STATUS OF APPRENTICE.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 15320, 16 September 1920, Page 5

STATUS OF APPRENTICE.

AM tJNUSUAL CASE; ■J AUGKLAND, last higbt; An uiiushal ease regarding the status . bf aii apprfehtifce returning from . service was argued before the Arbitration Court to-dAy, when the Inspector of J?ac- , tories (Mr G. H. Lightfoot) Sued A. a«d G. Price, Limited (Mr McVeagh), ciigi- ' neers, Thames,, for a penalty of £100 for ' alleged' breach of the boile'rihakers'' award. Mr Lightfoot said a lad named Ernest Alfred Pernio was engaged by defendants as an apprentice m April, 1914. The award then m operation provided for an apjJrehtie.shib of six Real's. 'Hi July, 1918& Periilo wteht ihto 6amjt*j and wiigiveh a ciertifibat^, stating he was within ninfe months of completing his apprentib_ship. On lijs discharge from camp m Novombtjr, 2018, "as" Price's were slack, he obtaihed employment m Wellington at £2. a wfeek, m , adaitioii to bveittinie; tn April, 1919, "Peijino saw Price, who told him he could >tart. again, but would have to be satisfied with- any. work which plight come, along or \ as ah .i_ssistant bdilerrnakef. Section 40 of the War Regulations and Statute La\y Amendment Act of 1918 laid, down that where any person, bad served . . m connection with tile war liis; contract of apprenticeship was deemed to have .been suspended, during hiis service and. for six .'mouths 'after discharge, uilTess revived. ... If, .howeyqr, kef Ore. the expiration . of , six nioiith- the apprentice gave notice m writing- of his wish tO-.renew.his appeiitifcesbip the Con-, trafet was revived. There was no limita-. tioli iik any Act or Award a£ to the age ahd term of apprenticeship or the number or. proportion of apprentices to journeymen . applied to apprentices servingr under such revived contract.' .The section .further laid down ..that if -no such notice was . given within the period bf six mOnths and no, agreement was made to the contrary m. accordance writh. Section. 28 of the War Legislation Amend-* meht Act, 191$, the contract ot, apprenticeship lapsed. Aa Section 28, .of the 1910 Act was rppealed, and Penhb made no application m writing, to. ..liave, hiss^apparenticeship revived, lind had .entered info no agreement, he. was entering into a new contract. His . Hoiiqr. said that surely a mutual agreement would be held as .valid, even if. no written application were made. Mr Lightfoot said that under the boilermakers' award there were only two clauses—apprentices and journeymen. The lad was treated, as. a journeyman, ahd. i ftohen On several occasions he was "stood . off" work. for a few days he was not paid,, whereas an apprentice would, have received pay all the. time. When Pernio was re-engaged defendants paid liini 255: a .week . until September 8, . and then 36s a week. instead of Is 7_d^plus 2^d, ah hour, Boilermakers' wages; .'Mr Lightfoot dontended .that . if no notice was given any* new. contract must bo subject to th 6 exist-] ing award, which laid down a period of j .five s years' apprenticeship. Defendant! Should,- therefore, have paid hiih as . a journeyman when his five years were completed. _His Honor said that if he .had entered '■ into a new agreement surely h.6 was a first year apprentice. . " Mr Lightfoot maintained '■ that he 'had several years' training, m th© trade, y . Ernest Alfred. Pfenho gave evidence.- " In reply to. Mr.' MqVeagh, witness ad-. l hiitte'd. he linderstopd he would : bo , jre-^ instated as. aii. apprentice. During the ' first few ihonths the.Repatr.i^tioh pepart-; ■ili-nt made .Up. his wage's to. £3 a, w,eek.; Mr McVeagh fcxplaihed that a, certificate" , given, to , Penho wa_ an errofc,- ''dnj. bb*-' vipusly according Ao the award then hi force should "J hay? read ohe' year, five .T^b lad had returhed as an ap-^ pr^ntico and wiis treated as ohe. ( M r iLighjtfdbt maiiita-ued that the dis-" bf'.a boUermak'er Was one who 1, ,had served five years, and Perinb had. dbho this m Septehibjer.- „ ' Mr McVpagh said §6ction 40 .did notprecluded 7 the parties '.-" from making a mutual agreement to renew relations. There could be J ho doubt that the former contract liad been reft'ew^d. ,The young ; maii mistook .tho certificate for a legal; document shortening his .term by One' year; and, aeclcrating his recognition as a journeyman. . ...-'■ .' - His Honor said tho case was .important, ; as about 09 ' per ' cent, of the lads who" had returned had simply walked baiik and, resumed -their, relations with their employers Without written application. The . Coiirt would give "a written docision:— Press "Assn. , Z