Search results

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the joint training and apprenticeship system emerging in maintenance occupations in the US transit industry, its challenges and strategies to overcome them.

The paper reports on early results, including efforts to develop a consensus national framework for apprenticeship and training in transit maintenance. In the paper, training is an arena that both management and labour have common interests. Collaboration in training can foster partnership and improved labour‐management relationships. Implementing technological innovations and organisational changes in workplace practices are facilitated by training and together with training demonstrate strong positive financial payoffs.

The paper finds that the training and apprenticeship system discussed is not yet fully implemented.

The paper shows that several industries in America and other countries are facing similar shortages of skilled technicians due to technological and significant demographic changes.

The paper reviews approaches taken to develop a national effort to promote quality and sustainability in the emerging training system for transit maintenance workers.

This paper aims to compare the performance of building trades apprenticeship programs in the USA, sponsored jointly by employers and unions, with those sponsored unilaterally by employers. It reviews enrolment and graduation rates, including participation of women and minorities. The article also looks behind the numbers to examine the operation of apprenticeship. It reviews the evolution of joint programs, including institutional arrangements and recent innovations to cope with the challenging characteristics of construction labor markets.

Statistical comparisons by type of program sponsor are carried out using individual‐level data on registered apprenticeship for the period 1996‐2003. Evolution of apprenticeship programs is discussed in a historical perspective.

Joint programs (with union participation) were found to have much higher enrolments and greater participation of women and ethnic/racial minorities. Joint programs also exhibit markedly better performance for all groups on rates of attrition and completion. Joint programs have developed various innovations, including college credit for training and scholarship loans to expand apprenticeship and improve quality and retention, although there are no quantitative evaluations of the effectiveness of many of these specific measures.

Statistical information includes about 65 percent of all registered apprentices in the USA.

The paper shows that alternative forms of training sponsorship have substantially different effects on enrolment and graduation. Identification of the practices, that improve enrolment and retention, and their widespread adoption would enhance the effectiveness of training programs.

The dataset used in this paper has not yet been used in any publications. The findings regarding joint programs are notable, in view of the skilled labor shortages facing the construction industry in the USA.

Blues music is in the midst of its second revival in popularity in roughly thirty years. The year 1960 can be identified, with some qualification, as a reference point for the first rise in international awareness and appreciation of the blues. This first period of wide‐spread white interest in the blues continued until the early seventies, while the current revival began in the middle 1980s. During both periods a sizeable literature on the blues has appeared. This article provides a thumbnail sketch of the popularity of the blues, followed by a description of scholarly and critical literature devoted to the music. Documentary and instructional materials in audio and video formats are also discussed. Recommendations are made for library collections and a list of selected sources is included at the end of the article.

Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) member schools often compare their faculties’ research records to journal lists of their “peer and aspirational” programs. They often survey faculty and administrators’ perceptions of journal quality; number of Social Sciences Citation Index downloads; or “count” the number of faculty publications – but rarely analyze accounting programs’ actual journal quality lists. To examine this issue, we use a survey of national accounting programs. We identify a set of quality-classified journal lists by sampling 38 programs nationwide, varying by mission (e.g., urban or research), degrees granted (e.g., doctoral degrees in accounting), and national ranking (e.g., classified as a Top 75 Research Program) – from which we derive 1,436 data points that classify 359 journals that appear on these 38 programs’ journal lists. We also describe a case study that an accounting program used to revise its old journal list. We also find that while programs generally use generally accepted “bright lines” among the top three categories (A+, A, A−), they tailor their listings from the wide variety of B or C classified journals to create their own sets of acceptable journals in these categories. The study provides guidance and data for accounting programs who wish to develop or revise their own journal lists. While many studies have examined journal rankings, this is the first study to document the use of journal lists by accounting programs with a wide array of missions.

