THE TENTATIVE GERMAN POOR-LAW.
for insuring seamen against accidents which Mr. very interesting account of the new German law Rennell Rodd has drawn up for Sir Edward Malet, will remove some misconceptions as to the remarkable experi- ment in legislation which will always be associated with Prince Bismarck's name. To his translation of the particular law, Mr. Rodd has prefixed an intro- duction describing the place it holds in the general scheme. The first Accident Insurance Law was passed in 1884, its object being to protect workmen against acci- dents caused by machinery,—always the most fertile cause of accidents. In 1885 the scope of this law was greatly extended, and last year the principle was made to include seamen and those engaged in seaboard industries. Fisher- men and boatmen are to be dealt with by a subsequent measure. These laws are all designed to provide for workmen injured by accident, after the period during which the liability for their maintenance and treatment is thrown either upon the individual employer, or upon a fund contributed by the working men themselves. This period may be roughly put at three months. When this time is over, the Accident Insurance Laws come into force.
The object of these laws is to throw the burden of the injured man's maintenance and treatment not, as has often been supposed, on the State, but on the whole body of employers in the particular trades included in each statute. They have to pay the indemnities assigned by law to the injured men, and to bear the cost of raising and dis- tributing the fund out of which they are paid. For this purpose, they are distributed into Trade Associations, which "draw up their own statutes and manage their own finances, and are generally allowed a very large range of self-govern- ment." The employers under the Marine Insurance Law form one such Association. Every employer is a member, and has a voice, determined by the number of ships he owns and the number of men employed in them, in the election of the Governing Board. This Governing Board first determines whether the injured man has a right to compensation, and next fixes the amount to be paid. In both respects its action is regulated by statutory provisions ; it has only to ascertain the nature of the employment, and the amount of the wages earned. If the injured man is dissatisfied with the decision of the Governing Board, he has a right of appeal to an Arbitration Court, composed of two members of the Trade Association and two members elected by the insured class, with a President, who must be a public official, appointed by the Government of the Federal State. From this Court a further appeal lies to the Imperial Insurance Office, which has its seat at Berlin, and before the passing of the law with which we are dealing, consisted of at least three permanent members nominated by the Emperor at the instance of the Federal Council, and of eight non-permanent members, four elected by the Federal Council, two by the Trade Associations, and two by the working-class members of the Arbitration Courts. The Marine Accidents Insurance Law strengthens this Court by the addition of four non-permanent members, chosen from the insurers and the insured, who are to take part in the proceedings of the Imperial Insurance Office whenever the business before it is connected with their own Trade Association.
It will be seen that in all these arrangements the State only defines the liability of the employing class, and makes provision for its just assessment. It does not find any of the money. That duty devolves entirely upon the Trade Associations. All that the Government does to help them is to allow them to pay the indemnities by orders drawn upon the local post-offices, and the Imperial Insurance Office is charged with enforcing the repayment of the sums thus advanced. The members of the Trade Associa- tion are assessed according to the number of the persons they employ, though the contribution may be increased in the case of specially ' dangerous trades, or of neglect to take the prescribed precautions against accident. The first annual Report of the Imperial Insurance Office shows an expenditure for indemnities of £85,000, distributed over sixty-two Trade Associations, representing nearly 270,000 businesses, and nearly 3,500,000 workmen insured. If this were all, the burden on the employers would not be great ; but the indemnities constitute but a fraction of the total outlay. About £130,000 has gone in costs of adminis- tration, investigation of accidents, and taking precautions against their occurrence ; while £270,000 has been spent in forming a reserve fund. This ratio between administra- tion and the payment of indemnities has called forth a great deal of comment, especially when it is compared with the ratio existing in industries directly under State control. There, about £10,000 has been paid in indemnities, against .2400 paid for administration, investigation, and precautions.
There is one point in which the German method of fixing the liability of employers in cases of accidents to workmen, is decidedly superior to our own. It gives them a more direct and practical interest in the prevention of accidents. With us, the employer either takes his chance of the result of the action at law, or he insures himself against risk by contracting with a private Company. In neither case is there any authority directly charged with the duty of taking precautions against accident. The individual employer can only discharge this duty in his own business. The Insurance Office does not discharge it at all. In Germany, it is one of the prescribed functions of the Trade Associations. They are directed to draw up regulations for the prevention of accidents, and to see that they are enforced. As every accident means so much money to be found by the Association, the Governing Board has an interest in reducing their number. It is true that the example of Railway Companies in Eng- land shows that liability to pay compensation does not always ensure caution. But the Board of a German Trade Association is something more than a Court of Directors. On it sit, in equal numbers with its own mem- bers, the representatives of the workmen insured. A thorough practical discussion of the value of the existing regulations, and of the changes proposed to be made in them, is thus secured.
The whole system, as described by Mr. Rodd, certainly deserves more attention than has yet been bestowed on it in England. It is not, so far as we see, open to the charge of State Socialism. As with us, the duty of making pro- vision for workmen injured in their service is imposed upon employers ; but whereas we stimulate the practice of insurance by the terrors of an action at law, the Germans compel an employer to insure. The principle of the two systems is identical ; the only difference between them lies in the way in which the principle is applied. The pinch of the Socialist objection will not be felt until the question of insuring the working man against old age presents itself for settlement. So far as Prince Bismarck has yet gone, the working man has been made to protect himself against temporary sickness ; the employer has been made to protect him against accidents incidental to his employment. Upon whom is the burden of protecting him against old age to fall ?
Previous page
