DURING THE PAST FEW DECADES, A NUMBER OF UNIONS HAVE HELPED MEMBERS TO RETRAIN TO COPE WITH TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE OR TO UPGRADE TRADE OR CRAFT SKILLS, AND SOME UNIONS HAVE PARTICIPATED WITH EMPLOYERS IN JOINT APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS AND SIMILAR EFFORTS. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PROVISIONS FOR RETRAINING HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO KEEP AS MANY WORKERS AS POSSIBLE ON THE JOB, TO ASSURE THAT THESE WORKERS SHARE IN THE GAINS OF AUTOMATION, AND TO PROTECT THOSE WHO, DESPITE THE EFFORTS OF THEIR UNIONS, ARE DISPLACED BY TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE. HOWEVER, SUCH MEASURES DO NOT SOLVE THE LONG-RANGE PROBLEMS OF PERSONS ALREADY DISPLACED, THOSE NOT YET EMPLOYED, OR WORKERS WHOSE EMPLOYMENT POTENTIAL HAS BEEN AFFECTED BY CHANGING EMPLOYMENT OR SKILL REQUIREMENTS. MOREOVER, FREQUENT INSTANCES OF LOW MOTIVATION AND INADEQUATE EDUCATION AMONG POTENTIAL TRAINEES HAVE REDUCED THE IMPACT OF MANY UNION-SPONSORED AND INDUSTRY-SPONSORED RETRAINING PROGRAMS. EXPERIENCES AT ARMOUR AND COMPANY AND SEVERAL OTHER CONCERNS IN RECENT YEARS ARE DOCUMENTED. (ALSO INCLUDED ARE 56 REFERENCES.) THIS DOCUMENT APPEARED IN LABOR LAW JOURNAL, VOLUME 11, JUNE 1964. (LY)