STATUS OF AN APPRENTICE

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 303, 16 September 1920, Page 6

STATUS OF AN APPRENTICE

By Teleeriiph—Press AssociationAuckland, September 15. An unusual case regarding Hie etatua of an apprentice returning from active service was argued before the Arbitration Court, when the Inspector of Factories (Mr. G. H. Lightfoot) sued A. and G. Price, Limited (Jlr. M'Veagh), engincere, Thames, for a penalty of £W for alleged breach of the boilermakers award. Mr. Lightfoot ■ said that a, lad named Ernest Alfred Penno was engaged bv the defendants as an apprentice in April, 1914. The award then in operation provided for an apprenticeship of six years. In July, 1918, Penno went into camp, and was given a certificata stating that he was within nine months of completing his apprenticeship. On his discharge from camp in November, 1918, as Prices were slack, ho obtained employment in Wellington, at ■ .£2 per week in addition to overtime. In April, 1919. Penno saw Price, who told him ho could start again, bin ymtld have to be satisfied with any work which might como along, or as nn assistant hollermaker Penno had made no application in writing to have his apprenticeship revived, and had entered into no agreement He was entering into a new contract Ilis Honour said the case was important, as about 99 per cent, of lads who had returned had siranlv walked back and resumed relations with their employers without written application. The Court would give a written decision.