manager, who is one of the First Division : how would that do ?—I would not like to see the General Manager taken out. I think he is a right and proper person to be on the Board. 58. The Chairman.] What is your opinion with regard to clause 23 ?--At the Inyercargill conference we decided that the clause should be struck out. We were not clear on the point. Mr. Wilford explained to the witness the proposed amendment by the Government, that a person should not draw from the Superannuation Fund while he received payments under the Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act. 59. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] I understand that, on the whole, you are satisfied with the amended Bill?—lam. 60. Mr. Pirani.] What division do you belong to ?—No. 2 Division. 61. Has the proposal for reduction of the contributions set out in the conference scale come from your division, or from the other division ? —From the two combined. 62. From whom did the suggestion first come ?—From the First Division. 63. Are you aware that the contributions proposed in the Bill are less than those which the Government compel the police to pay ? —No, I am not aware of that. 64. You will find that that is so. The police contributions are 5, 6, 8, and 10 per cent, for the intermediate divisions—actually heavier than the Government are asking your members to pay ? —I was not aware of it. 65. In fixing the contributions at the conference scale the Government have really considered the railway servants ? —Yes. . 66. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] With reference to this question of the constitution ot the Board, of course you know that the Superannuation Fund is to be governed by statute law ?—Yes. _ 67. And not by regulations of the Minister for Eailways or the General Manager for Railways, or anybody else ? —I was not aware of that. 68. I assume that those who are anxious to alter the constitution of the Board are under the impression that its management of the fund is to be an ordinary matter of regulation : do you know whether that is the case ?—I believe that is so. 69. Mr. Pirani.] Do you think that the objection to the heavy contributions would be met by provision being made for the Board of the Eailway Superannuation Fund to have power at any time, if they found that funds were coming in too quickly, to reduce the contributions ?—I do not think the members of the Second Division would object at all to the contributions being lowered. 70. Mr. Collins.] I would like to know whether, when you said that you were perfectly well satisfied with the amended Bill, you voiced your own opinion or the general opinion of those whom you represent here ? I understand that you are now speaking as president of the society ? —Yes. lam giving my individual opinion as well on that point. We had the ruling of the conference on the matter, and I think it is our duty to put that before you. Whatever we have done since, we have done in the interests of the society. We wish the best Superannuation Bill passed that we can possibly get. . ' 71. Mr. Guinness.] With regard to clause 23, have you considered it and come to a conclusion as to what your views are in reference to it as it is proposed to be amended ?—No, I have not. 72. Mr. Pirani.] Ido not think you understand the question. Has it not been explained to you that clause 23 ought to have an addition made to it ?—Yes, it has been. 73. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] Just to make the point clear I will ask you this : In the course of the interview that I had with you and other members of the society did I mention that I proposed to amend the clause in the direction indicated by Mr. Wilford a few minutes ago ?—Yes. 74. And I understood that was satisfactory to the men ?—I believe that is so. I quite misunderstood Mr. Guinness's question. Thomas Aethub Bullock examined. (No. 4.) 75. The Chairman.] What is your name ?—Thomas Arthur Bullock. 76. What office do you hold in the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants ?—I am vicepresident. 77. Have you considered the amended Bill?—We have gone into the matter fully. 78. Will you please, as concisely as you can, place your opinion, or the opinion of the executive, with regard to this Bill before the Committee?—My opinion with regard to the Bill is that if it does not make provision for the older members of the service it will not be really acceptable.

1.—7.

THOMAS ARTHUR BULLOCK. |

79. Mr. Pirani.] Which Bill do you refer to ? —I am speaking of the original one. 80. We want your opinion of the revised one ?—Taking it altogether, I think that, if the scheme can be worked on the lowest scale of contributions from the members, the Bill will be most beneficial to us. Of course, you will understand that I myself and, no doubt, a good many more like to pay as little as possible for the benefits that we receive. If it is possible to work the scheme on the lowest scale of contributions as submitted by the members of the deputation it would be most acceptable to the members, lam sure ; but if it can be shown that the scheme cannot be worked on the lowest contributions, then, of course, we must naturally take the higher ones. 81. The Chairman.] What were the lowest contributions suggested ?—The scale going up to 7i per cent. 82. Have you considered the scale of contributions for the police service?—l take it that there are very many poorly paid men in the railway service, such as platelayers, who could hardly pay the high contributions. I look at it in that way. I find that there are over three hundred members of the Second Division who at the present time have been over twenty-five years in the railway service, and I take it that those are not young men. 83. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] They would require to be provided for soon, of course?— Yes. With regard to the No. 1 Division, I find there are over 136 men who have been in the service over twenty-five years in that division. 84. And they will require to be provided for soon ? —Yes. 85. The Chairman.] Is there any other point that you wish to speak about ?—I do not know that there is anything else. lam very much impressed with the desirability of doing something for our older members. That is really the matter with me. 86. On the whole, you approve of the amended Bill ?—-Yes, of the amended Bill before you. 87. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] When the present old men .are out of the service and provided for, the balance of the employees will necessarily come under the lower-contribution rate ? What I mean is this: supposing that there are three hundred old men now in the service over fifty. They will pay 10 per cent. They may all be out in five years. If they comprise the whole of the 10-per-cent. men the employees right throughout the service will for ever avoid coming under that 10-per-cent. rate ?—That is so. And as soon as those paying 7$ per cent, go out no one will pay that rate, and so on, until all are under the one scale. 88. As a matter of fact, in the course of time the rate of contribution will come back to 3 per cent, only?— Yes, all will pay that and no more. 89. Mr. Guinness.] Whom do you represent ? —I am vice-president of the society, and I represent the whole of the society in New Zealand. 90. You are one of the executive council of what is called the Amalgamated Society of Bailway Servants? —Yes. 91. You and the other witnesses all represent the same society ? —Yes ; the whole body of members —not any particular branch. I have been connected with the head office ever since the formation of the society. ■ 92. Mr. Pirani.] What division do you belong to ? —The Second. 93. Can you explain to the Committee the reason why the conference at Invercargill—which, I understand, was specially summoned to deal with a measure of this sort —and the executive have differed in their decisions as to the scale of contribution ?—The difference between the two scales has been brought about by the conference between ourselves and Division No. 1. The higher scale was submitted to the conference at Invercargill. 94. Which did not comprise Division No. 1 ?—That is so. The higher one has been brought about by a conference of the two bodies. We thought it could be worked on the lower contributions. 95. Are you aware that the scale decided on by the conference of Division No. 2 is a lower one than the police scale at present ?—I think the police pay 10 per cent. 96. But the intermediate rates. The police pay 5, 6, 8, and 10 per cent., as against 3, and 10 per cent, recommended by your Division No. 2 ? —I do not think the matter was gone into so fully at the conference as it has been since we have been in Wellington. 97. I understand that you want a still lower scale than that to which I have just referred?—■ In the new scale 7 per cent, is the highest, instead of 10 per cent., and then the contribution rates go down to 3 per cent. 98. Mr. Edwards has given us the proposed rates —namely, 3, 4, 5, and 7$ per cent. Can you tell me whether that scale is based on any actuarial calculations ?—I could not tell you that. 99. You have not considered it from an actuarial point of view ?—No. I think it has been clearly shown by some of the members who have given evidence that we place the scale on that basis simply because we will withhold payments out to the individual members for a time, and we want to have sufficient funds to pay out with when we do start. 100. But the scale is really a matter of guesswork ; it is not based on actuarial calculation ?— We have had no actuarial statement on the matter. David Clapham Hiskbns examined. (No. 5.) 101. The Chairman.] What is your name ?—David Clapham Hiskens. 102. What office do you hold in the Amalgamated Society of Eailway Servants? —I am a member of the executive. 103. Have you considered the amended Superannuation Bill ?—Yes. 104. Will you please put before the Committee, as concisely as you possibly can, your opinion and the opinion of your fellow-members with respect to the Bill ? —I think that the Bill is a good one.. The main object of the deputation is to obtain some consideration for the older members of the service, so as to enable them to retire when their time comes, thus giving chances of promotion to the junior members of the service. I think that the Bill, generally, is a good one.

