Stewart Segal looks at the traineeship programme in light of a Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) one-year review.
There has always been a range of programmes designed to help young unemployed or under-employed young people into work.
The names of the programmes will be familiar to many — E2E, Programme-Led Apprenticeships, Access to Apprenticeships and many more.
So when the previous Skills Minister Matt Hancock announced traineeships in a blaze of publicity, it was not surprising that many people were a little sceptical.
The programme design itself was excellent. It followed many of the recommendations that we had made over a number of years.
It was a flexible design enabling the provider to create a programme around the individual. It could contain work preparation, work experience and English and maths and for the first time, the Skills Funding Agency would pay for non-qualification activities such as work experience.
However, the government couldn’t resist launching the programme with restrictions on learner eligibility, complicated funding rules, complex contracting arrangements and no exemptions to benefit rules. It has taken time, but gradually we are seeing some of those restrictions lifted. And we still need to lift the biggest restriction — the government continues to stop many providers delivering the programme, which means many employers cannot provide traineeship opportunities for young people.
Considering the complexity of the programme and the fact that the recent BIS survey was completed at a very early stage, the results are very positive.
Some of the main points made in the report are 67 per cent of trainees were in an apprenticeship, a job or further study and many more were job seeking and work experience was the most useful element of the training.
These results are very encouraging especially as the programme has already had a number of rule changes to respond to the issues AELP and providers had raised.
Since the start of the programme, the benefit rules, and work experience timings have been relaxed while the eligibility rules have been expanded to include level two learners over the age of 19.
The initial restriction of only allowing Ofsted grade one and two-rated providers to deliver traineeships should now be reviewed
The review does not really address the issue of those trainees on benefits and there are still some Job Centres where the benefits rules do restrict the delivery of traineeships.
This means that some JCPs are still not referring young people onto the programme because they are concerned that the programme may be too long.
This is further complicated by the fact that JCPs have their own programmes such as Work Experience or Sector Based Work Academies.
Our view is that traineeships should become the main programme for all young people looking for work.
The final issue is how young people get on the programme. The highest number of trainees came through a provider direct (25 per cent) which was more than the Job Centre (18 per cent). Even fewer came through the National Careers Service or the Apprenticeship Vacancy site. The latter now covers traineeships so we hope this will improve.
The majority of employers reported that referrals came through training providers. It is clear from the review that training providers are the only common link to all of the sources of referrals and they make the link with employers.
This is good evidence to support the fact that we have to increase the numbers of providers delivering the programme.
The initial restriction of only allowing Ofsted grade one and two-rated providers to deliver traineeships should now be reviewed.
Any provider that has evidence they can deliver a high quality traineeship programme should be allowed to deliver.
Many of these providers have existing relationships with employers and have established apprenticeship programmes.
They can make those links and ensure that the programme can be expanded and more employers will see the benefit of providing these important first work opportunities.
With these recommended changes, we have a real opportunity to develop a high quality, flexible programme delivered by quality providers in partnership with employers.
Making learners who don’t achieve at least grade C in their English and math GCSEs is a requirement not only of them but also the numeracy and literacy teaching skills of their post-16 tutors explains Andrew Harden.
Many of our best vocational teachers have moved into colleges from the workplace where they have built up years of expertise in their fields.
With highly developed skills in businesses ranging from construction and car mechanics to hairdressing and health and social care, they have been ideally placed to train new generations.
Since August of last year, there has been a requirement for 16 to 19-year-olds who do not hold English and maths at GCSE A*-C to continue to study these subjects. It has been recognised that a key way to support this is for vocational teachers to embed English and maths into their teaching.
This is not a new idea — a study done a decade ago by the Institute for Education found that successful embedding of literacy, language and numeracy for learners on health and social care, hair and beauty therapy, construction, business and engineering courses, helped more to succeed in achieving their literacy, language and numeracy goals and their vocational objectives.
But the reality, as highlighted recently by Marina Gaze, Ofsted’s deputy director for skills, is that not all our vocational tutors have the confidence and ability in their own English and maths to fulfil this new requirement. This is not a failing on their part — their skill sets were the basis of their employment and now the goalposts have been shifted.
It is imperative that they are comprehensively supported to improve their English and maths, but colleges should approach this carefully.
It has to be accepted that vocational tutors can’t become English and maths experts overnight and that the key to success is support
The starting point is to invite all vocational tutors to attend Functional Skills development sessions. And the key to good attendance is the provision of genuine staff development time. All too often, we hear staff development is undertaken solely during lunch hours or at the end of the day.
