Wool-Packers, Tavistock.

Oral Answers to Questions — Unemployment. – in the House of Commons at on 15 May 1930.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr Bertram Falle Mr Bertram Falle , Portsmouth North

11.

asked the Minister of Labour if she is aware that the wool-packing factory at Tavistock recently made a 10 per cent. reduction in wages; that all men employed had to accept this or leave; that the men who refused these lower wages have been adjudged ineligible for unemployment benefit, and that the wages for wool-packers at Tavistock were 35s. for a 54-hour week and, after the reduction, 31s. 6d.; and will she state on what grounds these men have been deprived of unemployment benefit?

Photo of Miss Margaret Bondfield Miss Margaret Bondfield , Wallsend

I am having inquiries made, and will communicate the result to the hon. Member as soon as they are completed.

Photo of Mr Bertram Falle Mr Bertram Falle , Portsmouth North

Is there a minimum wage below which a man cannot be forced to work without losing his unemployment benefit?

Photo of Miss Margaret Bondfield Miss Margaret Bondfield , Wallsend

That depends on the nature of the agreement in his trade. Undoubtedly, there will be a minimum below which any man will not be expected to take a job.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALL:

Does not the Government recognise that the products of sweated labour are coming into this country without any tariff?