7

1.—7.

8

[DAVID CLAPHAM HISKENS.

105. Are there any points in the Bill that you wish to refer to ; for example, the constitution of the Board, or clause 23, with regard to compensation for accidents?—l see by the report that the conference at Invercargill recommended five as a quorum. I was not present at the conference, but they asked for two members of the Second Division from each Island to represent them on the Board on account of the preponderance of Second Division members in the service. But that is a matter from the conference, not from the deputation. The recommendation was passed at the conference, and we are bound to mention it. 106. Are you satisfied with the rates of contribution laid down in the Bill— i.e., 3, 5, 7-J-, and 10 per cent. ?—I think, myself, that there are a number—l will not say a great number—of the older members of the service in the lower grades who will find the 10-per-cent. rate rather high. I think it would suit a number of the older members in the low grades if a lower rate could possibly be arranged. With regard to what I said just now about representation of the Second Division on the Board and the number to form a quorum, I might say that I am not advocating a quorum of five. That recommendation was passed at the conference, and lam bound to mention it as having been passed. I think that I might not have referred to the matter of representation at all, because, personally, I do not think there is anything in it. I merely mentioned it because the conference passed a resolution on the subject. 107. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] I understand that, on the whole, you agree with the amended Bill?— Yes. 108. Mr. Pirani.] With regard to the quorum of the Board, there is one thing, probably, that you may think it necessary to increase the quorum for, and that is in case of the forfeiture of a pension. Do you think that the forfeiture of a pension ought to be considered, so as to be dealt with in a satisfactory manner by more members of the Board than three ?—I think the treatment would be fair. 109. Do you think that if a Board consisting of the Minister, the Public Trustee, and the Solicitor-General forfeited a pension the members of the service would be quite satisfied?— For myself, I should be. 110. Mr. W. Fraser.] I understand that, while you agree generally with the provisions of the amended Bill, there is an impression that the contribution of 10 per cent, would, fall somewhat heavily on the lower grades of the service—the older men would pay 10 per cent. ? —Yes. 111. The 10-per-cent. contribution would fall more heavily on a man with a small salary than a man with a higher salary?— Yes. 112. Do you think it would meet the objection if 10 per cent, was paid by the older men who received more than a certain amount and a lower rate by those who received less than that ?—I think it would be more acceptable generally, but it almost seems an unfair basis. 113. But at the same time you would, rather than discriminate, leave the payments as proposed ? —Yes, I think so. 114. Mr. Pirani.] Do you understand that the scale agreed to by the conference and included in the Bill is lower than the police scale ? —I believe it is at the same rate as the police scale. 115. That is the mistake you have all been making. The police scale is 5, 6, 8, and 10 per cent., as against 3, 5, I\, and 10 per cent. So you see the police contributions are very much higher than yours, even as proposed at Invercargill. You did not consider that when you were considering a further reduction from the scale proposed at Invercargill ?—No. The Police Act was mentioned at Invercargill as the basis, and from that we took the 5 per cent, for ages of thirty upwards, and the 1\ and 10 per cent. 116. The scale proposed at Invercargill and adopted by the Government is, except with regard to the oldest men, lower in each grade than the police scale?—l think that, generally, the Bill is a fair one. 117. Mr. Wilford.] Does the suggestion for the lower rates of contribution come unanimously from the society?—As represented by the executive.

Thuesday, 14th August, 1902. Mr. E. McKenna examined. (No. 6.) 1. The Chairman.] What is your name in full ? —Edward McKenna, Stationmaster at Wanganui. 2. Are you a member of the First Class ?—The first subsidiary class. 3. Are you a member of any of the branches ?—No. 4. Well, you have got a copy of this amended Bill ?—Yes. 5. You might tell the Committee, as concisely as you can, what is your opinion with regard to it ? —I should be the oldest servant of the railways. lam mentioned as the oldest officer in the railways, having completed very nearly thirty-six years' service. I have read the Bill thoroughly and considered it, and I think, with one or two exceptions, it will meet with the approval of every railway-man now in the service. 6. Mr. Pirani.] That is the amended Bill?— Yes, the amended Bill. 7. The Chairman.] Well, what are these one or two points to which you wish to refer ?—The first point to which I wish to call your attention is clause 14, "Provided that no payment shall be made out of the fund before the first day of January, one thousand nine hundred and four." 8. What do you take exception to ? —I have looked through the classification return furnished to each railway-man last year. I find there are about thirty-eight men with twenty-nine years' service and over, and under thirty-four years' service. There are only twelve men of thirty-five years' service and over, and I know that amongst these twelve men there are only, I think—as far

E. MCKENNA.]

9

1.—7.