One good example already up and running comes from The Education and Training Foundation, which runs one-day workshops teaching maths up to level two. The workshops, currently taking place across the country, aim to develop personal maths skills and improving teaching techniques and confidence.
Alternatively, colleges can use their own tutors to run courses. This allows English and maths teachers to see more of what their vocational colleagues do and help them explore the best ways to work literacy and numeracy into their course content.
Again, this can be a time-consuming process, but its success rests upon both sets of staff being given adequate time to do it. Furthermore, where vocational tutors really lack confidence, they should be offered the opportunity to take Functional Skills or GCSE courses themselves.
However, this new drive for success in English and maths will ratchet up pressure on our vocational tutors in other ways. We have heard reports that some colleges plan to remove the three hours a-week required for each English or maths GCSE course out of a student’s vocational course. This means that some students will have six hours less a week to focus on their vocational course.
The new requirements on vocational tutors will also mean that marking is going to become significantly more complex as they will be required to take into account spelling and grammar in addition to assessing subject knowledge. Anecdotally, we have heard reports of tutors now spending twice as long on marking. Their proportions of contact time and administrative time should be adjusted in light of this.
The underlying theme is support for the FE sector. The government is very good when it comes to warm words about colleges, but plans announced last month to slash as much as 24 per cent from adult learning budgets tell a different story.
Without doubt, the coming year will be an intense time for vocational tutors. It has to be accepted that they can’t become English and maths experts overnight and that the key to success is support. That means colleges must be given the capacity to support their staff through changes, to provide genuine staff development and to retain and attract experienced vocational skills teachers.
Exeter College principal Richard Atkins has announced his retirement from the post at the end of 2015.
The current Association of Colleges president joined Exeter College as its leader in 2002, and last year took it to Ofsted grade one — having already achieved the feat, but in a pilot of the current common inspection framework. The 9,000-learner college had previously been rated as good.
Mr Atkins said: “I have been fortunate enough to work with many wonderful students, great staff and supporting governors, which has made the job a real pleasure.
He added: “I shall miss the college a lot when I go, but it will be business as usual until December.”
The governors of the college, led by chair Philip Bostock, have begun the recruitment process to appoint a new principal.
Meanwhile, Norfolk’s grade two-rated Easton and Otley College has a new principal in David Henley. The former principal of Devon’s Bicton College takes up his new role at the 5,000-learner college this month, succeeding David Lawrence, who stepped down for health reasons earlier this year.
Mr Henley said: “I am privileged to succeed David as principal. As directors of Landex – a national land-based training and education group – David and I have worked together over many years and I have tremendous respect for the commitment he has shown over all the time he has worked in the eastern region.”
Mr Lawrence, principal since May 1993, said: “I have known David for many years and rate him highly. I am very confident that he will continue to build on our collective vision and ethos.”
He added: “It’s been an incredible journey and I will be very sad to leave but I feel it’s the right time to step aside.”
Sally Bendall, chair of governors, said: “I am very pleased to have appointed David Henley as the new principal of Easton and Otley College. His agricultural background and leadership experience made him the ideal choice.”
Vice principal Clive Bound has also announced his retirement after seven years in post. “I would like to publically thank David and Clive for the very significant contributions they have made to the college’s success,” said Ms Bendall.
And Edge Foundation chief executive Jan Hodges OBE is to retire next month after a 35-year career in education. The former South Essex College of Further and Higher Education principal has run Edge for the last four years and will be succeeded by policy and research director David Harbourne until her permanent replacement is appointed.
“It has been a pleasure and privilege to lead Edge over the last four years, working to raise the status of technical, practical and vocational learning,” she said.
“There have been so many highlights. There’s our annual celebration of success, VQ Day, and our sponsorship of The Skills Show, to name just two.”
You would be hard-pressed to find a better way of convincing teenagers to choose vocational learning over university than inviting OBE recipient Rod Bennion to tell them his life story.
The grammar school boy decided academia wasn’t for him after passing his A-levels and was instead taken on as an articled quantity surveyor trainee, the equivalent of a higher level apprenticeship of its day, with one of the UK’s largest construction firms, the Wates Group.
Bennion subsequently rose to the top of the corporate tree during 36 year at Wates, before retiring as group chief operating officer in 2003 to concentrate on helping disadvantaged young people train for the building industry through his role as chairman of trustees of the Construction Youth Trust.
