opinion
ALEM opinion l You’re hired?
Continuing the series of articles from The Association of Loading and Elevating Equipment Manufacturers (ALEM), Rob Fay, managing director of member company Easilift Loading Systems, ponders why the Government’s stated commitment to apprentices isn’t matched when it comes to construction tenders.
current Government has made apprentices a central plank of its policy, from the creation of an extra 100,000 apprenticeships to its partnerships with leading British manufacturers such as Rolls-Royce to establish academies. The reasons for nurturing apprentices are obvious to ALEM members. It’s a cost-effective means of growth, bringing on talented youngsters without having to pay graduate prices. It’s a positive gesture towards community and country, showing a willingness to give somebody a start and a defined career path – a laudable goal, especially in these recessionary times. You’re also helping to cement a loyal workforce, instilled with your values and keen to help the business progress. Having completed a four-year apprenticeship at the start of my own career, I fully appreciate the value it can offer to young people. I also hope that my own career path inspires today’s youngsters by demonstrating that a long-term career with promotion opportunities can be a reality. Taking on apprentices is also a form of succession planning. Long-term success in business demands fresh insight and innovation, especially in today’s hyper- competitive world, with growing pressure from China and other rapidly developing countries. And yet, according to one recent report, Britain’s aging demographic is becoming top heavy, with more people aged over 40 than there are under.
A
For these reasons, and many others, Easilift Loading Systems has recently taken on four apprentices who will
pprentices are all the rage again – and not only because of Lord Sugar’s annual televised search for new business talent. The
ultimately join our engineering staff. It’s the right thing to do, but I can totally understand the mentality of firms who have decided against it. While the Government talks a good talk, there seems to be little tangible reward for those manufacturers, like ourselves, who are embracing the initiative and investing in Britain’s industrial future. For starters, it’s hard to find good quality training establishments. I often think there’s paranoia about taking on apprentices because of the obvious dangers involved in putting young kids out onto site. That’s understandable – but a good course will focus on best practice, keeping the apprentices in the classroom until they’re ready to face real- world situations.
Thankfully, we’ve found such a course, and have partnered up with Kirkdale Industrial Training Services (KITS) for precisely this purpose. But such organisations are few and far between. We have recently appointed a Manchester-based apprentice who must make a four-hour round trip to KITS every day, at our expense, because there isn’t a suitable training organisation near to where he lives.
ALEM is well placed to ask the obvious questions of government: are you really serious about supporting investment in apprentices? If so, why make it so difficult to find suitable training organisations? During recent meetings, ALEM members have discussed getting recognition for suitable training courses, a venture of benefit to members and non-members alike. It would be well worth endorsing – but it would still need significant government support to get this going. Another question worth asking: if the employer has to take on additional financial burden to make it work,
where’s the payback? I notice comments from the Government’s chief construction advisor Paul Morrell, stating that, in public sector contracts, businesses with a proven commitment to apprentice recruitment should receive preferential treatment. In practice, I see little evidence that main contractors and other decision makers are paying any attention to Mr Morrell. The more tender documents I see, the clearer it is that few, if any, take apprenticeships into account – nor is it a deciding factor in pre-qualification questionnaires that define which companies go through to the tender stage. I don’t need fingers to count the number of times somebody has said to me, “Easilift was chosen because you demonstrated a commitment for embracing the Government’s apprenticeship scheme,” although I live in hope!
Until there’s a standardised requirement for apprenticeships to be included on tender documents, and a
I don’t need fingers to count the number of times somebody has said , “Easilift was chosen for embracing the Government’s apprenticeship scheme!”
system of checks and balances to ensure that apprentice recruitment is seen as a positive contribution to a company’s pitch, then Mr Morrell’s words carry zero weight.
So, while apprentices are all the rage, it’s unclear whether we’re experiencing a fad, or the foundation for stronger, better British manufacturing. Now is the time for organisations like ALEM to take the Government to task on its promises, and ensure that it isn’t only Lord Sugar who is saying, “You’re hired.” ●
www.alem.org.uk
www.PressOnShD.com December 2011 ShD 35
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 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68