Healey safety. As of July 19, last week, the Secretary of Labor signed an order which consolidated in our Bureau of Labor Standards all of the safety functions of the Department of Labor. This means, in addition to the transfer of the Walsh-Healey safety staff and the responsibility, the undertaking of certain other safety functions by virtue of several laws which the Congress passed last year, the most important of which, I suppose, in terms of volume, is the so-called Service Contracts Act. So we will be busy in a somewhat larger area in our own LSB operating programs. But I would hope, and I am confident that we will succeed in developing, where there can be developed, working understandings and arrangements with a number of the States so that, as I say, wherever it is possible, these things can be approached with a maximum of cooperation between our work and the work that you are doing.

Surely 1967 can be a portentous year. Forty-six legislatures have now been reapportioned and 47 legislatures will meet. It will also mark the 50th convention of the IAGLO—an opportune time not solely to review the past-but more importantly to plan imaginatively and constructively for the future!

Our cooperation and help, as in the past, is always available. With that, Mr. Chairman, I will close. Thank you very much for the opportunity of being here and talking to you today.

President CATHERWOOD. Thank you, Nelson, for your very appropriate remarks. Congratulations to you and to the Secretary of Labor for what I am certain is a constructive step in tying the Bureau of Labor Standards into the safety work. This aspect of safety work in recent years has been of mutual concern to the States and to the Secretary of Labor. Your remarks were thoughtful and in line with what we have come to expect from you-constructive contribution to our mutual interest.

I am particularly interested in this LSB-LSI proposition. As I understand it, your initials stand for Labor Standards Bureaulabor standards index. And as you pointed out, the index is still tentative and rough in spots, but it has real possibilities. I think it is a tribute to the nonpolitical nature of our sessions and of our staff in the Federal Department of Labor that this possibility comes to light here today for the first time.

Thank you Nelson Bortz for a major contribution to our program. [Following a short announcement by Commissioner Luttrell, the luncheon session adjourned.]

JULY 25-AFTERNOON SESSION

Presiding: MARTIN P. CATHERWOOD, Industrial Commissioner, New York Department of Labor

The Monday afternoon session of the IAGLO convention convened at 2:10 p.m. in the Century Room of the Monteleone Hotel, with President Catherwood presiding.

President Catherwood announced appointments of the following committees:

Resolutions committee: Chairman, Carl Cabe, Kentucky; Paul Bachman, Wyoming; John Otero, New Mexico; and L. R. Peterson, British Columbia.

Nominating committee: Chairman, Raymond F. Male, New Jersey; W. L. Robison, Idaho; Leonard R. Williams, Kansas; and Raymond Reierson, Alberta.

Auditing committee: Chairman, Dale Parkins, Iowa; R. E. Anderson, Nova Scotia; Walter Keim, U.S. Department of Labor.

President CATHERWOOD. The National Safety Council, during its annual safety conference in Chicago, October 24-27, 1966, has scheduled a meeting of administrators of the industrial safety laws. The meeting will be held in the Pick-Congress Hotel, October 26, at 2 p.m. This meeting has been arranged on the recommendations of the labor conference to the board of directors of the council. An agenda has been arranged to afford members of IAGLO an opportunity to participate in the discussion. Mr. Henry Hoffa, Assistant General Manager of the National Safety Council, has requested members of our association to take part in discussions on safety at their meeting.

There will be some IAGLO representation at this meeting. Ernest Webb, Nelson Bortz, Carl Knighting, and Marion Martin are scheduled as speakers.

Marion, incidentally, is unable to be with us this week. But we look forward to seeing her in connection with other activities.

There will be, I understand, presented for the consideration of the resolutions committee a resolution relating to mutual interest

with the National Safety Council. I know from some of our labor unions and union friends that we have had representations concerning the importance of State labor departments working closely with the National Safety Council.

We will next hear from R. E. Anderson, who will present the Report of the Apprenticeship Committee.

Report of the Apprenticeship Committee

Chairman: R. E. ANDERSON, Deputy Minister, Nova Scotia Department of

Labour

I am indebted to Commissioner Williams from Kansas and the other commissioners from the United States for preparing the United States' section of the report. I am also indebted to the Deputy Minister of Labour for Ontario, Tom M. Eberlee, for his assistance in compiling the Canadian section of the report.

UNITED STATES

The importance of the skilled worker increases at a rapid rate, since he is the pivot on which every industrial operation and our advancing technology turn.

Today's world requires more specific skills; young persons who enter and complete apprenticeship will be among the future leaders in industry and commerce, yet knowledge available to our youth on apprenticeship is not increasing according to the demands for the skilled craftsmen. They hear of numerous kinds of training and possible shortcuts to the skilled occupations, owing partly to the numerous types of training now being offered.