The 68-year-old, who was given an OBE for services to construction training and the community in the south east of England in December, says: “I have never courted success and just try to get on with things.
Bennion with Liz on their wedding day in 1968
“I was incredibly thrilled and proud to have been given the OBE, which I see as an award for all the good work done by everyone at the trust.”
Bennion, of Ashtead, Surrey, first became involved with what was then called the Construction Industry Trust for Youth as a trustee in 2000.
He said: “We had no staff at that time and raised around £100,000-a-year to help about 20 people into the industry through training bursaries.
“We decided to grow the trust in 2002 and I was invited to become chair.
“I applied to the Wates Foundation [the charity arm of Wates Group] for seed funding, which paid for us to employ our first director on about £40,000-a-year and it went from there.
“It meant that rather than just giving out bursaries, we were able to create construction projects, overseen by our staff and partner-employers, giving valuable work experience to disadvantaged young people.
“It could be something like finding out that a path needed building across a housing estate and arranging for 20 or 30 young people to help install it.
“By the time I stepped down as chair in May last year, the charity had an annual income of around £1.5m, around 30 employees, and supported up to 5,000 people-a-year.”
A lot of the young people who still turn to the charity, says Bennion, lack positive role models and may have struggled at school.
You will often find that young people in problem situations have parents who have never worked, so they had no example to follow
“You will often find that young people in problem situations have parents who have never worked, so they had no example to follow,” he says.
“I would find that if you wanted them to show up at work at 8am every day, you often had to ring them each morning at the start, as they wouldn’t know any better. But once given a chance, a lot of them really thrived and went on to things like apprenticeships.
“I am also proud of the work we did, during my time, with offenders, training and linking them with employers, so that they had a job when they came out and a chance of breaking the crime cycle. You would be surprised how many of them want to get out from under.”
Bennion pictured in 1952
Bennion was born in 1946 in Coventry, a city that still bore the scars of the Nazi bombing campaign on Britain’s industrial heartland.
He moved aged nine to Worcester Park, in Surrey, with his mother Enid, who died five years ago aged 87, father Arthur, who died 15 years ago aged 83, brother Douglas, now 60, and sister Elaine, now 72.
His father, a machine tool engineer, had secured a job with London-based Asquith Machine Tools, where he later became sales director.
“The first thing I had to lose [after moving south] was my Midlands accent because the other kids [in Surrey] were merciless,” says Bennion. “I learned to speak like a good Surrey boy quickly.
“I was always secure and happy though. The huge advantage that I had in life was that I came from a loving family home.”
Bennion attended Tiffins Grammar School, in Kingston, after passing his 11-plus.
“I think grammars gave a lot of people from ordinary backgrounds a better chance than they have now to get on,” he says.
“I had a brilliant, inspirational headmaster called Brigadier JJ Harper. His whole ethos, which has had a massive influence on me, was geared around developing the whole person not just their academic side.”
Bennion played in the school’s first-15 rugby team and captained his house side as a teenager and developed a passion for smart clothes and good music.
Bennion (back row, right) with (from left) his children Zoe and Matthew, wife Liz, and daughter Alice in 1995
“I loved the Beatles, I still do, and was the perfect age [16] to appreciate them when they came out in 1963,” he says.
“All the old Victorian values were being challenged in the 1960s, which was so exciting. I tried to be a mod, like the proper East London boys, so used to dress smartly and drive around on a scooter.
“I was going to school one day, on the scooter, when my brake cable broke and I crashed into the back of my sport’s teacher’s car. It was a brand new Volkswagen Beetle and he wasn’t pleased.
“The headmaster bawled me out the next day in assembly. He called me the ‘carbaretta cowboy’ which stuck as my nickname.”
Bennion was able to afford the latest mod threads after starting on his five-year work-based training programme with the Wates Group aged 18.
“I learned about most areas of the construction industry through my training, from concrete fixing to architecture, engineering and building surveying, and used to study for four months each year at Croydon Technical College,” he says.
Bennion married Liz in 1968 and they had three children Zoe, now 44, Matthew, now 43, and Alice, now 38.
He had been promoted to the role of managing surveyor before leaving the Wates Group temporarily in 1983 to work in Singapore for a firm called Singapore Land.
“I was the clients’ contract adviser for a huge hotel and retail development on reclaimed land,” he says.