IT is evident from the numerous press cuttings which are reaching us, that we are once more afflicted with one of those periodical visitations of antagonism to Public Libraries, which occasionally assume epidemic form as the result of a succession of library opening ceremonies, or a rush of Carnegie gifts. Let a new library building be opened, or an old one celebrate its jubilee, or let Lord Avebury regale us with his statistics of crime‐diminution and Public Libraries, and immediately we have the same old, never‐ending flood of articles, papers and speeches to prove that Public Libraries are not what their original promoters intended, and that they simply exist for the purpose of circulating American “Penny Bloods.” We have had this same chorus, with variations, at regular intervals during the past twenty years, and it is amazing to find old‐established newspapers, and gentlemen of wide reading and knowledge, treating the theme as a novelty. One of the latest gladiators to enter the arena against Public Libraries, is Mr. J. Churton Collins, who contributes a forcible and able article, on “Free Libraries, their Functions and Opportunities,” to the Nineteenth Century for June, 1903. Were we not assured by its benevolent tone that Mr. Collins seeks only the betterment of Public Libraries, we should be very much disposed to resent some of the conclusions at which he has arrived, by accepting erroneous and misleading information. As a matter of fact, we heartily endorse most of Mr. Collins' ideas, though on very different grounds, and feel delighted to find in him an able exponent of what we have striven for five years to establish, namely, that Public Libraries will never be improved till they are better financed and better staffed.

The following admirable letter from MR. G. BOOTH‐HEMING, the Ex‐Mayor of the City of Westminster, has been published by the Daily Telegraph. The eminently sane views and the timely warnings it contains should give pause to the foolish advocates of false “economy” and the hysterical preachers of indiscriminate “retrenchment”:—

With the view of obtaining reliable first‐hand information as to the nature and efficacy of the food laws in Great Britain, France, and Germany, Mr. ROBERT ALLEN, the Secretary of the Pure Food Commission of Kentucky, has recently visited London, Paris, and Berlin. He has now published a report, containing a number of facts and conclusions of very considerable interest and importance, which, we presume, will be laid before the great Congress of Food Experts to be held on the occasion of the forthcoming exposition at St. Louis. Mr. ALLEN severely criticises the British system, and calls particular attention to the evils attending our feeble legislation, and still more feeble administrative methods. The criticisms are severe, but they are just. Great Britain, says Mr. ALLEN, is par excellence the dumping‐ground for adulterated, sophisticated, and impoverished foods of all kinds. France, Germany, and America, he observes, have added a superstructure to their Tariff walls in the shape of standards of purity for imported food‐products, while through Great Britain's open door are thrust the greater part of the bad goods which would be now rejected in the three countries above referred to. Whatever views may be held as to the imposition of Tariffs no sane person will deny the importance of instituting some kind of effective control over the quality of imported food products, and, while it may be admitted that an attempt—all too restricted in its nature—has been made in the Food Act of 1899 to deal with the matter, it certainly cannot be said that any really effective official control of the kind indicated is at present in existence in the British Isles. We agree with Mr. ALLEN'S statement that our food laws are inadequate and that, such as they are, those laws are poorly enforced, or not enforced at all. It is also true that there are no “standards” or “limits” in regard to the composition and quality of food products “except loose and low standards for butter and milk,” and we are compelled to admit that with the exception of the British Analytical Control there exists no organisation—either official or voluntary —which can be said to concern itself in a comprehensive and effective manner with the all‐important subject of the nature and quality of the food supply of the people. In the United States, and in some of those European countries which are entitled to call themselves civilised, the pure food question has been studied carefully and seriously in recent years—with the result that legislation and administrative machinery of far superior types to ours are rapidly being introduced. With us adulteration, sophistication, and the supply of inferior goods are still commonly regarded as matters to be treated in a sort of joking spirit, even by persons whose education and position are such as to make their adoption of so foolish an attitude most astonishing to those who have given even but slight attention to the subject. Lethargy, carelessness, and a species of feeble frivolity appear to be growing among us to such an extent as to threaten to become dangerous in a national sense. We should be thankful for outspoken criticism—if only for the bracing effect it ought to produce.

Auditing textbooks include summary level coverage of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Code of Professional Conduct, but textbook coverage is too brief to support a strong understanding of auditor independence. Independence rules have the force of professional law for the independent auditor (PCAOB, 2015). Threats to firm independence can arise from events and circumstances such as investments in the client, loans from the client, past-due fees, contingent fees, deposits in the client, gifts and job offers. Student test results from a five-year rotation of alternative auditor independence lecture support materials demonstrate that using the actual AICPA Code of Professional Conduct reduces student performance. However, this drag on student performance was mostly offset by the positive impacts of simultaneous use of an independence decision tree developed for this chapter and tested as a teaching material for classrooms use.