It is estimated that the total number of apprentices, both registered and unregistered, is somewhat over 250,000. They are replacements for those leaving the trades by retirement and death for a work force of over 8 million. At the same time, at least one-half of those apprentices indentured fail to complete their training period. Why does this situation exist? Many reasons could be given. One of them is in recruiting qualified persons for apprentices, due perhaps to some degree to the recent trend occurring in wage structures and employment conditions that have greatly reduced incentives for learning a skilled trade. Wage rates that have been negotiated and other wage rates that have been demanded in some industries employing nonskilled and semiskilled have increased in some instances to the level of skilled workers. The incentive pay rates and overtime pay quite often have exceeded the skilled workers' wage rates.

The fear of unemployment, or of being terminated because of age and negotiated contracts with fringe benefits, has lessened the incentive for the apprentice when he is confronted with the low wage rate, particularly in the early stages of his apprenticeship. We recognize that industry is faced with a long period ahead during which the supply of skilled craftsmen will be increasingly inadequate, and the hour is late if the status of the journeyman skilled craftsmen is to be maintained in sufficient number to fulfill the requirements of modern industry. Action should be taken to restore incentives for skilled workmen.

The Manpower Development and Training Act through on-the-job training for preapprenticeship is one of the more recent advances toward skilled training.

The selection of apprentices by qualifications only is another step toward improving the effectiveness of apprenticeship.

The joint efforts of labor and management in establishing and maintaining classrooms and acquiring instructors for the apprentices are also contributions to the skills of the journeyman.

A more creative and motivated approach may be needed in publicizing the dignity and rewards of craftsmanship. More and better data on both the supply and demand aspects of apprenticeship are needed, as well as more statistics concerning the immediate and future needs and the number and types of skills to be required by industry.

Bona fide apprenticeship admittedly is the true and tried system for training skilled craftsmen, yet in some instances, other types of training is claimed to fulfill the requirements of a skilled labor force.

There always has been something to detract from bona fide apprenticeship, and there probably always will be. There always have been problems connected with apprenticeship, the same as with any education system, and it is to be expected in the future that the problems associated with apprenticeship have always been, must be now, and must be in the future accepted as challenges contributing to a better apprenticeship system.

The shortage of skilled workers and the shortcomings of apprentice training are not the result of failure of the system, but are the result of the failures of human beings of a free Nation. If we now recognize this and have a sound and solid look at our failings and evaluate the system, then we have not failed-the system will go forward to furnish the skills in our trades and to furnish ample goods and services for our national economy.

Industry should assume this leadership. Government, both State and Federal, should aid and assist all kinds of training of our skilled work force to include rather than exclude apprenticeship.

The State labor departments should assume the leadership of balance in focusing attention and positive action in their own apprentice training system to supplement the skilled craftsmen in the work force.

CANADA

Although apprenticeship is one of the oldest forms of organized education, it is comparatively new in Canada. Prior to 1958, except for scattered plans carried on privately by industry, apprenticeship was a neglected field, at least so far as governmental interest and support were concerned. The majority of employers followed a hitand-miss plan of training, optimistically hoping to obtain skilled workers that some other employer had trained. Industry depended largely upon immigration from Great Britain and other Western European countries for its skilled craftsmen.

Apprenticeship Legislation

The first genuine apprenticeship act in Canada was passed in Ontario in 1928 and applied to the building trades only. Legislation before this time was of a medieval character and referred mainly to the employment of children of the poor. Legislation based on that of Ontario was introduced in British Columbia in 1935, and in Nova Scotia in 1936. In 1937, the National Employment Commission, appointed by the Federal Government, recommended establishing in the Federal Department of Labour a branch to promote apprenticeship in the Provinces.

Little happened until 1944 when under the Vocational Training Coordination Act, the Governor General in Council authorized the Minister of Labour to enter into an apprenticeship agreement with any Province. As a result, apprenticeship acts were passed in 1944 by the Provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island; but in Prince Edward Island, the act did not become operative until 1963. Newfoundland passed an act in 1953. With the addition of the Northwest Territories in 1964, there are now 10 signatories to the present apprenticeship agreement-the exception, the Province of Quebec.

Federal Assistance to Apprenticeship

While apprenticeship is under the jurisdiction of the Provinces, the assurance of an adequate supply of skilled workers for industries of the country has a national as well as a Provincial aspect. Thus, the Federal Government has been involved in providing assistance to Provincial apprenticeship programs since 1944.