On 16 October 2025, City and Guilds of London Institute (CGLI) announced the sale of its commercial awarding organisation and skills training activities to PeopleCert

The press announcement and detail provided looks pretty open and robust for a arrangement of charity status and a commercial brand operating in a far more competitive world from when it was originally set up.

Looks as if slow to adapt to changes in training/certification/technology.

The deal has been done and plenty of other press and industry releases last quarter 2025 indicating mostly thru natural wastage the new owners seek to save £22M, with £13M on staff costs alone, some staff function will be relocated to Greece where the new owners operate from and a privately owned Greek company.

Of course ( I wouldn't like to guess the numbers) of apprentices, craftsperson's and learners in general that all gained C&G certificates, ironically Believe I was one of the first tranche of people awarded Graduate status of C&G and a nice wee ceremony in London to get my cert.

From a business perspective, without doubt the new owners have bought a well trusted and respected globally name! proof I suppose will be how they then make investment where required and the changes that all the different courses/awards/exams need and how the approved assessment centres interact. Don't see drastic changes being made straightaway but they will happen I'm sure.

Will C&G actually increase in its standing or loose credibility? that's a while off yet.

At the end of the day its been a business decision that appears as if due diligence was done.

Cheers GTB 

It is worth scratching a bit deeper on the decision making process.  Everything is not as it seems Allegedly.  Allegedly even some of the trustees are finding it unpalatable to a point that they are speaking to people at government level about improprieties

Hi Sergio,

Please be careful, as that's a serious allegation. If you're going to state that please link to evidence. (I'm not saying don't say it, just make sure that it's evidence based.)

Thanks,

Andy

A web search from that favoured engine:

"allegations of city & guilds improprieties by new owners"

gave a number of results if folks want to look at the assertions.

Just because some are unhappy doesn't mean that it contravenes the various moral, ethical, legal, etc. expectations.

Official statement from the trustees here "In recent days, a number of inaccurate claims have been made about the sale of City & Guilds. In response, the Trustees of City and Guilds London Institute have issued the following statement and Q&A to address these issues." cityandguildsfoundation.org/.../

Philip Oakley said:

Just because some are unhappy doesn't mean that it contravenes the various moral, ethical, legal, etc. expectations.

And having read the C&G statement it wouldn't be surprising if not all trustees supported this move. And any of us who've been involved in strategic business decisions know that when they don't go the way all board / trustee members want then those were voted down often do take it personally and make interesting allegations. (And, in this case, of course have a perfect right to take them up with the Charity Commission, whether they are valid or not.) But that's very different to saying those allegations are correct. 

I'm sure that if, say, the IET decided to sell off the Wiring Regs "business" to a third party there would be a huge row within the trustees. And I suspect that if the vote went, completely fairly, in the direction of selling it off then some of those who voted against would become very vocal about it...trustees are still human beings at heart.

Philip Oakley said:

Just because some are unhappy doesn't mean that it contravenes the various moral, ethical, legal, etc. expectations.

And having read the C&G statement it wouldn't be surprising if not all trustees supported this move. And any of us who've been involved in strategic business decisions know that when they don't go the way all board / trustee members want then those were voted down often do take it personally and make interesting allegations. (And, in this case, of course have a perfect right to take them up with the Charity Commission, whether they are valid or not.) But that's very different to saying those allegations are correct. 

I'm sure that if, say, the IET decided to sell off the Wiring Regs "business" to a third party there would be a huge row within the trustees. And I suspect that if the vote went, completely fairly, in the direction of selling it off then some of those who voted against would become very vocal about it...trustees are still human beings at heart.

Andy Millar said:

I'm sure that if, say, the IET decided to sell off the Wiring Regs "business" to a third party there would be a huge row within the trustees. And I suspect that if the vote went, completely fairly, in the direction of selling it off then some of those who voted against would become very vocal about it...trustees are still human beings at heart.

A good analogy!

To my mind, such a sale smacks of short-termism. Whilst CGLI may invest the sale proceeds in order to provide an ongoing income stream, it has given up the income which CGL was providing.

From the customer perspective, we must hope that the high standard which C&G has provided is maintained.

Sergio Fernandez said:

What is next will they be selling off Cambridge or Oxford University?

Not sure that would be possible, but they could (if the statutes permit it) sell off e.g., the Department of Engineering, Medical School, etc. A valuation would be interesting.

Chris Pearson said:

From the customer perspective, we must hope that the high standard which C&G has provided is maintained.

How will that be maintained?  Once they become a commercial entity looking for short term gain.