as I can judge from my recollection —six of these of the age of sixty, and I know that there are six that are younger. I know one man who is fifty-five, although he has completed thirty-five years' service and over. Two amongst the six men that have seen thirty-five years' service are over sixty years of age, and I know that there are several of them very infirm, and who would desire, if possible, to leave the service, by taking advantage of the benefits of the fund. I would respectfully suggest to the Committee that instead of the Ist day of January, 1904, it be the Ist day of April, 1903 ; that is the commencement of the financial year. The other point is the next clause, No. 15, " Every contributor whose length of service in the Department is not less than forty years, or whose age is not less than sixty years, may at any time retire from the service of the Department at the expiration of three months' notice of his intention so to do, and shall thereupon be entitled to receive from the fund an annual allowance for the rest of his life computed as follows : For every year of service he shall receive one-sixtieth part of his annual rate of pay; but in no case shall the total yearly allowance exceed two-thirds of such annual rate of pay." To those who are joining the service now, cadets and others of seventeen or eighteen years of age, forty years' service would not be considered a very long time, and comparatively they would be young men at the end of that time ; but there are a great many old men that joined the service at a mature age in the early stage of the railways. I myself was thirty-six years of age, having gone through twentyone years' service in the army, and lam now in my seventy-third year. But I may be an exception'to the general rule of men. It has pleased God to give me very good health, and I feel strong in body and mind, and all that; but I know that there are a great many men now in the service that are not so constituted, especially men belonging to the workshops and men of the permanent-way who have been exposed to the rough life of their work. To these men it would be a great benefit if they could retire on the passing of the Bill. When I tell you some circumstances of the early life of the railway-men I think you will not consider the request too great. For instance, my first station was Kaiapoi, in Canterbury. I have frequently in the grain season entered my goods-shed at 6 o'clock in the morning—in fact, that was the regular hour of work; in summer-time from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., and in winter from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Those were our regular hours, but they were never attended to. We worked frequently very much longer hours than we wished. I have gone from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. in the grain season, and I have been summoned with my staff at 8.30 to load a special train ; so that the rolling-stock we had at that time being very small it was impossible to cope with the traffic unless extraordinary measures were taken. I worked then from 8.30 with all my staff until 4.30 in the morning. I returned again at 6 o'clock and worked until 6 that evening. That, sir, was not once in the grain season, but I may say that during the last harvest that obtained when I had charge at Kaiapoi Station, for one fortnight every other day was the same. We worked from 6 o'clock one morning until 4.30 the next morning, and commenced again at 6 o'clock and worked until 6 o'clock the following night. 9. How far do you consider this measure will benefit the older servants?—l would just state that instead of forty years the time should be thirty-five years, because these men have worked longer and worked harder than others. They have worked at a less wage, and consequently they are not in that position that the young men will be in who are now joining the service. 10. With regard to clause 7, " The contribution from members shall in each case be at the following percentage of the pay of each member respectively, and shall be deducted at each fourweekly railway accounting period—that is to say, three per centum if his age is not more than thirty years at the time when the first contribution becomes payable; five per centum if his age then exceeds thirty years but does not exceed forty years ; seven per centum if his age then exceeds forty years but does not exceed fifty years ; ten per centum if his age then exceeds fifty years " ?—I do not see that there is anything to be taken exception to there. 11. With respect to clause 23, " In any case where any payment is made by an award of the Court under ' The Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act, 1900,' to or in respect of any contributor, the benefits that would accrue to or in respect of such contributor under this Act shall absolutely cease and determine during receipt of compensation under the said Act" ?—I believe that will be of very great assistance to the Bill. 12. Is there any other point you wish to speak on ? —No, nothing else, sir. 13. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] Mr. McKenna, have you seen the amended scale for the new Bill ?—Yes, sir. 14. And you concur with that ? —Yes, sir. With the exception of the two clauses I have mentioned, the retirement question, and the Bill to come into force in April, 1903, instead of January, 1904—which would be only nine months before the time the Bill provides—l agree with the Bill. 15. That and the thirty-five years as against the forty years are the only two recommendations you make ?—There are a good many men nearly as old as I am, and there are men younger in years who are older in body, owing to the hard work they have gone through. 16. Then, you are speaking as one of the No. 1 Division ?—Yes. 17. With the exception of the two exceptions you make the rest of the Bill commends itself to you ?—As far as the present generation is concerned, I think the Bill could not be better. I have been speaking for myself as well as the older men, and I only make it twelve men with thirtyfive years' service and over. 18. Mr. Pirani.] Do you think that the position of these older men in the service would be satisfactory if we made it thirty-five years' service for those who entered the Eailways before 1880 ?—Yes. 19. So that it would be forty years for all those that entered after 1880?— Yes. I think the older servants —the men who really have built the railways—ought to be treated in that respect, if possible.

2—l. 7,

10

[THOMAS WILSON.

1.—7.