“I suppose that it was the making of me really, as working with 20 or 30 different nationalities out there made me a lot more outward looking.
“We took our children to Singapore too. I think going to school out there and mixing with different cultures set them up to be tolerant and broad-minded people too.”
Bennion sailing at Salcombe, in Devon, with his son Matthew in 2004
Bennion returned to the Wates Group in 1986 as commercial director for London and became group commercial director in 1991, then group managing director a year later, and finally group chief operating officer in 2000.
“We always believed in training young talent at Wates. A successful business should be like a pyramid, with lots of young people at the bottom, then fewer, more experienced people as you get higher up,” he says.
“Moving on to the Construction Youth Trust after that was such a privilege.
“I feel very proud that together with my fellow trustees and the staff, we were able to change people’s lives for the better.
“It is a question of giving people a chance. The construction industry needs talented young people and this was a good way of helping.”
Bennion, who is still chairman of the board for bridge building firm Mabey Holdings and utilities construction specialists McNicholas Holdings, has no intention of winding down his activities for the foreseeable future.
He says: “I keep telling myself that I will stop it all in a couple of years’ time, but it never seems to happen.
“I love construction, the challenges it throws up and opportunities it gives so many people to succeed.”
————————————————————————————————————————————–
It’s a personal thing
What is your favourite book, and why?
It’s Birdsong by Sebastian Faulkes as it combines a great love story with the horrors and futility of war
What do you do to switch off from work?
Bennion pony trekking at Brecon Beacons, South Wales, in 1980
I spend time with my family and enjoy gardening and sailing. A glass of wine also helps
What’s your pet hate?
Lack of respect for others
If you could invite anyone to a dinner party, living or dead, who would it be?
Nelson Mandela. I met him by accident once as he came into the Dorchester Hotel on a visit to London. I went up to him and shook him by the hand — can you imagine shaking the hand of your living hero? I have always admired him for his power of forgiveness and his belief in the suppressed talents of the South African people. I would also like Lord Nelson and Winston Churchill to be there. I’ve read a lot about Nelson and he was such an inspiring leader who always looked after his men. For all his human failings, Churchill was the greatest leader this nation ever produced
What did you want to be when you grew up?
A teacher. Some would say of course that I never have [grown up]
The Education and Training Foundation review of non-GSCE English and maths qualifications is likely to result in a call for level two programmes in the subjects to be maintained, FE Week can reveal.
Although the recommendations have not yet been agreed, review chair Professor Ed Sallis (pictured) gave FE Week a preview of his findings, due to be published on Thursday, March 26.
“What’s come through strongly from the research actually is that there is a need for an alternative route for some young people and some adults,” he said.
“While GCSEs are very important and government policy is right in trying to get as many people a GCSE in English and maths grade C at least as possible, there is for some young people and many adults, the need to achieve a level two in English and maths in a different way.”
However, he did not say what the review’s conclusions would be on whether such non-GCSE level two qualifications should be “a stepping stone or whether it should be an alternative route” — although he said it was something the report “would be exploring”.
He would also not be drawn on whether the GCSE alternatives should be Functional Skills qualifications as they currently exist, or an entirely new qualification.
Former Skills Minister Matthew Hancock made moves to scrap Functional Skills in favour of GCSEs, however, in October his successor Nick Boles handed the qualifications a lifeline, saying they were “important” and simply needed to be “rebranded”.
Prof Sallis said the review would show “what percentage of employers understand and give value to Functional Skills”, but that the data had not yet been “fully analysed”.
But he said: “Not surprisingly, but very importantly, we found employers are very concerned about the level of maths and English employees have, particularly their new recruits.
“I suppose you might say, ‘we knew that’ but actually we’ve never asked the question in a proper study, so now we know it’s important to them.”
The review into non-GCSE maths and English qualifications began in December and heard from 1,400 individuals and organisations — including 489 practitioners, 229 colleges, awarding organisations and independent learning providers, and 31 apprentices — through telephone and face-to-face interviews, online questionnaires, webinars and seminars.
Prof Sallis said conducting the review had been “pleasurable” but “exacting” given the short time available to publish the results before purdah, which forbids new policy announcements during an election campaign. The aim of the report, he said was to “stimulate a really good debate”.
Ofsted has defended itself against criticism in an Association of Colleges (AoC) paper that branded the education watchdog as “not fit for purpose” and “driven by political considerations”.
