MAJORITY REPORT. 
219 
“i —. 
these reasons we are satisfied that some special provision is 
essential to meet the peculiar circumstances of insured women 
on marriage. On the grounds indicated it would, in our opinion, 
be impossible to extend to insured women who cease employ- 
ment at the time of marriage the ordinary provisions as to the 
granting of a free year’s insurance. It must be borne in mind 
that the so-called *‘ free year ’’ is not a fixed period of twelve 
months, but is an elastic period capable of indefinite extension. 
In the first place, if any period of illness occurs during the first 
twelve months of free insurance, the period of insurance is 
extended by a period equal in length to that of the illness, and 
in the event of prolonged or permanent incapacity occurring the 
ordinary insured person would continue entitled to benefit long 
after the termination of the first twelve months of free insurance. 
It would be an altogether impossible financial proposition to 
allow of such indefinite extension in the case of women who had 
left work on marriage, and were consequently not suffering loss 
of wages during the period of incapacity. A point of much 
importance from the point of view of the insured woman herself 
is, however, that the great majority of insured women leave 
industrial employment on their marriage, and the limitation of 
their subsequent title to benefit to a period of twelve months 
would exclude a large proportion of them from drawing maternity 
benefit on the occasion of their first confinement. We have 
had ample evidence that this benefit—which the present system 
1s designed to secure—is greatly valued, and we are not disposed 
to recommend an. alteration under which it would be jeopardized. 
523. But, while we cannot recommend that the ordinary pro- 
Visions of the Act should be applied without any modification to 
Insured women who cease employment on marriage, we recognise 
the advantages of making the special provision which is essential 
In such cases conform to the normal provision except 
Where a departure from the normal is required to meet 
the circumstances of the case. In particular, we do not 
think that it is advisable to retain a special reduced rate of Sick- 
hess Benefit, and we recommend that this benefit should 
be paid at the woman's ordinary rates. We are advised 
by the Actuarial Committee that it would be possible, within the 
available financial provision, to increase the benefit to this extent 
Provided that the present maximum period of six weeks for Sick- 
hess Benefit is retained. We are satisfied that insured women 
Who continue in employment after marriage should, as at present, 
remain in insurance as ordinary employed contributors. We also 
consider that the present test of cessation of employment, viz. : 
eight consecutive weeks of voluntary abstention from work: under 
an employer, is satisfactory and should be retained. Any weeks 
during which the woman is away from work by reason of sickness 
should not be counted towards these eight weeks, and a similar 
Concession should be made in respect of weeks of genuine in- 
54709 
H