Thomas Wilson examined. (No. 7.) 20. The Chairman.] What is your name in full?— Thomas Wilson, engineman, Palmerston 2L Do you belong to the First or Second Division?—l belong to the Second Division. 22. Have you considered this amended Bill? —Yes. 23. You might just as concisely as you can tell the Committee what is your opinion in respect to it? I would like to say, sir, briefly, that since the Bill has appeared in its amended form the objections that I had to it on its first introduction have been very greatly removed, and with the exception of some detail matters, that may be amended, I am thoroughly in accord with the provisions of the Bill. The first item which I would like to mention my objection to, or upon which I have to make a suggestion, is in section 12, " The fund shall be administered by a Board, called ' The Government Railways Superannuation Fund Board' and consisting of eight members— namely, the Minister, the Solicitor-General, the Public Trustee, the General Manager; two persons'to be elected from among their number by the members of the First Division of the Department, one representing the North Island and the other the Middle Island two persons to be similarly elected by the members of the Second Division of the Department." I think that this Bill will be sufficiently attractive to induce a very large number, if not nearly the whole, of the members of the Second Division, as well as the First Division, to participate in the benefits of it; and, that being the case, Ido not consider that the two persons to represent the Second Division isa sufficient representation. Then, section (2) of clause 12, "At all meetings of the Board three shall form a quorum." Considering the important functions which the Board has to perform Ido not consider that three is sufficient to form a quorum. I also think, sir, that provision should be made for the Act coming into force on the Ist January, 1903, instead of 1904. We know very well that there are cases of hardship at the present time, and that the Departments are frequently forced into this position : they do all they possibly can to provide light employment; but experience goes to prove that it is absolutely impossible for them to provide such employment for all men who are past doing what may be considered a fair day's work, and in a number of instances they have no option but to retire these men from the service with practically nothing to live upon; and the longer this Act is in coming into force the greater the number of hardships there will'be. That is my idea. Then, in regard to the forty years, I also think that thirty-five years is quite.sufficient. Forty years may be a reasonable period for an inside staff (as a general rule), but I think you will find that in a number of cases the men employed outside are worth very little long before they have arrived at the end of forty years' service. I need only quote a man following my own calling. At the present rate of progress in the New Zealand railways a cleaner enters the service at nineteen years of age, and is rapidly promoted until he takes his place on the footplate, and very few men after putting in a number of years on the footplate are worth much. It is a well-known fact that a large number of them have not a leg to stand on afterwards. This also applies to guards, and it applies with more force, to my way of thinking, to shunters. I also think that in regard to section (2) of clause 18 "If any contributor dies before becoming entitled to any ■retiring-allowance, there shall be paid to his legal personal representatives the whole amount actually contributed by him to the fund, together with any compensation to which he is entitled under section seventy-six of ' The Government Railways Act, 1887/ but without interest thereon," the same provision should apply as in the following clause, " But if such contributor dies from injuries received while in the execution of his duty, and leaving a wife or children him surviving, then (in lieu of such payment to his legal personal representatives) there shall be paid to or for the benefit of his widow during her widowhood the annual sum of eighteen pounds, with an additional sum to be paid to or for the benefit of his children (if any) of five shillings per week in the case of each child until the child attains the age of fourteen years; or the widow may if she so elects be paid, in lieu of the foregoing allowance, a lump sum equivalent to the whole amount of the contributions actually paid by the member to the fund, together with any compensation to which the member was entitled under section seventy-six of ' The Government Railways Act, 1887.' " There is provision made in the latter clause for his widow and children in the event of him meeting his death from injuries received while in the execution of his duty, and to my mind the same provision should apply in the first clause. It is sometimes a very difficult matter to trace what is really an accident "in the execution of his duty," and if a man receives an injury owing to exposure it would be a very difficult thing to prove that it was done in the execution of his duty, although it may be a wellknown fact that such was the case. I think the same provision should be made for those who die before arriving at that stage at which they would receive their retiring-allowance as for those who die from an accident received while in the execution of their duty. In regard to section 19, "If at any time the pay of a contributor is temporarily stopped by the Department on the ground of ill health, he shall be permitted to continue to contribute to the fund in such manner as may be prescribed by regulations." Now, I think that what we really want here is not a provision for the individual to pay his contributions, but some provision made whereby he will be able to stop those payments without forfeiting that for which he has already paid into the fund. I would respectfully suggest that some provision should be made where in the event of a man receiving no pay on account of his ill health his contributions should stop. I certainly think it would be utterly useless for any one to ask a man to pay when he had nothing to pay with. That is as it appears to me. Ido not mean to say that the Department should provide the payments, but his position should be kept alive. The next section is one upon which I am not perfectly clear; it appears to me a little bit obscure, and I would like to be enlightened upon it: "In every case where under the provisions of this Act any life-allowance or other money granted to a member on his retirement is computed on the basis of his pay, such pay shall be deemed to be the rate of pay he is receiving at the time of his retirement, unless within the

11

THOMAS WILSON.]

1.—7.

previous five years he has served in any grade beneath that held by him at the time of his retirement, in which ease such pay shall be deemed to be the average rate of pay received by him during the seven years next preceding his retirement." This appears to me that the average for the seven years is struck, provided he has been reduced in pay at any time previous to the date of his retirement, but if he was receiving that reduced rate at the time of retirement fhat average would not be struck, and he would receive the rate computed on the money that he received at that time. 24. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] That is an ordinary provision in connection with retirement ?—lt appears to me that provided a man was in receipt of the reduced pay at the actual time of retirement his retiring-allowance would be computed on the reduced rate. 25. That is not so; it would be very unfair ? —Well, I think, sir, that is all I have to say. With this amended clause 23, " In any case where any payment is made by an award of the Court under ' The Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act, 1900,' to or in respect of any contributor the benefits that would accrue to or in respect of such contributor under this Act shall absolutely cease and determine during receipt of compensation under the said Act," I am thoroughly in accord. 26. In clause 12 the section about the constitution of the Board and the quorum at the meetings of the Board : you railway-men all appear to have the idea that when this Act is in force it will be about the same as the ordinary regulations that you now have in connection with any Department. For instance, you might say " the unfairness of a Board " and all that sort of thing. The moment this Act is a statutory law it alone governs the whole position. No Manager or Minister for Eailways can administer that Act differently from the provisions laid down in it. You must recognise that?—l do recognise that; but there are considerable powers placed in the hands of the Board ail the same. They appear under subclauses (a), (b), and (c) of clause (4) of section 20 to have power to stop the retiring-allowance or instalments of the same. 27. Only in the terms and in accordance with the Act. I have had a discussion with one or two of the men since. They recognised the material difference. The suggestion that the quorum should be increased to carry out the ordinary law for the purpose of dealing with the case would be impracticable. It might require the Board to meet every morning in the year to carry out the ordinary law. If they had to meet and bring people from one end of the colony to the other the delay would stagnate everything. This is a statute law which no one can allow to be illegally administered. This is a very material point, and my own opinion is that if we were to agree to make he quorum five under this proposed Bill I think we would be doing an immense amount of harm. We would either have to relieve the men from their ordinary positions and pay them to attend that regularly or have the meetings of the members once in every three months. What you suggest is that Division 2 should have more representation?— Yes. 28. The only other point is the thirty-five years as against the forty years. Do you think that should apply to the No. 1 Division ? —Well, I would not like to say that it should not apply to No. 1 Division although the conditions are not the same. A man at inside employment throughout the year is not in the same position as the man at outside employment, who is exposed to all kinds of weather, and has much harder work to perform. 29. In the case of a cleaner, that man takes his retirement at fifty-four years ?—I would go the length of fifty-five years. But I certainly think that forty years is too long in a number of cases. 30. Do you know of any other railway superannuation in any other part of the world where the age is as low as that?—l do not think I do. 31. You are of the opinion that as far as the drivers and shunters and guards are concerned their calling does entail risks ?—Yes. Very often these men are broken down to such an extent that they have to be removed from the footplate and other duties, and a consequent reduction would take place in their wages, which would really affect their retiring-allowance. In a very large number of cases before men arrive at sixty years of age they have to be removed and their wages reduced in consequence. 32. Then, you have read the amended scale ? —Yes, and I am thoroughly in accord with it. 33. And excepting upon the points upon which you have touched you do not object to the Bill. Upon the whole you approve of the Bill ?—Yes. 34. Mr. Pirani.] Mr. Wilson, I understand that this scale we have got in the new Bill is the same as they agreed upon at a conference of the society at Invercargili ?—-Yes. 35. Were any steps taken at Invercargili to appoint delegates to interview the Government in reference to this case ?—Yes. That conference, after deciding on all the proposed alterations they required, and dealing with other conference business, appointed a deputation of four, consisting of Messrs. Warren and O'Keefe (of Auckland), Austin (of Petone), and myself of (Palmerston North), together with the president and general secretary of the society, to deal with the Superannuation Bill, as well as other business. 36. You are aware that the executive of the society have been up here in reference to this scheme?— Yes. I understand that this is the result of an arrangement with the management; that we have been left out, and that they, contrary to the decision of the conference, come and deal with the business themselves. 37. Have the executive any authority from the society to speak on their behalf?— They have this authority : they manage the affairs of the society in the interim. But they should take their instructions from the conference from time to time. In this instance, as a result of the arrangement with the management, they have taken it out of the hands of the delegates appointed. 38. Then, the executive cannot be said to be representing the societies as a whole ?-—You can rest assured that the scale as laid down in the Bill is absolutely the same as agreed to at our last conference.

