The record-union., 1891-12-11
APPRENTICESHIP AND TRADES
UNIONS.

Professor Bemis, in paper in a recent
review, undertakes to disabuse the public
mind of what he declares a grave error
That is, the general public believes that
the decline of the old apprentice system
is due mainly to labor union opposition
to it, and to demands for it's limitation.
But Professor Bemis declares that he has
investigated the matter and that there is
no sufficient foundation for the popular
belief
There are, he says, from fifty to sixty
trades unions in the country, with ma
tional or international organizations. Of
these he has Investigated forty-eight hav-
ing membership of 100000. But he
finds only So, 900 men in seventeen unions,
or 163 per cent. of all, that have any rules
at all restricting apprenticeship. There
are only 1000 men, or IA per cent. that
report any success in enforcing these
rules or demands.
In ten Of the unions the matter of re-
striction is left to the local unions and
these do not often act. In twenty-one
unions there are no restrictions, local or
national. Professor Bemis adds that he
finds the rules or demands in most cases
not so restrictive, nor so indefensible as
is supposed by most people. For in
stance, the rule asking for thorough ap-
premiership is one that is justifiable in
the eyes of all men, even if any deny the
policy of the trades unions preferring a
demand with that as its pith. Again,
Professor Bemis finds much to be said in
favor of rules limiting the number of ap-
prentices in certain trades, because the
purpose is to check the disposition of en-
ployers to fill shops with half-trained, or
half-fnished journeymen, which practice
lowers the standard of workmanship and
prevents any one from getting thorough
training, as well as Injuries the standard
of production.
But when trades unions go beyond the
line justifying limitation. in order to Sc
cure trained workmen and seek to re-
strict apprenticeship more than the dan
ger stated justifies, they cease to be bene-
ficent and are worthy of opposition, Wig
orous and severe.
Professor Bemis finds that the chief
reason for the declination of the appren-
ticeship system is the subdivision of in
dustrial yocations and methods. Under
this subdivision and specializing it be-
comes Improbable to the employer to
teach all parts of the business to one per-
son.
The essayist is inclined to defend the
workmen most need is general intelli-
gence and dexterity, rather than a minute
knowledge of each one of two score or
more of the subdivisions of an industry.
He looks upon the disappearance of old
time apprenticeship, therefore, as "a logi-
cal consequence of the natural evolution
of industrial methods" and that is not
altogether a matter for rational regret,
especially as so much of the training by
that system as is applicable to modern
methods of business can be impaired and
better taught in trade schools as supple
mentary to manual training in the public
schools.
These are the views of a man who
claims to have made thorough study of
the whole question. They are entitled to
consideration and unquestionably have
strength, but are nevertheless open to
criticism and are not all to be accepted
out of hand and without further examina-
ton. We shall probably take occasion to
present some other thoughts relating to
the subject and closely connected with
the policy of limiting the import of
foreign workmen, who in such large
numbers fill the trades while the Amerl-
can youth is so much excluded from
them. If the conclusions of Professor
Bemis are sound, then the remedy for a
confessed i'll becomes the chief of consid-