September 27, 2011

Ontario Electrical League pushes to change apprenticeship ratios

KELLY LAPOINTE

staff writer

The contractors of the Ontario Electrical League (OEL) have launched a public relations campaign focused on changing the current journeyman to apprenticeship ratio of 3:1 to 1:1 for every company in the province.

“Where people get penalized is that the 3:1 ratio exists in our legislation and it seems to really hamper larger companies,” said OEL Contractor Government Relations Committee Chair Walter Pamic.

The OEL recently launched radio and print ads as well as an educational pamphlet campaign to stress the issue before the Oct. 6 provincial election.

As it currently stands there is a 1:1 ratio for companies with one or two journeypersons, going up to a 2:1 for up to eight journeypersons. For every three journeypersons employed after eight journeypersons, one additional apprentice is allowed.

To become a fully-certified electrician in Ontario requires a multi-year apprenticeship with on-the-job training. The OEL’s campaign maintains that Dalton McGuinty’s Liberal government is creating an “artificial shortage” in skilled trades.

Pamic said these ratios have existed for some time but were never enforced until the McGuinty government came into power and then became strictly enforced.

“I have a fifth year apprentice who is applying to work for my company and I can’t hire this person, who is almost ready to write their license, because this ratio exists,” said Pamic.

“Before, when they were not enforced, people were hiring helpers and apprentices like this, in order to get them through any crunches that existed when work had to be done, they hired people that were skilled that could work in the trades.”

He said safety is the reasoning behind the ratio but that it does not stand up to scrutiny.

“Many people in the industry, and I am one of them, believe that a 1:1 is much safer than a 3:1 ratio,” Pamic explained.

He also noted that in a larger operation the journeymen could be under the impression that the apprentice is with someone else and actually be unsupervised.

“If it was a health and safety concern, then they would have eliminated this ability to have a 1:1 ratio for a two-electrician company.”

He also said that with a 3:1 ratio, apprentices mainly fetch tools and materials and do not get much hands-on experience.

“If you had a 1:1 ratio across the board, you would have an apprentice dedicated to an electrician, they would work together, it would be one student, one mentor working together hand in hand,” said Pamic.

“This is much safer, you always under the constant care and control of that one individual. If you come to a job site you would actually see it would work the best.”

He said because of these ratios, he’s had to turn away would-be apprentices. He said he’s always getting inquiries from people looking for work, but since the launch of their public campaign, they have received a lot of public response.

“What we’re hearing is that it’s just another regulation that we have in this province that does nothing but harm the youth of Ontario.”

The campaign says it’s as easy as “a stroke of a pen” to switch it to a 1:1 ratio for electricians across the board in Ontario. Pamic said that Minister of Training, College and Universities can in an order of council change the regulation, which is attached to legislation.

He said they’ve done it with other trades, like sprinkler which now has a 1:1.

“The sprinkler trade is large pipe, it’s up high, ladders — there’s a lot of similarities in what these people are doing. And if there was a safety issue, they would change it.”

He said if he could, he would hire about eight new apprentices tomorrow.

Other provinces have various ratios, British Columbia doesn’t have set ratios, Alberta doesn’t account for third and fourth year apprentices and Saskatchewan has a 1:2.

“We don’t do this for any other industry. We don’t require three doctors to train one intern. We don’t have three teachers to one student in high school or university. It’s actually absurd is what it is.”

Print | Comment