The paper, written by FE consultant Mick Fletcher, went on to call for a “slimmed down version” of Ofsted for under-19 FE provision and a new system of self-regulation for adult provision.
There was a “growing concern” the report said, that “Ofsted focuses increasingly on compliance with government policy rather than a more widely shared understanding of quality”.
An Ofsted spokesperson said: “Ofsted reports without fear or favour.
“We strongly refute any suggestion that Ofsted is not independent.”
The watchdog also rejected the report’s accusation that the appointment of chief inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw (pictured) was “political rather than professional”.
The Ofsted spokesperson said: “Sir Michael Wilshaw has been a successful head teacher at a number of schools before his appointment at Ofsted and as the many public reports have shown, has not shied away from holding government or education institutions to account.”
In the 26-page discussion paper Mr Fletcher also criticised the use of a single, overall grade for an FE institution, saying such a grade was “inappropriate” for a “large and complex” institution, which also offered provision, such as higher education, which falls outside of Ofsted’s remit.
He also accused the inspectorate of prioritising “simple numerical judgements over context-sensitive support for improvement”, which he said was a “retrograde” approach.
However, Ofsted denied its grading was simplistic.
“Inspections are not focused on one performance indicator,” the spokesperson said.
“It takes into account a broad range of evidence including looking at the outcomes for learners, the quality of teaching, learning and assessment and effectiveness of leadership and management.
“What inspectors are looking for is the impact of teaching on learning and progress.”
Mr Fletcher’s report, which examined the history of inspection in the UK as well as making comparisons with other countries, said most other countries did not have inspection for post-compulsory education.
Mr Fletcher argued in the UK’s current funding landscape, where provision was increasingly financed by learners or employers themselves, a college should focus on “paying customers” rather than government priorities.
He called for a “decisive step” towards self-regulation and peer review for adult education.
Ofsted agreed that providers were “responsible for their own improvement”.
However, the spokesperson added: “They also need to be publicly accountable since they are funded by the taxpayer.
“Ofsted’s aim is to ensure that FE and skills providers are inspected and reported on regularly so that parents, learners and employers can make informed choices.”
Far from scaling back Ofsted’s inspections, the spokesperson pointed to the watchdog’s plans to introduce “frequent, shorter inspections” for good FE providers, with inspections carried out “usually once every three years”.
This would mean “signs of decline can be spotted early” and “parents, learners and employers can be kept much better informed”, she said.
Skills Minister Nick Boles has relaxed much-vaunted rules set by his predecessor, Matthew Hancock, that limited new apprenticeship guidelines to two sides of A4.
The official government guidance for employers developing Trailblazer apprenticeship standards, published in October, stated that they “should be
short and clear, taking up no more than
two sides of A4”.
Former Skills Minster Matthew Hancock had already said in March last year — four months before he became Business, Enterprise and Energy Minister — that he wanted a “two-side description of the skills, knowledge and attitude employees need”.
But a spokesperson for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) confirmed Mr Boles had since approved six standards running to between three and five A4 pages.
She told FE Week: “For some sets of occupations with a common core, rather than having lots of separate standards it may be preferable for a Trailblazer to develop a single ‘core and options’ standard.
“In some circumstances, this will mean it is necessary for the standard to be longer than two pages.”
The longest approved standard is five pages for hospitality managers (level four).
The standards running to four pages are for craftspersons (level three), published four months ago, and digital and technology solutions professionals (level six), furniture manufacturers (level two), hospitality supervisors (level three), and hospitality team members (level two).
Meanwhile, a three-page standard has been approved for laboratory scientists (level five).
Brigid Simmonds, chief executive of the British Beer and Pub Association which helped develop the over-running hospitality standards, said sticking to two pages would have been “a challenge”.
She said this was, for example, because “being a chef in a hotel or silver service restaurant is very different from being a chef in a pub.
“While the apprenticeship standards may be a little longer, it is for a very good reason”.
Stewart Segal, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said: “Sticking rigidly to two pages was not sensible. In our view, we should adopt a standard format so that each standard covers the important issues, but we would not specify how long they would be.”
Teresa Frith, senior skills policy manager for the Association of Colleges, warned keeping standards “streamlined” could “risk losing consistency in the way standards are interpreted”.
Government approval has so far been given to 144 standards, covering industries including accounting, dental health, nuclear, retail and TV production and broadcasting.
But only 15 of these — all of which are two pages long — are currently rated as “ready for delivery” by BIS, with the rest awaiting Mr Boles’ approval on assessment guidelines.
