VALUE OF DEGREES.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 178, 31 July 1933, Page 15

VALUE OF DEGREES.

SYDNEY CONTROVERSY. ENGINEERS' PAY REDUCED. (From Our Own Correspondent.) • SYDXEY, July 25. A discussion on the Water Board the other day hrought out with unpleasant clearness the painful fact that there are still people in positions of authority here who see nothing of value in academic training. Alderman Keid proposed that a previous resolution of the board be rescinded to enable the reclassification of certain officers. It seems that certain University graduates in engineering had been appointed as draughtsmen to the board at £0 a week, "over the heads of Departmental officers with from four to six years' experience." Alderman Reid thought that "experience" in such matters ought to rank above "degrees," and he was strongly supported by Alderman Tresidder, who held that bachelors of engineering, of whom the board already had some experience, are "not worth the basic wage." Some other members pointed out that preference ought to be given to graduates if the School.of Engineering and the University are to be kept going. But eventually Alderman Reid and Tresidder got their way, and the unfortunate B.E.'s are to be paid "on the minimum scale"—£2B6 a year. This decision aroused a considerable storm of dissent and criticism, and the president of the Chamber of Manufacturers spoke strongly in favour of academic training as a prelude to the practical work of commercial and industrial life. Dr. Bradfield (our "bridge builder") put in a good word for the B.E.'s that he has known, and the ViceChaneellor of the University told the two Aldermen that they are hopelessly out of date and behind the times. Of course, all rational people agree with Professor Wallace and Dr. Bradfield. But it is a deplorable fact that even in a great city like Sydney such ignorant and antiquated prejudices still carry weight in civic councils and public affairs.