12

[JAMESSHENRY SHEBWIN.

i.—7.

39 All they said was that the scale ought to be reduced by 2f per cent., and it was agreed to by the First Division. I want it to be clear that the Second Division are not objecting to this scale 9—This conference consisted of representatives from every branch of the society. 40 Have you heard anything from any member of the Second Division objecting to the proposed scale?— No. The only real solid objection that I have heard advanced in objection to the Bill as it was in its first form is where no provision was made for the old men in the service. I have no doubt that this Bill will be sufficiently attractive to induce nearly the whole of the Second Division to participate under its provisions.

Fbiday, 15th August, 1902. Jambs Henby Sheewin examined. (No. 8.) 1 The Chairman.] What is your name in full ?—James Henry Sherwin. ,_.'.. 2! Are you a member of the No. 1 Division ?—The First Grade in the Second Division, at °3 e- Have you seen the copy of the amended Superannuation Bill ?—Just a few moments before I came here I had a glance at it. . 4 Mr Wilford 1 Mr. Sherwin, you and Mr. Leadbeater, who is outside, and three others represent the old-service men in the "workshops at Petone. You are elected as their representatives?— Yes. . , .-o-iio v 5 And you waited on me with certain objections to the nrst .Dill ! —xes. 6' Those objections were, first of all, the objection in reference to the contributions ; secondly, the objection to clause 23 ; and, thirdly, the objection as to the constitution of the Board?— Yes 7. The amended Bill carries out practically exactly the line of suggestions that you would 1 e B'."And S 'it is quite satisfactory ?—Yes. As far as we were delegated to go, it is all that is required; it is what we ask for. . . 9 In the amended Bill have you noticed it does not alter that clause 23 ; but I am right m Butting it to Mr. Sherwin that the understanding is that the benefits received under the Workers Compensation Act shall be sufficient, and the benefits under this Act shall not be determined but only be held in abeyance, while the man is in receipt of contributions under the Workers Compensation Act ?—Yes, that is under the clause 23, "In any case where any payment is made by an award of the Court under ' The Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act, 1900, to or in respect of any contributor the benefits that would accrue to or in respect of such contributor under this Act shall absolutely cease and determine during receipt of compensation under the said Act. Of course the one thing why we objected to that was that the compensation man—it he comes to compensation—anticipates that probably he will get £200 or £300 for his compensation. That is the amount he sets down as his loss, but the Board or Act may consider that he is not entitled to more than £25. He will still have a claim under the Compensation Act tor £25, but that will not entitle him to what he is entitled to under the Superannuation Fund. 10 If he got compensation the Act says, " the benefits that would accrue to or m respect of such contributor under this Act shall absolutely cease and determine during receipt of compensation under the said Act," but if with the words " shall absolutely cease and determine some other words were put in, such as " while this money runs on," that), I think, meets the whole difficulty ? —Will that meet the man who claims compensation to the extent of £300 and whoonly gets £25 ? 11 Well that will mean he will cease from obtaining the benefits of this particular Bill until he is considered to have used up the £25 for the period ?—I see. Then, in regard to the constitution of the Board ? 12 In regard to the constitution of the Board, the Committee cannot see their way to agree to the suggestion that has been made ?—I see. Well, there is one other matter. The members whom I represent thought that probably the Committee would agree to add to the provisions of the Bill the privileges that the present employees receive and the pass. They thought it would not be asking a very °reat thing to add these on to the Bill—that is, in regard to the receiving of a pension It was discussed at the last meeting, and agreed that the Committee should be asked whether they would allow us, when we received our pension, the privilege ticket once a month and the free pass annually. We receive it now as members of the service, and we thought it would not be asking too much for it to be attached to the Superannuation Bill. Mr. Pirani : You cannot put that into a Bill; it is more a matter for the administration of the railways. . _... . 14 Ron Sir J. G. Ward.] Yes, that is so. You cannot put that into a Bill, because every branch of the whole of the Civil Service of the colony has applied for something similar, and in every instance it has had to be refused without exception. If we attempted to put that into a Railway Bill you would have to make it apply to all of the Departments. If a man is sixty-five years of age and he has been in the Civil Service, say, forty or even twenty-five years, by that time he will just have had as much travelling as he needs ?—We look upon it as a privilege, sir. 15 You would never get that in the Bill. You would never get any proposal like that in a Superannuation Bill ?—Well, I think that is as far as we go. As far as the delegates are concerned, lam agreeably surprised to find that you have adopted our suggestions. It seems to me that you have embodied everything. ~-■,* v * * re. a 16. Are you generally satisfied with the amended Bil !— Yes, perfectly satisfied. 17! Mr. Graham.] You represent yourself as one of the long-service men? —Yes. 18. How long have you been in the service ? —About seventeen years.

JOB LEADBEATER.}

13

1.—7.

