THE APPRENTICES ACT.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 173, 24 July 1928, Page 5

THE APPRENTICES ACT.

MORE OR LESS A COMPROMISE

FEAR OF THE IDEALIST

TENDENCY TOWARD BARGAINING

A suggestion that the Apprentices Act of 1923 constituted a compromise because level-headed business men realised the danger of apprenticeship matters falling into the hands of idealists, was made in the Arbitration Court this morning by Mr. W. Cecil Prime, employers' advocate, of Christchurch. in supporting an application calculated to effect drastic revisions to the wages of apprentices engaged in the painters and decorators' trade.

Under the existing order operating in the Northern Industrial district, apprentices commence at £1 a week, and their salaries increase to £3 5/ in the fifth year by rises o£ 5/ every six months. It was suggested that the order be amended, and that the rates of pay should be fixed at 15/, 22/0, 30/, 37/6 and 45/ a week for the first, second, third, fourth and fifth years respectively.

It had been found that apprenticeship conditions under the present Act were subject to bargaining, declared Mr. Prime. Prior to the passing of the present Act, people behind the movement largely comprised educationists, technical authorities, trade unionists and to some extent employers with high ideals. Opposed to the new Act were employers —level-headed business men— who recognise the danger of allowing apprenticeship matters to fall into the bands of these idealists.

Confusion Over New Act. Therefore, the present Act was more or less a compromise. With the setting up of apprenticeship committees, the employers, in spite of a good deal of organisation, were not well versed in the requirements of the Act, and consequently a good deal of confusion resulted. In the case of the painters' and decorators' order an experiment had been tried, although the existing rates of pay were fixed presumably as the result of a complete recommendation from the committee. The sole remaining employers' representative on the original committee, however, said definitely that he did not agree to the proposed rates.

Evidence was called in support of the application for the amended order to the effect that the present rates of pay were unreasonable. ' I don't think employers can afford to pay the present rates and thoroughly train their apprentices," said one witness. Mr. N. Taylor concurred in this view, claiming that the boys did not earn their wages. Under cross-examination witness said he knew of a man, his wife and child, who lived comfortably on £3 a week. Mr. Justice Frazer (president of the court): They must be exceptional people then! In opposing the application, Mr. H. Campbell (secretary of the Painter? and Decorators' Union), said that prior to the enforcement of the apprenticeship order in 1924 there .vere only 23 apprentices employed in Auckland. Today in the combined trades there were 106. "In spite of the statement by, employers that they could not afford to tnke on boys at the present rate," he added, "the Apprentices Committee has dealt with an average of tw? contracts for apprentices per month durincr the present year. That indicates that the employers are still willing, and are taking on boys at the present rates of pay." There was also the aspect of the unhealthy nature of work in the trade to be considered. Tt was contended that the apprentices were bein? paid too much, but he maintained that apprentices in other trades were being paid too little. "Robbing the Money Boxes." "We admit the trade is bad." continued Mr. Campbell, "but surely we are not going to blame the boys for that. In my opinion the attempt to reduce wages is a mean way of trying to rob the children's money boxes." Mr. Prime: Oh! In advancing argument in rebuttal to Mr. Campbell's submissions. he said the employers were finding that the boys were not payable propositions, and if wages were not reduced. it would simply mean that they would have to take on fewer apprentices. "When the present rates were agreed to in Wellington." he said, "they were adopted in Auckland, because there was a. good deal of sentiment and idealism about. We are suffering throushout tlie country on account of the idealist, whose evidence carried weisrht with the court."' Pending consideration of a similar application in Wanganui, the court reserved its decision.