Ofqual hopes to ensure English apprenticeships will continue to be recognised in Europe after the Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF) has been scrapped, the regulator has told FE Week.
Its assurances come after Angus Gray, head of the European Social Fund division at the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), told the House of Lords EU internal market, infrastructure and employment sub-committee on Monday that the QCF, due to be scrapped this year, was the reason qualifications achieved as part of an apprenticeship were valid outside England.
Jeremy Benson (pictured), Ofqual executive director for vocational qualifications, said: “The recognition of one country’s qualifications and apprenticeships internationally is an important matter.
“The UK has previously referenced its national qualifications frameworks to the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) and this helps support recognition of our qualifications in Europe.
“As we make important changes to the regulations Ofqual uses to regulate qualifications, and to the associated qualifications framework, we will aim to protect the existing relationship with the EQF.
“Our proposals for a new qualifications framework will be available for public consultation shortly.”
A spokesperson for the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ) said: “Decisions on regulatory structures for vocational qualifications after the QCF is removed are a matter for the regulators.
“We welcomed Ofqual’s proposal last year to end the QCF. We look forward to seeing Ofqual’s long-awaited technical consultation on the detail of this, due by the end of this month.”
Providers and employers who said no to government cash for apprenticeship training going through businesses have won the fight to keep the flow of funding between government and providers.
Chancellor George Osbourne’s Budget on Wednesday (March 18) fleshed out the new plans, trailed the day before by Number 10, for a “digital apprenticeship voucher” to be in place from 2017.
The announcement followed two government consultations on apprenticeship funding reform over the last two years — the first of which uncovered support for the current system of channelling funding between government and providers from 213 of 366 respondents.
But the option was not mentioned in proposals laid out as part of the second consultation, which considered a PAYE model and a credit account model of funding — both of which were rejected with added bureaucracy among concerns.
The government finally decided on the voucher scheme, which a spokesperson said would give employers “purchasing power” — but actual government cash to pay for training will go straight to providers — and not into employers’ hands first.
John Walding, from the Forum of Private Business, said: “We hope that the proposed changes continue the focus on what the employer wants, and that training organisations respond to customer needs and use their expertise to complete the form-filling and administration involved. If this happens, this will be a victory for both employers and education providers.”
John Allan, National Chairman of the Federation of Small Businesses, said: “We are pleased that the government has made a decision on the design of the funding model after listening to concerns from stakeholders, including the FSB. This has led to a result that works for small firms.”
Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) chief executive Stewart Segal said he was “pleased” the government had listened to feedback from employers and providers, but called for clarity over the new plans. He said: “We have always said that employers need to control funding but that they can do that through a training provider.”
He added: “There are still details to be agreed and we’re very pleased the government wants providers as well as employers as part of the stakeholder process to come up with the detailed design of the model.”
David Hughes, chief executive of the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education, said: “It will be interesting to see the full details of this and to monitor whether this approach convinces employers to take on apprentices for the first time. It is clear from consultations from across the sector that the proposals for change were problematic, including the idea of channelling funding through National Insurance rebates, and that many existing apprenticeship employers seemed happy with the way funding flows currently.”
But the Association of Colleges (AoC) warned that the new proposals were “superficially simple” and would “add bureaucracy” to the process of taking on an apprentice. Chief executive Martin Doel said: “It might be an improvement on the government’s earlier proposal to use the PAYE system, but we are unconvinced that these reforms will lead to more public and private sector employers taking on an apprentice.”
The Budget document also confirmed that the government would proceed with plans to demand contributions towards training costs from employers.
David Harbourne, director of policy and research at The Edge Foundation, said: “We know from research published by BIS that some employers will be put off by mandatory contributions, and might stop employing apprentices? We need clarity on this — the sooner the better. Finally, when will colleges and providers be told how and when to cash in the voucher? I hope the system will be easy to use, but we can’t be sure until we’ve seen the fine print.”
Main pic: George Osbourne
————————————————————————————————————————————–
Funding cuts petition
A petition against cuts of up to 24 per cent to the FE budget has collected more than 18,000 signatures.
The petition at fefunding.org.uk was launched by the University and College Union and is supported by groups including the Association of Colleges, 157 Group, Association of School and College Leaders, Trades Union Congress and National Union of Students. It has also been signed by FE Week reporters and editor Chris Henwood.