Job Leadbeatee examined. (No. 9.) 19. The Chairman.] What is your full name ? —Job Leadbeater. 20. Do you belong to the First Division or the Second Division ?—The First Grade, Second Division, at the Petone Workshops. 21. Have you gone through this amended Superannuation Bill?— Yes, sir, we have, very carefully. 22. Will you kindly tell the Committee, as concisely as you can, what is your opinion in respect to it ?—The first question is as to the amount of money in connection with the Eailway Fund—whether it is possible to get that money placed in a fund whereby the old hands would be able to reap some advantage in connection with the Benefit Society ? 23. Mr. Wilford.] The answer to that is that you have got your benefits under the back services. Under this amended Bill every year of your back service counts? —Of course, that gets over that question altogether, then. Then, there is the question of how many of the railway servants live to be sixty years of age. 24. What is the proportion ?—I understand at the present time there are four hundred who are entitled to retire in the beginning of the first week of the year. 25. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] If those who wished to remain in the service did so the proportion would be very much greater, but there are scores and scores of men who have retired after they have got to fifty or fifty-five years of age. The average time of life for people is not sixty years of age ; that is well known. We cannot alter the average length of life, of course ? —Then, again, is it the intention, when this Bill is properly redrafted, to make all men retire over sixty years of age ? 26. That is at the option of the Department —the Minister. That is the case now. You cannot alter that in any case? —I do not see that there is any need for me to take up the time of the Committee further, gentlemen. There are all the things we have come for in the Bill now, and I think we will be satisfied with it. 27. The Chairman.] Have you read clause 23, "In any case where any payment is made by an award of the Court under ' The Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act, 1900,' to or in respect of any contributor the benefits that would accrue to or in respect of such contributor under this Act shall absolutely cease and determine during receipt of compensation under the said Act." That is only while he is in receipt of the contribution under the Workers' Compensation Act?— Well, that is one thing that we wanted to bring forward. 28. Mr. Wtlford.] Mr. Sherwin said, supposing a man claimed £200 under the Workers' Compensation Act and he only got £25, then he would cease from benefiting under the Act for the period covered by the £25. I think that is only fair. I think we can say you are quite satisfied ? —Yes,. I am quite satisfied with the Bill. A. H. Hunt examined. (No. 10.) 29. The Chairman.] What is your name in full ?—Albert Henry Hunt. • 30. What division do you represent?— No. 1, sir. 31. Have you gone carefully through this amended Bill? —Yes, we have given it a great deal of attention on two occasions —at the annual conference and lately at the special conference. 32. Well ; you might place before the Committee, as concisely as you can, the opinion of yourself and your fellow-members with respect to this Bill. Do you represent the executive?— Yes. We questioned what members were available this morning and they said, " Yes." Well, the result of our latest deliberations was that there was an opinion that contributions were rather high. We tried to gauge the matter as affecting every man in the service to the best of our ability, and we thought the contributions were rather high—that was, the 5, 7, and 10 per cent, of the salaries. It begins at 3 per cent, and is up to thirty years of age, then it is 5, 7, and 10 per cent., and we thought that it would suit the contributors better if the contributions were made slightly less, and the benefits adjusted accordingly. Of course, we were dealing with the man's ability to contribute to it and pay all his other calls made upon him. Then, we also thought that, in regard to men of Division 2 who lose time through sickness, and their amotmts would not appear on the pay-sheet, therefore no contributions would be made during the period of sickness. Many of the men only receive as a full payment during the year £100 or £105 — chiefly platelayers and labourers—and if much sickness had taken place the contribution would accordingly be so reduced that the benefit qualified for would be so small as not to be adequate for the support of the man on retiring, even although he had served the full period of forty years. We thought if a minimum was fixed at, say, £65 a year. Then, again, we thought the contributions might be reduced if the maximum amount to be drawn be placed at, say, £250, and we thought £250 a year would be enough for any man to draw as a superannuation. We discussed the matter fully. Then, with regard to clause 15, retiring-allowance. This clause reads that for every year of service he shall receive one-sixtieth part of his annual rate of pay, but in no case shall the total yearly allowance exceed two-thirds of such annual rate of pay. Well, sir, in the case of Division 1 a great number of the members have compensation due to them under section 76 of " The Government Eailways Act, 1887," and accruing up to 1889. Well, there is no mention here of this compensation if he elects to draw on the yearly allowance of the superannuation. No notice is taken of his compensation as is done in the case set out in clause 18, subclauses (1), (2), and (3). Under these clauses he has the option of drawing the compensation, or, if he dies, his widow is entitled to the compensation. The compensation is secure in these cases. When he becomes entitled to the yearly allowance of the superannuation his compensation is forfeited. That is a matter that will cause feelings of injustice, because a man should receive his compensation, because it is an amount that has really accrued to him, and if he is not to get

14

1.-7.

(ALBERT HENRY HUNT.

