out. workman have no right to have an award under it filed in the SECT. 3. County Court (y). But the scheme will be operative only so far Contracting as it extends, and dependants not provided for by it will nevertheless retain their independent rights under the Act (≈), and generally it must be noted that a scheme only ousts the Act or other remedies of the parties exactly so far as its provisions specifically extend. Thus, in the case of Haworth v. Andrew Knowles & Sons, Ltd. Accident Society (a), it was held the applicant had a right to have the question of fact settled by the County Court judge, Was he, or was he not, able to resume his work? By a clause of the scheme, if the committee entrusted with carrying it out found he was able and would not resume work, he was to forfeit further compensation. But there was no provision that the finding of the committee was to be final or conclusive, and hence, as the workman's right to compensation depended on the question, Could he, or could he not, resume work? he was entitled to have that question tried in the ordinary manner. Further, it must be noted that the Act and Rules only provide for a scheme being entered into between a definite employer and his workmen, and not a scheme between a number of masters in a district and the collective body of workmen employed by them all (b). Cases as regards old schemes grow of less importance as years pass by. In the case of Wallace v. Hawthorne (c), there was a hiatus between the working of an old scheme and the introduction of the new, which entitled a workman to claim under the Act; and in Moss v. G. E. R. (d), a workman was also held entitled to claim under the Act, because, in addition to other reasons, rules, an essential part of the scheme, had not been properly certified. Schedule I. (21) clearly contemplates liability being taken over (y) Horn v. The Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, 27 T. L. R. 84. (z) Williams v. Vauxhall Colliery Co., (1907) 2 K. B. 433. (a) 19 T. L. R. 658. SECT. 3. Contracting out. by a friendly society. This might possibly constitute a useful graph runs as follows: (21) Where a scheme certified under this Act provides for payment of compensation by a friendly society, the provisions of the proviso to the first sub-section of section eight, section sixteen, and section fortyone of the Friendly Societies Act, 1896, shall not apply to such society in respect of such scheme. The necessity for this rule is, that the proviso to the first subsection of sect. 8, which is as to the registry of friendly societies, states:-"Provided that a friendly society which contracts with any person for an annuity exceeding fifty pounds per annum or of a gross sum exceeding two hundred pounds shall not be registered under this Act." This obviously must be negatived, for under the Workmen's Compensation Act it would have to take over liabilities that might exceed these amounts. Sect. 16 provides for the tables of annuities, contributions, &c. being certified by some actuary to be approved by the Treasury, whilst sect. 41 corresponds with sect. 8, inasmuch as it limits the benefits a man may receive to the amounts such society may insure. (2) The Registrar may give a certificate to expire at the end of a limited period of not less than five years, [and may from time to time renew with or without modifications such a certificate to expire at the end of the period for which it is renewed] (d). If in the renewed scheme there are changes from the old, it is not sufficient to bind a workman that he merely did not object to the new scheme; it must be proved he actively consented to it (e). (d) The words in brackets are new. (e) Wilson v. Ocean Coal Co., Treherne v. Ocean Coal Co., 21 out. (3) No scheme shall be so certified which contains SECT. 3. an obligation upon the workmen to join the scheme Contracting as a condition of their hiring, [or which does not contain provisions enabling a workman to withdraw from the scheme] (ƒ). By the Shop Club Act, 1902 (2 Ed. VII. c. 21), employers may not make it a condition of employment that workmen shall give up existing membership of friendly societies. (4) If complaint is made to the Registrar of Friendly Societies by or on behalf of the workmen of any employer that [the benefits conferred by any scheme no longer conform to the conditions stated in sub-section (1) of this section, (g) or that the provisions of such scheme are being violated, or that the scheme is not being fairly administered, or that satisfactory reasons exist for revoking the certificate, the Registrar shall examine into the complaint, and, if satisfied that good cause exist for such complaint, shall, unless the cause of complaint is removed, revoke the certificate. (5) When a certificate is revoked or expires, any moneys or securities held for the purpose of the scheme. shall, [after due provision has been made to discharge the liabilities already accrued](ƒ), be distributed as may be arranged between the employer and workmen, or as may be determined by the Registrar of Friendly Societies in the event of a difference of opinion. (6) Whenever a scheme has been certified as aforesaid, it shall be the duty of the employer to answer all such inquiries and to furnish all such accounts in (f) The words in brackets are new. (g) These words somewhat vary from the corresponding words SECT. 3. Contracting out. regard to the scheme as may be made or required by the Registrar of Friendly Societies. (7) The Chief Registrar of Friendly Societies shall include in his annual report the particulars of the proceedings of the Registrar under this Act. (8) The Chief Registrar of Friendly Societies may make regulations for the purpose of carrying this section into effect. [New.] Can masters, without offending against the Truck Acts (ƒ), receive a weekly payment from their men towards what they pay for insurance? This was successfully done in the case of Owner v. Hooper (g). Here the employer paid his men their wages in full, giving to each at the same time a note of how much he had to pay towards the insurance fund. More, this amount was such that the employer made a considerable profit out of it. The sum named the workman then paid to his cashier. In some ways it seems difficult to reconcile this case with other decisions on these Acts, but probably it can be safely followed, and for the reason there given, that really such transaction was not within the mischief provided against by them. Comparative advantages of reference committees. We have already observed that sect. 3 (1) requires that workmen contributing to a scheme shall receive the cumulative benefits of the scheme as well as of the Act. This will do much to lessen the popularity of such schemes, at any rate with masters. In fact it is difficult to see what benefit they can hope to derive from such schemes except that of avoiding interference by the County Court. If this is the end, a better way would seem to be not to make a scheme, but for them to join with their men in appointing a reference committee to act as arbitrators (h). No doubt, one of (f) See Stone's Justice's Manual under this heading. (h) See under Sched. II. (1), infra. (g) 89 L. T. 130. out. the drawbacks to such committees is their inability to give compen- SECT. 3. sation in any other way than is prescribed by the Act. The Contracting Act only provides for compensation by weekly payments (i), and for the subsequent composition of such payments, either by agreement or by application to the Court under para. 17, Schedule I. But as regards composition by agreement, it is not safe for an employer to pay a lump sum unless he has a memorandum of the agreement recorded in the County Court, and this he can only have recorded if the Court approves. As for composition under para. 17 of Schedule I., the rate is so excessive, so far exceeding what a workman would take or a master could pay, that it is worse than useless, for it suggests to registrars and County Court judges generally that no agreements for composition should be recognized unless they more or less approximate to the figures there given. No doubt when masters and men want to get rid of law proceedings in their entirety, and when they can appoint a joint committee in which they would have confidence, their simplest course would be to appoint such committee and then to have every claim made discussed and settled as a claim under the Employers' Liability Act or at common law. By this means the workman will effectively exercise his option. under sect. 1 (2) and give the committee a free hand to do what is best for all parties. By sect. 15 provisions are made dealing with contracts and schemes existing at the commencement of the Act, for which see infra, and by sect. 8, sub-sects. (7), (8) and (9) (k), compulsory insurance is to be established in certain industries. Whether the benefits of such insurance are to be substituted for those of the Act is not stated. Possibly it was intended they should be, but effect has not been given to such intention. |