Greater co-investment in workforce development won’t come about simply through government exhortation. It requires dialogue between employers and employees, within a framework of mutual trust and cooperation. Collective learning funds provide us with one such model, writes BERT CLOUGH


government’s strategy is to ‘profoundly’ shift responsibility for funding learning and skills from the state to individuals and businesses. The NIACE-sponsored Inquiry into the Future for Lifelong Learning, which reported in 2009, found that a total of £55 billion is spent each year on learning provision, including £25 billion of public expenditure, £14 billion of private employer expenditure on employee development and £5.5 billion from individuals. Analysis of the National Adult Learning Survey found that employers paid all the fees for 37 per cent of those undertaking learning and shared payment with four per cent of those undertaking taught learning. In addition, there is the cost of time which, including both off-the-job wage costs and individuals’ own time, accounts for £38 billion. Almost 70 per cent of the total cost of time is met by individuals, and 19 per cent by employers supporting off-the-job training. At a time of stringent cuts in publicly-


C


funded further education and the withdrawal of individual learning entitlements, the challenge for policymakers is how to increase private investment in the skills of the workforce. In a recent article for Adults Learning, Chris Banks, who chaired the Independent Review of Fees and Co-Funding in Further Education, stated that for the academic year 2010-11 government funding needed to be complemented by a further £1 billion of investment from individuals and employers. Yet, he warned, all the data suggest that this figure will not be realised, and not by a considerable margin. The TUC has long argued that employers should increase investment in the development of their workforce if the UK is to improve its productivity, competitiveness and social inclusiveness. There is a powerful argument that a stronger culture of co-investment in adult learning between employers and employees would lead to increased expend- iture on workforce development, over a wider range of provision, leading to more transferable skills. As the main report of the Inquiry into the Future for Lifelong Learning, Learning Through Life, argued:


A society where everyone recognises that they have a stake in learning, and


JANUARY 2011 ADULTS LEARNING 9


o-investment between the state, em- ployer and employee is an intrinsic feature of most vocational and education training systems. The


where there are collective as well as individual returns, will produce high rates of investment in it.


It is in the area of transferable skills and long-term personal development that there is the greatest need for collaboration and co-investment between the employer, the individual and the state. This will not just come about through government exhortation. It can only be achieved through dialogue between the employer and the employee. This is best articulated through intermediaries such as trade unions and their union learning representatives (ULRs) within formal frame- works such as collective learning funds (CLFs).


Collective learning funds Collective learning funds are union-led ini- tiatives to stimulate co-investment in the personal development of the workforce to make such learning affordable and accessible. They are a way of levering in cash and in-kind


Figure 1 Contributions to collective learning funds UNION


(ULRs, project worker support, cash)


EMPLOYER (facilities, cash contribution, paid time-off to learn etc)


COLLECTIVE LEARNING FUND


GOVERNMENT (learning subsidies, e.g. Train to Gain)


contributions from employers, providers, unions and individuals. The aim is to establish a framework of mutual trust and co-operation whereby employers are willing to invest more in the personal development of their workforce provided that the employee and the state also make a contribution, and vice versa. The objective is to create a non-zero-sum, or win-win, solution which optimises investment in workforce development. Key facilitators in such scenarios are trusted intermediaries such as trade unions. Collective learning funds are often underpinned by a learning agreement between management and the union(s) and delivered through a joint union/ management learning committee. There are a number of possible sources for contributions to a collective learning account, as Figure 1 (below) shows.


• Employers can contribute in a number of ways: providing paid time-off for study; paying some or all of the tuition fees or providing loans; establishing and


PROVIDER (taster, cash contribution to fund etc)


LEARNER (tIme, fees etc)


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32