anything from such compensation on going on the fund under clause 15, then he is no better off than the man in Division 2 who never had any compensation due to him. 33. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] That is, the compensation due up to 1889 ?— Yes. It is safeguarded to the man in case he elects to take a lump sum, and it is safeguarded again if he dies; but if the man lives himself and elects to go upon the fund, then this amount is confiscated, and the man on Division 2 who never had any right to compensation is equally as well off as the man who had. 34. Mr. Pirani.] You forget the State is guaranteeing a contribution of one-sixtieth for every year's service, and that is how the men will benefit ? —Yes, I know that; but such benefit is being given by the sacrifice of compensation by members of Division 1. 35. Why should you object to anybody else getting benefited. Does that injure you ?—lt is acknowledged in places in the Bill that the compensation is due to members in our division, yet in another case it is taken away from them. In Division 2 a man becomes a charge upon the colony as much as Division 1, and he had no compensation due to him, and therefore is not as adequately qualified for the benefit as a member of Division 1 who had his compensation confiscated. 36. We are not taking into account the compensation due to the First Division ? —We were told to bring this up. The men consider that if the compensation is recognised in two or three instances it should be recognised in all instances regarding Division 1. It was thought a man should receive benefits from his compensation in every case, and he should be entitled to his compensation under any circumstances. 37. How old in the service are the men who are entitled to compensation? —Well, for any amount worth speaking of, not less than about fifteen years. The compensation ceased to accrue in 1889. 38. So that they are getting fifteen years' benefit without paying a sixpence ?—Yes. So are the men on Division 2 getting the same without having any compensation confiscated. 39. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] Have you read clause 18?-~Yes. Under those circumstances a man's compensation is safeguarded to him. 40. That is, " If any contributor voluntarily retires from the service of the Department before becoming entitled to a retiring-allowance under this Act, or is dismissed, or if his services are dispensed with from any cause, he shall be entitled to a refund of the whole amount actually contributed by him to the fund, together with any compensation to which he is entitled under section 76 of ' The Government Eailways Act, 1887,' but without interest." Now, you mean, assuming that he comes on and he becomes entitled to the Superannuation Fund, he should have that right as well '?—Yes. Mr Pirani : We do not interfere with his rights at all. He can elect to take his compensation and not get the superannuation. 41. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] In other words, the compensation under the Act of 1887 is preserved for him. It is really a provision for himself privately. If you get a provision fund, when the State is responsible for its being carried out, and a man comes after that and gets £60 a year, to assume that he should get a lump sum after that —why, the colony would not stand it? —A man in Division 2 gets exactly the same benefits under the superannuation if he elects to go on the yearly allowance with the man in Division 1 who had compensation accruing to him confiscated. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward : After you start the new system }"ou cannot commence to discriminate between Divisions 1 and 2. It would be far better to say to everybody that they have the right of benefit now under the Compensation Act and to keep off the superannuation fund. You cannot have both, you know. 42. Mr. Pirani.] I do not suppose that you ask for both?—No, not completely. But the interests of Division 1 in this matter are so very different in a great many ways from Division 2 that if the superannuation is applied equally to Divisions 1 and 2, then Division 1 have been sacrificed to a certain extent in having their compensation kept from them in the circumstances of clause 15, and some benefits from compensation added to this clause. 43. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] It is not imposing anything on the liability of members of Divisions 1 and 2?—lt is giving—without the circumstances of compensation—to the No. 2 Division and, a man having died, his widow gets it. 44. Mr. Pirani.] Do you think it would be more equitable if we struck that out ?—Certainly not. In some cases—making comparisons, and comparisons are odious—a man pays for more than he gets, comparatively. 45. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] —Nos. 1 and 2 recognise the fact that there are considerable advantages to be conferred on their wives and children that no compensation up to 1889 could possibly take the place of. I think, myself, you could not discriminate in consequence of the repeal of the existing Compensation Act. It would really create a dual system ?—Of course, sir, I am only representing No. 1 Division, and this was something in their interests that they considered. 46. You are quite right in representing them, but that is the difficulty ?—Of course, 1 am not prepared to take the responsibility of sticking out for that clause to be put in, and to jeopardize the Bill. Ido not think I would be acting in the best interests of those who have sent me here if I did. 47. Mr. Pirani.] You think that it would be better to have the Bill, notwithstanding the objections of No. 1 Division, than to sacrifice it ?—Yes. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward : It is a point the Committee will consider. 48. The Chairman.] Is there any other clause you object to ?—Clause 17, but that has been struck out. It is in regard to the men I'etiring—when the man has to specify what he will do, whether he will go upon the fund or take his money in a lamp sum. We think it would be proper for a request to be made by the Department calling upon the man to exercise his option. If a great many years elapse the man might forget the option that he had, and perhaps, by having

ALBERT HENRY HUNT.]

15

1.—7.

forgotten them, and not telling them to the Department, he might forfeit what would be in the best interests of the worker. 49. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] He cannot under the statute law. This is an Act, a law that must be conformed to; and if any breach of the law affects any individual, and in twenty years from now was admitted, he has the right under statute law to have the position put right ?—Perhaps it is more in the way of a regulation —for the working of the Act. The man has certain options that he has to state to the Department, and all I want is that the man should be advised by the departmental office that he is entitled to them, so that he should not overlook them. 50. In the amended Bill that is struck out'?— Well, in clause 18 it says, ". If any contributor voluntarily retires from the service of the Department before becoming entitled to a retiringallowance under this Act, or is dismissed, or if his services are dispensed with from any cause, he shall be entitled to a refund of the whole amount actually contributed by him to the fund, together with any compensation to which he is entitled under section 76 of ' The Government Bailways Act, 1887,' but without interest." Well, then, he has to specify an option, sir, as to whether he will go under that clause or go on to the superannuation for a yearly allowance. 51. Not if he voluntarily retires. If he voluntarily retires he gets all he pays in and his compensation up to 1889 ; so that is no option there of any kind ?—Well, then, there is the matter of permanent disablement. We discussed the matter of a man being permanently disabled. He might have only been in the service such a time as would enable him to draw one-sixtieth of his salary. It would be of no use to him, and we thought that we would represent to the Committee that some minimum allowance should be made —I mean for a man permanently disabled on duty. Perhaps a man might get both arms taken off. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward : We have got provision for that. 52. Mr. Pirani.] We have compensation for that by vote of Parliament, which is down every year. That is very much better than making it a charge on'this fund ?—lf a man's superannuation amount is £50 a year, and he gets disabled —say, both his legs are taken off—-and he gets £250 damages under the Workers' Compensation Act, that would last him for five years, and then he could come back under the superannuation fund ? Mr. Pirani : Yes. 53. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] There should not be a double fund for the same amount?— Take Division 1. Say a boy sixteen years of age, who has been in the service about a year, is running about chasing trucks, and he gets knocked down and both his legs or arms are taken off, that boy would get one-sixtieth of his salary and would be voted a sum by Parliament. Say he got £250 : well, one-sixtieth of his salary might be about £1 a year. 54. Well, as a matter of fact, if you take the average of those who get hurt in a big Department it is very small. If you try and make provision for an extreme case, which is quite possible to occur, then there is no superannuation fund in the world that could provide for a boy of that age; thea the colony comes in ; you cannot possibly provide for a youngster of sixteen who exhausts his superannuation fund if he has got it. No superannuation fund in the world would stand that. The best answer to that is that there is not a dozen per cent, in the No. 1 Division that have ever met troubles of the kind. It is the No. 2 Division that get into all the crack-ups ?—I have known several Stationmasters killed. 55. If he is a Stationmasterhe gets a good retiring-allowance as well? —Another point I wished to mention was that we considered that to make the service of the whole of the men's time retrospective was rather heavy, and that, if some alteration was made in that respect, very likely the charges upon the fund would not be so heavy, and the contributions could be made less. There are plenty of men at the present time, fifty-seven and fifty-eight years of age, and who have been in the service thirty-two or thirty-three years. They will go on paying for two or three years ; they pay a very small amount in; then when these men pay in for a couple of years most likely they would draw for ten years. If they draw on thirty-two sixtieths it is a rather large amount. We thought that for a man who had been in the service, and contributed such a short time, the retrospective years should not be more than twenty-five. 56. Mr. Pirani.] He would be entitled to compensation, which would probably be more than his pension ?—Yes. 57. Well, the Government guarantee the fund by means of his pension ?—Then Division 2 men come in under certain circumstances, and a part of Division 1 man's interest is gone to make up for Division 2. Mr. Pirani : You will find very few of Division 2 will come in; they are mostly Division 1. 58. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] One fact wants to be kept in view. When the present old men — put them down at 500 if you like—have gone out of this Superannuation Fund their places will be refilled by others. They should all benefit by this fund, and a great number of people will allow them to have the Superannuation Fund, and unless we can manage to meet these cases this Bill cannot go on at all. Once you have got rid of the old men the young men come in, and it is a very fine thing for the younger generation ?—Yes ; it will take thirty years before this works itself out, and all the hands will be on the 3-per-cent. basis. 59. Five-sixths of the men will be paying on the 3-per-cent. basis within the next five years probably. In regard to the men who are going to get the benefits of this fund, and who are not going to pay on a 3-per-cent. basis, it is only a fair and rational thing that they should pay a higher rate ?—Personally, our men are very favourable to the Bill. Personally, the Bill suits me very well, and all the men that I have come in contact with. 60. Which Bill are you speaking of ?—The very latest Bill that you have given us. 61. That is the one with clause 17 struck out?-^Yes. 62. Is the Number 1 Division satisfied with this Bill, Mr. Hunt ?—Yes, with the exception of the points that I have mentioned to you, which will leave a slightly sore feeling.

