APPRENTICES

Andrew Balding’s Kingsclere yard is a highly successful racing stable, and also an educational establishment for apprentice jockeys which has spent 60 years getting better and better (first under Ian Balding and now under his son.)

A crisis has arisen recently because a number of trainers who employ apprentices have been unwilling to pay their share of their apprentices’ expenses as per the present arrangements. Such situations arise from time to time and the BHA and the National Trainers’ Federation (NTF) should be quite capable of dealing with the matter.

Not so on this occasion, declares the BHA, which has proposed a seismic change in the financial arrangements currently in operation in this field.

As I understand the BHA press release on the subject, the regulations which are to be applied on March 28 2020 will have the following effects:

Re. 7-pound claimers (the youngest pupils), the trainer’s potential income is reduced by 33 percent. Harsh.

Re. 5-pound claimers (those who have won a certain number of races), the reduction is 25 percent. Harsh.

Re. 3-pound claimers (the most successful pupils), the reduction is 66 percent. Very Harsh.

Where does the money taken from the trainers go to? Largely to the apprentices themselves, so that they can pay their own expenses without having to ask their employers to reimburse them, which can certainly put a strain upon the master-pupil relationship if trainers are reluctant to toe the line.

However the BHA licences trainers and the National Federation of Trainers is their management team. Between them, they should be able to deal with the matter, without feeling obliged to sabotage (and I mean sabotage) the finances of all trainers who employ apprentices, including Andrew Balding, who happens to run the best model of an apprentice school there has ever been anywhere in the world.

Andrew Balding decided that if the new arrangements become mandatory he will take no more apprentices, and has already informed next year’s intake not to bother to turn up.

He added that under the new arrangement “nepotism” will be the only basis on which a parent would allow a child to become an apprentice jockey. I had to reach for my dictionary. Nepotism means intense devotion towards relatives, a mother’s affection for her child, for example, love at its most extreme.

Coincidentally, it rang a bell in my ancient brain. I had just read Henrietta Knight’s new book “Starting from Scratch”, about the development of young jump jockeys. Repeatedly one comes across examples of intense nepotism of the best sort: situations where parents cannot afford to own a pony and yet push the financial boat out to buy and keep a pony (or two) to enable a child to experience the pony racing scene, which nowadays so often leads to an apprenticeship in racing. A pony may lead to a trailer and then a horsebox, and what about the kit and… and where is the next penny coming from?

Andrew was saying that when boys or girls become apprentices, at 15 or 16, which is a complicated stage of their lives, they are not just taught to ride, they are taught how to grow up as sensible human beings. They are taught to appreciate the importance of a strong work ethic, a sense of duty, and hopefully a basic honesty in their dealings with their fellow apprentices and the staff who are there to guide them. If they can take on board those virtues, they will be well equipped to face up to the facts of teenage life as regards drink, sex, drugs, cars, discipline, and money. There again in a good stable the company in which the apprentices find themselves will be there to help them make the right choices.  Andrew was suggesting (I suspect) that to function properly an apprenticeship should be as good and as concerned as the best sort of family, and that providing such a framework does not come cheap. If that is what he meant, he is right on all counts.

My thoughts on the subject? All trainers are entitled to take on apprentices. Some do, some don’t. In addition there are three apprentice schools that I am aware of:  Doncaster (or is it Manchester?), Newmarket, and Kingsclere. All three are doing well, with Kingsclere at the top of the heap.  It has occurred to me that further development in that field might be interesting. Possibly areas rich in trainers (Middleham? Lambourn?) might want to create something of the sort as a joint effort involving several trainers.  If there is scope for more, I have found myself thinking, surely the model for the future would be Kingsclere.

However none of this will apply if the BHA’s latest brainstorm is allowed to take root.

The expression “Come on!” has its uses, when expressing the message “You cannot be that stupid!” In this instance we have the BHA declaring that the present Apprentice Problem is just a matter of re-balancing the finances. It seems to be unaware that its “re-balancing” involves destroying the financial foundations of one of British racing’s finest features. “Come on!” I say, “You cannot be that stupid!”

The new rules are scheduled to start work on 28^th March 2020, which is much too soon, in view of the seismic nature of the proposed changes. I suggest a moratorium for at least a year, and research into the possibility of extending Apprentice Education on the basis of what Kingsclere has shown to be possible, instead of the over-hasty and woefully misguided reaction favoured by the BHA.

If the problem is trainers who will not pay expenses as per the present arrangements, I suggest the BHA imposes Draconian fines and lengthy suspension of licences for those who are in effect stealing from their employees.

A strategy along those lines makes sense, which cannot be said about the huge financial adjustments which are being proposed by the BHA, and which have already led to consequences which are nothing less than tragic.

ALL THE BEST FOR CHRISTMAS.

DONEC

1,004 words.