VARIATION SOUGHT

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 103, 4 May 1933, Page 5

VARIATION SOUGHT

APPRENTICES' CONTRACT

ORDER BY MAGISTRATE

An application by several Wellington plumbers for a variation of an order made by Mr. T. B. McNeil, S.M., ]ast October in connection with the terms of employment of apprentices, was made in the Magistrate's Court yesterday. The order made by Mr. McNeil last year gave employers the power when work was slack to put off an apprentice one week in four. Mr. McNeil was on the Bench. Mr. O. C. Mazchgarb appeared for the applicants, Mr. P. J. O'Began for the apprentices, and Mr. L. Goodacre represented the Department of Labour. Mr. Mazerigarb said that the employers asked that the terms of the contract should be amended to permit them to dispense with the services of an apprentice during any period of the apprenticeship when the employers had no work available upon which the apprentice might be usefully engaged. The circumstances of the employers in. each case had altered considerably for the worse since the matter was previously before the Court. Winter was approaching, and work would be slack. The employers stated that the increased rate of exchange and the imposition of the sales tax had made a difference in the amount of work available. DEPENDENT ON JOBBING- WORK. With the slackness in the building trade employers were dependent upon such jobbing work as came in from day to day, and they could not say in advance during what period or periods it would not be necessary for the apprentices to attend at the shop. It might happen that during a week that an apprentice was not at the shop two or three jobs might como in. Therefore, the employers felt that, the order which had been previously made- was not elastic enough. The position formerly was that during the slack periods of the winter employers made up tanks, vents, spoutings, etc., which could be used for any building job that might como in. They were not able to do that now, because there was no building being done in the winter, and it was no good making up stock for use during the spring, when there was little building done. Also, a year or two ago Government regulations and a City Council . bylaw wero introduced' compelling them to use wrought iron in place of sheet iron, which they made up themselves, for use in plumbing work. The. winter was a bad time for the plumbers, because they could »Pt regulate their.work the same as they could a year or two ago. Some of the employers had taken the view that the apprenticeship contract Tcquired them to teach the apprentices the trade, and that there was no. objection, on, their part to feed the apprentices when they could ■ not engage, them .on useful work. Other cmi' ployers were of the opinion that_ they should provide the apprentice with a minimum weekly wage whether ho worked or not., "If the'employers have tho right to put off an apprentice when there is no work available, they will consent to the provision that the apprentice must' receive in every week at least 50 per cent, of his pay," said Mr.: Mazcngarb. "That does not mean t'h'at'an apprentice's pay will bo cut down by 50 per cent. One week the employer might, employ an apprentice for the full time. Another week she might be able to employ him 75 por cent, of the time, and another week ho might employ him only 25 per cent. of his time; but in the latter case lie must give the apprentice half-pay. At the1 present time an employer can put off an apprentice for one week and not pay him at all, but under this proposal if tho: employer puts him off for a week he must give him half-pay for that week.'.' APPRENTICESHIP TEEM INCREASED. Mr. O'Began said that the apprenticeship term was six years, but under the new proposal the term would be increased. There were a number of allied trades, but as far as he knew the plumbing trade was the only one asking for concessions. "The boys are strongly of the opinion that the term of the apprenticeship should not be prolonged," he said, "and that is what this application means." The Magistrate: Even under the exisiing order the term is prolonged. Mr. Goodacro said that there seemed to be some misapprehension in Tegard to the rationing of work. Counsel for the applicants stated that tho employers had to employ an apprentice throe weeks and put him off on. the fourth week, but under the terms of the order employers could put off an apprentice any week so long as he did not put him off more than one week in four. • If an employer had been busy for eight weeks, however, he could not put off an apprentice for two weeks to make up. The- Labour Department had had no complaints in' regard to the previous order made by the Magistrate. Tho Magistrate said ho was of the opinion that an apprentice must work and bo paid for three weeks in every four. If an employer did not have work for all that time it was unfortunate. After the evidence of some of tho employers and apprentices had been heard, Mr. O'Began submitted that tho hearing should be adjourned. Mr. Mazengarb suggested that tho employers' application should be amended to read, "That tho terms of the contract should be amended to permit employers to dispense with the services of an apprentice during any period or. periods of the apprenticeship when the employers had no work available upon which the apprentice might be usefully engaged, provided, however, that the apprentice should be employed on eighteen working days out of every twenty-four." WORKING AS INTENDED. The Magistrate said that from the evidence he had heard, the order he had previously made was working more or less as he intended it to work. Tho chief apprehension of the employers seemed to be the- winter, but the winter was not here, yet so long as the Labour 'officials were satisfied that it was working alright, it was bettor to leave it as it was in the meantime. He adjourned tho hearing sine die.