1.—7.

16

[ALBERT HENRY HUNT.

63. With the exception of the points you have mentioned, they are satisfied with the Bill as it is ?—Yes. 64. Mr. Pirani.] You will notice in the case of a widow that there is an allowance given to her in the case of death by accident, and it has been suggested that when the husband dies through illness, which might have been caused through exposure to bad weather, &c, the same provision should apply in the service. Clause 18, "If any contributor dies before becoming entitled to any retiring-allowance, there shall be paid to his legal personal representatives the whole amount actually contributed by him to the fund, together with any compensation to which he is entitled under section seventy-six of ' The Government Railways Act, 1887,' but without interest thereon. But if such contributor dies from injuries received while in the execution of his duty, and leaving a wife or children him surviving, then (in lieu of such payment to his legal personal representatives) there shall be paid to or for the benefit of his widow during her widowhood the annual sum of eighteen pounds, with an additional sum to be paid to or for the benefit of his ..children (if any) of five shillings per week in the case of each child until the child attains the age of fourteen years ; or the widow may, if she so elects, be paid in lieu of the foregoing allowance a lump sum equivalent to the whole amount of the contributions actually paid by the member to the fund, together with any compensation to which the member was entitled under section seventy-six of ' The Government Railways Act, 1887 ' " ?—Well, we thought that was rather much to ask, sir. 65. You do not see any objection to it, to add death through illness as well as death through accident ? —I think it would be a very good thing to do. 66. It is pointed out that it is very difficult to trace what really constitutes death in the performance of duty. For instance, it might occur through exposure, and so on? —Yes. 67. In clause 19 it is suggested that that clause should be amended so as to keep the position of a man on the fund alive while he is away through ill health and is not paying. You see, it only provides for those who have been away through illness and are paying?—We have considered that point, too. The argument we advance is this :If a man was on the pay-sheet then his contributions are deducted, but if he is away and not on the pay-sheet how are his contributions to be deducted ? 68. It has been suggested the position should be kept alive ? —We thought that in many cases a man's salary was at such a rate that he could not pay. I mentioned that a minimum amount should be made payable for the men who had served the forty years, because if those men were away from sickness their amounts would fall so much below the £100 a year that the amount and contributions would not make up for the amount they were to draw. 69. Then, with regard to clause 19a, " In every case where, under the provisions of this Act, any life allowance or other money granted to a member on his retirement is computed on the basis of his pay, such pay shall be deemed to be the rate of pay he is receiving at the time of his retirement, unless within the previous five years he has served in any grade beneath that held by him at the time of his retirement, in which case such pay shall be deemed to be the average rate of pay received by him during the seven years next preceding his retirement," It is suggested that if a man should be transferred to a lower position his pension should be calculated not on the lower pay, but on the maximum pay he received when he was efficient ?—We mentioned that too, and we did not think it was fair. We thought it was very fair, if a man was placed on a lower salary and elected to accept the position of going from the higher to the lower grade, to compute his allowance according to the salary that he received on the average under the Bill as per clause 19a, subclause (1). 70. That is not so, " the average rate of pay received by him during the seven years next preceding his retirement." It is exactly opposite. If his salary is raised, then the compensation is taken ; but if his salary is reduced, then the compensation is not taken ?—Yes ; I see. Yes, it would be a very fair thing that the same method should apply in both ways. Mr. Jambs Besant examined. (No. 11.) 71. The Chairman.] What is your name in full?— James Besant. 72. You are a member of the executive and of the First Division ?—Yes. 73. Well, you have gone carefully through the amended Superannuation Bill, and on the whole the division that you represent approve of the amended Bill ? —Yes, with a few minor exceptions. 74. Hon. Sir J. O. Ward.} Have you and Mr. Hunt conferred on the exceptions that he has represented to the Committee, and, with those exceptions, do you concur with the Bill?—-Yes, sir. 75. Mr. Graham.] You have had an opportunity of seeing all the exceptions to the Bill, and you concur with those exceptions ? —Yes ; they were drawn up by the four officers and the secretaries. 76. And with the exception of those exceptions you are heartily in accord with the Bill ?— Yes. 77. Hon. Sir J. G. Ward.] It is quite clear that you are all agreed upon this amended Bill, with those exceptions ?—Yes. 78. Now, in that respect there is one point. Regarding the interview you had with me, you have agreed to change your opinions—that is, in regard to the scale ?—Yes, sir.

Approximate Cost of Paper. —Preparation, not given; printing (1,425 copies), .£lO Bs.

Authority : John Mackay, Government Printer, Wellington.—l9o2.

Price 9d.]