Apprentice labour, as distinguished from skilled labour, has to be charged with the extra attention in management, the loss that is always occasioned by a forced classification of the work, the influence in lowering both the quality and the amount of work performed by skilled men, the risk of detention by failure or accident, and loss of material; besides, apprentices must be charged with the same, if not a greater expense than skilled workmen, for light, room, oil, tools, and office service. Attempts have been made in some of the best-regulated engineering establishments to fix some constant estimate upon apprentice labour, but, so far as known, without definite results in any case. If not combined with skilled labour, it would be comparatively easy to determine the value of apprentice labour; but when it comes up as an item in the aggregate of labour charged to a machine or some special work constructed, it is difficult, if not impossible, to separate skilled from unskilled service.
Another condition of apprenticeship that is equally as difficult to define as the commercial value of mechanical knowledge, or that of apprentice labour, is the extent and nature of the facilities that different establishments afford for learners.
In speaking of the mechanical knowledge to be gained, and of the privileges afforded for learners in engineering-works in a general way, it must, of course, be assumed that such works afford full facilities for learning some branch of work by the best practice and in the most thorough manner. Such establishments are, however, graded from the highest class, on the best branches of work, where a premium would be equitable, down to the lowest class, performing only inferior branches of work, where there can be little if any advantage gained by serving an apprenticeship.
Besides this want or difference of facilities which establishments may afford, there is the farther distinction to be made between an engineering establishment and one that is directed to the manufacture of staple articles. This distinction between engineering-works and manufacturing is quite plain to engineers themselves, but in many cases is not so to those who are to enter as apprentices, nor to their friends who advise them. In every case where engagements are made there should be the fullest possible investigation as to the character of the works, not only to protect the learner, but to guard regular engineering establishments in the advantages to be gained by apprentice labour. A machinist or a manufacturer who employs only the muscular strength and the ordinary faculties of workmen in his operations, can afford to pay an apprentice from the beginning a fair share of his earnings; but an engineering-work that projects original plans, generates designs, and assumes risks based upon skill and special knowledge, is very different from a manufactory. To manufacture is to carry on regular processes for converting material; such processes being constantly the same, or approximately so, and such as do not demand much mechanical knowledge on the part of workmen.
The name of having been an apprentice to a famous firm may sometimes have an influence in enabling an engineer to form advantageous commercial connections, but generally an apprenticeship is of value only as it has furnished substantial knowledge and skill; for every one must sooner or later come down to the solid basis of their actual abilities and acquirements. The engineering interest is by far too practical to recognise a shadow instead of true substance, and there is but little chance of deception in a calling which deals mainly with facts, figures, and positive demonstration.
It is best, when an apprentice thinks of entering an engineering establishment, to inquire of its character from disinterested persons who are qualified to judge of the facilities it affords. As a rule, every machine-shop proprietor imagines his own establishment to combine all the elements of an engineering business—and the fewer the facilities for learners, usually the more extravagant this estimate; so that opinions in the matter, to be relied upon, should come from disinterested sources.
In regard to premiums, it is a matter to be determined by the facilities that a work may afford for teaching apprentices. To include experience in all the departments of an engineering establishment, within a reasonable term, none but those of unusual ability can make their services of sufficient value to offset what they receive; and there is no doubt but that premium engagements, when the amount of the premium is based upon the facilities afforded for learning, are fair and equitable.
There is, however, this to be remembered, that the considerations which more especially balance premiums—such as a term at draughting, designing, and office service—may be mainly acquired by self-effort, while the practical knowledge of moulding, forging, and fitting cannot; and an apprentice who has good natural capacity, may, if industrious, by the aid of books and such opportunities as usually exist, qualify himself very well without including the premium departments in his course.
Finally, it must constantly be borne in mind that what will be learned is no less a question of faculties than effort, and that the means of succeeding are closed to none who at the beginning form proper plans, and follow them persistently.
(1.) Why cannot the conditions of apprentice engagements be determined by law?—(2.) In what manner does machine improvements affect the conditions of apprenticeship?—(3.) What are the considerations which pass from a master to an apprentice?—(4.) What from an apprentice to a master?—(5.) Why is a particular service of less value when performed by an apprentice than by a skilled workman?—(6.) In what manner can technical knowledge be made to balance or become capital?—(7.) Name two of the principal distinctions between technical knowledge and property as constituting capital.—(8.) What is the difference between what is called engineering and regular manufactures?