2306 
CHAPTER XVI. 
compensation for permanent total disablement to minors should be 
equivalent to 84 months’ wages. Provision for an increase at the age 
of 15 years in the rate of compensation to minors temporarily disabled 
will no longer be required, and it is unnecessary to repeat in sections 
4 (I) A (9)and 1 (I) B (3) of the Act maxima which are determined by 
Schedule TV. 
Waiting Period. 
Under the Act, as it stands at present, no compensation is given 
for the first ten days of temporary disablement. This is an unusually 
long waiting period, and numerous suggestions have been made that 
compensation should be given for part or the whole of it, either to those 
whose disablement lasts for more than 10 days or to those disabled for 
shorter periods, cx to both. The argument against a reduction of the 
period for the benefit, of those who are disabled for less than 10 days is 
that it would result in a very large increase in the number of possible 
claims, in each of which the amount of compensation would be trifling. 
The argument against reducing the period for those who are disabled for 
longer periods than 10 days (.e., for what is known as ““ dating-back ”’) 
is that it has led elsewhere to malingering, and some of those competent 
to judge fear that it would have the same effect in India. This danger 
could be minimised by adopting a system of graduated dating-back, 
such as has been suggested by one or two witnesses, but if the wait- 
ing period is to be reduced, it is preferable that it should continue to 
be governed by a provision easily intelligible and simple in working. 
While the fact that, under our proposals, the most poorly paid workmen 
receive full wages when temporarily disabled necessitates caution, we 
think that, with the low standard of living prevalent in Indian industry 
and the consequently small resources of the Indian workman, the pre- 
sent period is unduly long. Following the advice of some of the most 
experienced witnesses, we recommend the reduction of the period from 
10 davs to 7 in all cases. 
Excentions. 
In respect of the conditions governing the grant of compensa- 
tion, a considerable amount of criticism has been directed against the 
exceptions embodied in the second proviso to Section 3 (I) of the Act. 
These three exceptions operate to remove the liability of the employer 
to pay compensation when the accident is due to specific misconduct 
on the part of the workman, e.g., intoxication by drink or drugs, wilful 
disobedience to certain rules and orders and wilful removal of safety 
devices. In the case of a fatal accident, the hardship falls on those who 
had no responsibility for the misconduct. This last argument cannot be 
pressed far, for a man’s family benefit from his achievements and must 
ordinarily accept the consequences of his mistakes; but there are ad- 
ditional reasons for making the exceptions inapplicable to fatal accidents. 
Where a workman is killed, it is extremely difficult for dependents to rebut 
evidence that the accident was caused by the deceased’s misconduct. 
This is specially true where the employer’s defence is that the workman 
lisobeved a safety rule. e.q.. a rule against cleaning machinerv in motion.