This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Skills Shortages

The construction industry (namely services) is suffering from skills shortages without an apparent solution. There has been a flurry of press activity but not much action. How does the industry make itself more attractive to the younger generation? There are short training courses offered but these are not the solution and there are many mature people entering the industry on the promise of a quick buck. The majority of these (that I have encountered) have little passion for the industry and the quality of work can be quite poor. We don't want to end up in a situation whereby these guys are training the next generation.

 

I think that the apprentice schemes should be made easier for SME's to take part in. Many are small concerns and cannot commit to the burden. However, some of these owner operators have so much experience to offer and it's a shame to let the knowledge pass by. Perhaps the 'apprentice' could be in charge of his/her own portfolio and it to be made easier for them to jump between companies to gain their experience? The colleges could hold a register of approved organisations so that the system is not abused by people wanting cheap labour....


I have met youngsters that have been able to attend and pass the first year of college but unable to progress further because they cannot find companies interested in taking them on. How can this be so with the skills crisis? I presume the bureaucracy is putting off the SME's.


I would guess that other industries have similar issues?
Parents
  • Sorry Arron but I’m somehow missing your point.


    Tim,


    Although the IET has a good number of members working around the construction industry, especially so in relation to its traditional heartland of Electrical Engineering, I’m not surprised that no one has picked up on your post. I would even go so far if I was being provocative as to observe that some would are a little “snooty” towards it (low tech, dirty, hard hat etc).  


    For some of the reasons you have highlighted Construction retained a Training Board grant/levy system long after the model was dropped by other industries. The industry has always been cyclical, so boom finds skills in short supply and bust loses them to other sectors. By chance, I watched a documentary about Carrillion last evening , which is only the latest example of major players “catching a cold”.  Your suggestion of self-ownership of training has promise. Why for example shouldn’t a young person who is not drawing from the public purse for Higher Education (even high Tuition fees still need taxpayer subsidy) have a similar entitlement to buy vocational skills training instead? I suspect the problem is that when things like this have been tried in the past they have become vectors for fraud.


    I was a Company Training Manager in the construction industry for over a decade , for one of the leading M&E specialist contractors, with a design and build capability and a strong reputation in the most complex and demanding projects. This didn’t involve the “bricks and sticks” as we might fondly describe it , although we could be closely aligned with “builders” or “main contractors”. Many large projects were conducted as joint ventures of in PFI language SPVs. On a much larger scale as a national player, I found trying to access funding support via local TECs & LECs impractical and gave up. It would have cost more to employ someone to manage all the red-tape than money gained in return.   


    I’m guessing that by posting you hoped to build support for a proposition that you give us a flavour of, but I think you would need to develop that in more detail and palace it in front of other influential stakeholders to actually achieve anything.   



Reply
  • Sorry Arron but I’m somehow missing your point.


    Tim,


    Although the IET has a good number of members working around the construction industry, especially so in relation to its traditional heartland of Electrical Engineering, I’m not surprised that no one has picked up on your post. I would even go so far if I was being provocative as to observe that some would are a little “snooty” towards it (low tech, dirty, hard hat etc).  


    For some of the reasons you have highlighted Construction retained a Training Board grant/levy system long after the model was dropped by other industries. The industry has always been cyclical, so boom finds skills in short supply and bust loses them to other sectors. By chance, I watched a documentary about Carrillion last evening , which is only the latest example of major players “catching a cold”.  Your suggestion of self-ownership of training has promise. Why for example shouldn’t a young person who is not drawing from the public purse for Higher Education (even high Tuition fees still need taxpayer subsidy) have a similar entitlement to buy vocational skills training instead? I suspect the problem is that when things like this have been tried in the past they have become vectors for fraud.


    I was a Company Training Manager in the construction industry for over a decade , for one of the leading M&E specialist contractors, with a design and build capability and a strong reputation in the most complex and demanding projects. This didn’t involve the “bricks and sticks” as we might fondly describe it , although we could be closely aligned with “builders” or “main contractors”. Many large projects were conducted as joint ventures of in PFI language SPVs. On a much larger scale as a national player, I found trying to access funding support via local TECs & LECs impractical and gave up. It would have cost more to employ someone to manage all the red-tape than money gained in return.   


    I’m guessing that by posting you hoped to build support for a proposition that you give us a flavour of, but I think you would need to develop that in more detail and palace it in front of other influential stakeholders to actually achieve anything.   



Children
No Data