NET praises Government as it delays new apprentice funding system

Government plans for employers to directly receive money for running apprenticeships through the tax system have been delayed, and this has been welcomed by NET. 

 

Currently, money for apprenticeships is routed through training providers and colleges, which work with employers to find suitable candidates and take on the administrative burden of claiming funding.

 

However, for various reasons, the proposed reforms have been heavily criticised. One worry especially is that the changes are likely to put off small businesses from becoming involved, because of the financial burden and extra bureaucracy. It is for such reasons that the scheme had been delayed.

 

Commented Iain Macdonald: "Changing the funding system for apprenticeships in this country is a massive step to take, and one that must not be taken lightly.

 

"In choosing to take more time to determine which form that new system will take, the Government has demonstrated a clear desire to get the decision right and ensure that the new system works for all concerned. The last thing anyone wants is for a new system to be introduced and then scrapped or heavily amended a year later because it doesn't work or is harming apprentice numbers."

 

Continued Macdonald: "Any new funding system must to take into account the varying length of apprenticeships and, therefore, the wide ranging needs of employers in the industries that offer them. 

 

“Industries like financial services will have a number of large companies offering the majority of apprenticeships, but in our industry small and micro-businesses carry out the bulk of apprentice training. That is common across a lot of the industries with established apprenticeship programmes, and needs to be taken into consideration when decisions around apprentice funding are made.

 

Concluded Iain Macdonald: "What we have at present works well for our industry and others like it – and it would be a tragedy if those industries cut back on apprenticeships because the funding system imposed hindered, rather than helped, their efforts. When a new funding system is introduced it must support rather than harm established apprenticeships in skilled industries – and that will be worth waiting for."

 

 

NET believes that the term ‘apprenticeship’ should apply only to proper, industry–led programmes that lead to industry recognised outcomes and careers. Calling shorter courses or the training of existing staff ‘apprenticeships’ undermines the unique value and specialist skills developed by the apprenticeship proposition, the organisation says, adding: “There are too many courses labeled as ‘apprenticeships’ that are not industry-recognised, or demand enough of candidates and employers to add any value to the economy.”

 

Indeed, Iain Macdonald has previously said: “The electrical industry, like many others with a distinguished apprenticeship heritage, spends a minimum of three years training an apprentice to become a skilled craftsman. This duration is required to provide a learner with the skills and development they need to work independently within the industry. 

 

“We must to protect the term ‘apprenticeship’ so that it remains synonymous with giving an individual specialist skills and a career for life, and recognise the enormous value that is gained as a result of that investment.”

 

National Electrotechnical Training (NET - www.netservices.org.uk) is the independent, registered UK charity for the electrical installation industry, which owns and licenses the AM2 and FICA, formally known as the industry's Assessment of Occupational Competence (AOC).