It was launched in response to an announcement this month that the adult skills budget faced cuts of 24 per cent or more in 2015/16, with many organisations warning such a cut would place providers in financial difficulty.
It comes after concerns were raised about the impact an extra £12bn of cuts to departmental budgets between 2016 and 2019 announced in Wednesday’s budget would have on FE. See feweek.co.uk for more.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
Minimum wage increase puts benefits on table
Apprentices have been guaranteed access to sick pay and paid parental leave thanks to a 20 per cent rise in their minimum wage to £3.30 an-hour.
Downing Street announced the inflation-busting rise in the apprentice minimum wage, from £2.73 an-hour from October, on Tuesday (March 17) before the Chancellor George Osborne gave more details in his Budget the following day.
Based on current Department for Work and Pensions rules, the rise will mean that apprentices paid the minimum wage and working 34 hours a-week or more would earn above the £111 a-week threshold for statutory sick pay as well as maternity and paternity leave. They will also qualify for pay if they take time off to adopt a child.
On the old rate, apprentices on a 40-hour week minimum wage only earned £109.20 a-week.
National Union of Students vice president for FE Joe Vinson tweeted on Tuesday: “Rise in the Apprentice National Minimum wage means all apprentices now eligible for sick pay, maternity and paternity pay and adoption pay.”
He later called for a greater rise, saying: “It’s important to remember that a 20 per cent rise actually isn’t very much when your current wage is just £2.73 an hour. It’s certainly a step in the right direction though.”
David Hughes, chief executive of the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education, said: “We are pleased to see this much-needed pay rise for apprentices, although it will still be half of the National Minimum Wage [rising from £6.50 to £6.70]. I am concerned about its enforcement and would like to see the government take concerted action to ensure all employers pay it.”
The Low Pay Commission (LPC) had recommended a 7p (2.6 per cent) increase.
John Allan, Federation of Small Businesses national chairman, said: “The move to significantly increase the apprenticeship rate will have to be monitored closely.”
He added: “Many employers would have preferred to see a rate more in line with the LPC’s recommendation.”
David Norgrove, LPC chair, said: “We are disappointed the government has not accepted our recommendation on the level of the apprentice rate. We based our judgement on a careful assessment of the evidence, seeking to benefit apprentices while also protecting the supply of places.”
Elsewhere in the budget, the government promised to devolve more power over skills to regions including West Yorkshire and London, but the implications for the FE sector have yet to be set out.
————————————————————————————————————————————–
A Budget for drinkers not thinkers
Budget 2015 said very little about FE. In another sense however it said a great deal.
The choices the Chancellor made, ignoring a mounting crisis in our FE system while frittering millions on pre-election give-aways spoke volumes about his priorities.
For instance the Chancellor cut the duty on spirits by 2 per cent at an annual cost of £100m. That’s about the same sum recently saved through cutting the funding rate for 18-year-olds by 17.5 per cent — a cut disproportionately hitting the disadvantaged and low achievers.
It’s an odd society that cuts £700 from the education of every 18-year-old just to knock 16p off a bottle of whisky.
It’s not the only odd choice. The Chancellor spent £85m exempting children from Air Passenger Duty. That’s more than twice the cost of abolishing the ’Learning Tax’ whereby sixth form colleges pay VAT that schools and academies don’t.
The average sixth form college will continue to pay £335k per year on VAT, cutting the teaching hours of A-level students just so families can save £13 on flying a five-year-old to Malaga.
Researchers recently showed that 16 to 18-year-olds in our schools and colleges are systematically short-changed compared to those in almost all other advanced countries; our ‘ full time’ programmes have around half the teaching hours of high performing jurisdictions like Shanghai and Singapore.
One reason for this is the abolition of the entitlement which cut the funding for 84 hours ‘enrichment’ per year from full time programmes.
Half of that could be reinstated for £250m but the chancellor used the money instead to stop the rise in fuel duty this autumn; an increase that would hardly be noticed when oil prices are plummeting.
Repairing recent damage to 16 to 18 education was not the only option the chancellor overlooked. He could have plugged some of the gaps appearing in adult FE where over a million learning opportunities have been lost since 2010.
The average cost of a place in adult FE is around £670; so the £85m spent reducing the price of beer by a penny a pint might instead have provided places for 125,000 adults. So could the money spent subsidising ‘Granny bonds’ for pensioners with cash to spare.
It’s a sad day for skills when investment in booze and foreign holidays is deemed more important than supporting FE.
