DISMISSED BOYS

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 17236, 16 April 1930, Page 17

DISMISSED BOYS

PROMISE OF REFORM

APPRENTICESHIP LAW DEFECTS

Defects revealed in the working of the law governing apprenticeship were brought, to the notice of the Minister of Labor, the lion. W. A. Veitch. bv a deputation representing the Auckland Trades and Labor Council. The Minister said that be intended to take steps to remedy I hern during the coming session. Mr. Clark, secretary of the Plumbers’ Union, said a large number of apprentices had been thrown out ot employment- by dismissal before completion of their term of indenture. Other employers would not take them, as tlie •demand was for first yearapprentices at 15s a week. No employer had ever been prosecuted for failing to complete the terms of an apprenticeship. If an appeal against the discharge of an apprentice was upheld there should he some penalty upon the employer. Mr. Clark suggested that his union was also strongly of the opinion that no new buys should be taken into the trade until others, who had lost their positions before completion of their apprenticeship, had been given posts. Mr. Phelan, secretary of the Timber Workers’ Union, alleged the failure by the department adequately to carry out its function of protecting the interests of workers. He presumed that the inspector of awards was acting under instructions if there was any laxity. In th.' working of the department people naturally looked to the Minister to put it light. Mr. Campbell, secretary of the Painters’ Union, referred to the court proceedings, which had shown that the law contained no provision to compel specific performance of an apprenticeship agreement by an employer. Tile Minister said that before the lasi session of Parliament he drafted a I ill to amend the. apprenticeship law. :tul lie lmd to admit frankly that he was not very well satisfied vvilh it. He would give further consideration to the matter with a view lo having the law amended during the coming session.

Regarding specific performance of apprenticeship agreements, it would ho necessary to safeguard the employer, so far as character and suitability of apprentice wore concerned. Me would rml like lo promise anything in regard to giving tho unions the right to take action. !l might he found desirable to give more power to apprenticeship committees.