THE APPRENTICES’ ACT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20704, 30 April 1929, Page 9

THE APPRENTICES’ ACT.

ALLEGED ABUSE OF PROVISIONS. COMPLAINT BY UNION SECRETARY. (Pnt United Press Association.) AUCKLAND, April 29. Complaint was uiade to the Aribtration Court that the provisions of the Apprentices Act intended to assist firms were being abused. Dir Dixon, secretary of the Furniture Trades Union, mentioned the case of a firm, going out of business, not because of bankruptcy or liquidation, but because of the closing down of its cabinetmaking and upholstery department. This appeared a simple way for employers who desired to free themselves of apprentices for whom they have no further use. He also alleged abuses in .the transfer of apprentices. The union contended that the provision in the Act was not meant to assist employers who had entered into contracts to hand over their obligations to some other employers who were already availing themselves of their full quota of apprentices. Other employers who were doing the right thing by their apprentices were badly hit by unfair competition, while journeymen . were thrown out of employment by jobs being taken up by cheap boy labour. Mr Justice Frazer said" that the general order Was not intended for cases of kind quoted, but for cases of hardship. The court hoped that where firms altered their trading they would endeavour to fit their apprentices in somewhere. The most important thing was that the lads ■ should learn their trade.

SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES,

STRAIGHT TALK BY THE COURT. (Special to Daily Times.) AUCKLAND, April 29. ,f We would like you' to exercise a little common sense In these matters,” said Mr Justice Frazer in the Arbitration Court this'morning when Mr S. E. Wright (secretary of the Employers* Association) asked if it would be possible for an officer of the Labour Depart- ’ 1 inent to investigate the facilities for teaching apprentices in cases where the employers on an apprenticeship committee were unwilling to enter a rival factory for this purpose. - His Honor said the only thing was that sometimes the department would not have an officer sufficiently conversant with the trade to give a competent judgment., Surely to goodness the committee could arrive at some satisfactory arrangement. The principal thing was to dispose of matters quickly and not wait for sis months in some instances for the court to come round. Mr Wright.: That is why I make the t suggestion.

Hia Honor added that where there was disagreement the committee might accent an umpire. It was a great pity that something was not done to dispose of disputes expeditiously.