“Apprenticeship Committee Has Not Done Its Duty,” Says Judge

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 91, 8 July 1927, Page 1

“Apprenticeship Committee Has Not Done Its Duty,” Says Judge

ARBITRATION COURT APPEAL THE trouble in this ease is that the Apprenticeship Com- - mittee, has not done its duty at all.” This censure was passed by His Honor, Mr. Justice Frazer, giving judgment of the Arbitration Court this morning on an appeal of an apprentice against the decision of the Furniture Trades Apprenticeship Committee, refusing him an improvership. "tPHE judgment only affects thq case satisfactory aft it might be. it was not -*- of one apprentice,” saiJ his as full as: the committee could have Honour, “but there is a far-reaching obtained.

principle involved. “BOUND TO ACT JUDICIALLY” “The court has delegated powers to committees to decide whether improverships should be allowed in any particular case. This delegation imposes on the committee the duty to act in a judicial manner.

COLE’S APPLICATION The case arose out of an application of Frederick Cole, a cabinetmaker’s apprentice, to the Furniture Trades Apprenticeship Committee for an iniprovership for one year. The committee had reached no decision and he had had no satisfaction, so he applied to the court, which granted him his request. Cole stated that he had not had sufficient experience to qualify as a journeyman cabinetmaker. He had had an accident and had been off work for four months. He was a slow worker.

“The committee cannot say: ■We don't want improvers.’ It is bound to act judicially and to accept the ruling of the court without question.” The court had decided that improverships should he allowed in the interests of apprentices out of their time, but not fitted.' as journeymen. "The facts of this case,” said his Honour, continuing the court’s judgment, "indicate that the committee had got it into its collective heads that it could disallow requests without making inquiries. The trouble was that the Apprentice Committee had not done its duty at all. From that point of view the evidence was not as

The case was opposed by Mr. A. IT. Dixon for the Furniture Trades Workers’ Union, on the grounds that Cole having had a five-years’ apprenticeship should be able to earn the minimum rate for journeymen provided in the award.

The court granted Cole an improvership to date back to March, 1927, when he was out of his time.