PLUMBING TRADE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22524, 15 September 1936, Page 11

PLUMBING TRADE

APPRENTICE TRAINING NEW ORDER SOUGHT HIGHER WAGE SCALE All application for a new apprenticeship order in the plumbing and gasfitting industry in the northern district was brought before the Arbitration Court yesterday. Mr. J. Clark appeared for the apprenticeship committee, and Mr. W. -E. Anderson for the master plumbers and the Auckland Gas Company.

Mr. Clark said the proposed order embraced a great part of the old order, with some amendments. Mr. Anderson said there were only three clauses in the draft proposals to which the employers objected. A number of general orders issued by the Court amending all apprenticeship orders had apparently been overlooked by Mr. Clark.

The president of the Court, Mr. Justice Page* asked if any meeting of employers and the union after the nature of Conciliation Council proceedings had been held to discuss the details of the proposed order. Mr. Anderson: None whatever.

Mr. Anderson agreed with the President that it was desirable that such a meeting should be held. It was usual to arrange one. He agreed with Jlr. Clark that it was quite time that this apprenticeship order and its amendments, of which there were about 25, should be consolidated. Conference Hot favoured

Mr* Clark said the apprenticeship committee Was composed of representatives both of the workers and of the employers, and the committee's decision in this case had been unanimous.

Mr. Anderson said that at that-par-ticular meeting only one representative of the master plumbers had been present. The one who was specially familiar with these matters had found a door accidentally locked and had been unable to get in to the meeting. The President again suggested that it would be more satisfactory .if the parties got together, but Mr. Clark said he did not think they would be able to arrive at a profitable result. Referring to the proposal that the apprenticeship committee should have power to determine the number of apprentices allowed to any employer, Mr. Clark said the committee did not want to reduce but to increase the number of apprentices, and to allow an employer any number of apprentices that he was prepared to teach and had facilities for. The committee had no prejudice against any employer, but it wanted to see that these boys were taught; the trade. The same power had been given in the case of plumbers in Whangarei and of painters in Auckland. The Wages Asked

The wages asked were 15s weekly for the first six months, with half-yearly increases of 4s up to. £2 12s in the tenth half year and £3 lor the 11th half year and £3 10s for the 12th half year.* The rates were considerably Jower than those granted to carpenters' apprentices, he said: Mr. Anderson said the restrictions contained in earlier clauses were quite sufficient and it was wholly-unnecessary to finish up by saying that the apprenticeship committee mjght determine th«» proportion of apprentices, to journeymen which might be employed by any employer. It,was quite wrong that the apprenticeship committee should have the power to say whether an employer might or might not have apprentices. The employers were raising no objection to the rates proposed for the first three years which followed the Factories Act, although he did not admit they were bound by the Factories Act. They strongly opposed the higher rates asked for the fourth, fifth and sixth years, and proposed the rates laid down in the original apprenticeship order. Those rates were 40s for the fourth year, 45s for the fifth and 60s for the sixth. They considered that was an increase of wages before its time, but any further increase would be a serious matter. The President intimated that tho Court would take time to consider its decision.