APPRENTICESHIP

Hokitika Guardian, 8 June 1928, Page 4

APPRENTICESHIP

EAfPLO YAI ENT AND LABOUR UNIONS. (Contributed by X.) (Continued). Probably it will he found that tiie labour unions and the employers also are to some extent responsible for the present trouble. The union's being of the opinion that the less apprentices employed the more work there will be for journeymen, have endeavoured to reduce the quota of apprentices to the minimum. In some cases also boys have been approached and the idea instilled into their minds that their employers will take advantage of them if possible; they have been instructed as to what they may or may not lie called on to do, and even L believe attempts have been made to form “ ap prentices’ unions.” Xow whatever the advantages or disadvantages oi labour unionism may lie its tenets, ar. applicable only to journeymen, and on the immature mind of the hoy maj have a very bad effect. This is so obvious that probably the more sensible section of trades unionists are quite satisfied to leave the hoys alone until they have qualified as tradesmen before endeavouring to convert them int: trades unionists. The instilling oi “ class consciousness ” into the youth ful m.ind probably only emanates Iron, the “ Communist ” sections. But thai there have been attempts in this direction is a disquieting feature, and suel. attempts need careful watching. The employers are to a certain extent no doubt- responsible Tor the pres cut technical training proving more or less of a fiasco. It is undoubtedly a fiasco if a boy is kept at a technical school fur two nr three years largcic ar the nublir expense, to find that the employer doesn’t want him. hut preler.to take a younger boy directly "i mm the piimary or secondary school. Ann yet this is frequently occurring, and tiic* reason is obvious. I lie “employer is not always a tree agent. lie may have to put oil his own buys, or the boys of relatives and friends. Sometimes lie is approached by those with whom ho lias had important business dealings, and as a personal favour he is asked to give their hoys a chance when tlie next vacancy occurs, ill the case of companies the position is even more accidental as directors and even shareholders consider they are justified in putting in a word for those in whom they are interested. It does not beany means follow therefore that those who have the longest term of service at a technical school or even secure the highest testimonials are assured of preferential treatment when yacancie* occur in the workshops. Also it must lie remembered that many employers will not take on apprentices; over 16 or at tlie most 17 years of ago, and indoubt have good reasons to justify them in this decision.

CONCLUSION. If therefore it lias to he admitted that the responsibility for tiic present unsatisfactory conditions rest more oi less with the education system, the apprenticeship legislation, and also the unions and the employers, tlie remedy may probably lie found (1) In systematic'' effort to induce New Zealand boys to take up the pri niarv industries; scientific training in the various branches of horticulture which bring direct return from th land. This is a big and vital question which perhaps only indirectly afiects the apprenticeship problem. It is evi dent, however, that in a country s

l:irjcdy dependent on its primary industries, boys should end must be trained in these industries. Incident-, ally »ilso, it is in these industries thni the worker is brought face to face with the fact that the return for labour directly depends on what that- labour produces', and not on any artificial wage standard evolved by the Arbitration Court or any other tribunal. (2) That a clear distinction should he drawn between the artisan and professional classes in so far that the State should only he called on to provide free education up to the standard required for the former. A primary school education —with possibly some modification in tbe syllabus—should suffice. Higher education should he paid for by the individual. Scholarships and bursaries if given should he very limited in number, confined to exceptionally promising pupils only and awarded somewhat on the lines of the Rhodes Scholarships, in which personality, moral and well disciplined character and other features —not merely ability to “swot”—arc important and deciding factors. If the State is to hear the cost of “ higher ” education it should at least he assured that the circumstances are such—and the students of such exceptional promise—as to warrant it. (3) Technical education for the artisan should commence at the age of fourteen and be carried on for two years as a preliminary to practical workshop training, the instructions being arranged according to the suggestions of employers in each trade as to what would he most useful for the boy to be grounded in before commencing his apprenticeship. For this preliminary training probably no expensive macliipery or equipment would he required. Attendance at technical school during apprenticeship should he purely voluntary. It might be worth considering, however, whether on termination of apprenticeship facilities should be given to the young man to put in voluntarily a year at a fully equipped technical training college with a view to obtaining a State certificate of proficiency as a tradesman. (4) The present apprenticeship legislation should he amplified, probably in the direction of vesting in the Registrar of Apprentices the powers now vested in Committees. If the Committees are not abolished tlieir functions should be confined to acting in an advisory capacity in conjunctio with the Registrar. The Arbitration Cobrt might act as a Court of Appeal, but if its aid is invoked some reasonable costs should he allowed against those bringing an appeal if such an appeal were dismissed. The present “ indenture ” system should he modified, and the employer safeguarded against any interference—except in extreme cases —with his complete control of the apprentice. Provision should he made to meet the ease of companies; also with certain safeguards freedom should be allowed the employer to dispense with an unsatisfactory apprentice. Nothing is so subversive of discipline as the knowledge on the part of a hoy that his employer cannot without difficulty get rid of him. The low cunning shown by the very objectionable youngster with which most employers have, at some time or other been inflicted who will just “play up” sufficiently to disorganise the shop and set a bad example to the other hoys and yet save himself from being dismissed on any definite charge is responsible for many employers stating they will not he worried with apprentices at all. As the old days of corporal punishment are over, unless some disciplinary power is left with the employer the days of apprenticeship are numbered, particularly as unfortunately the discipline of home life is gradually slackening and the tendency of the modern boy anil girl is to be restive under any form of discipline whatever. (o', With technical education arranged on the lines here suggested it would be advisable to make it compul-

sory that every apprentice before being taken on should have put in two years in a technical school and have gained a creditable pass or leaving certificate. The above suggestions though merely tentative are I believe along the lines on which a solution may eventually he found for the, apprenticeship problem.