The New Zealand apprenticeship scheme is supported by central Government and a three year apprenticeship is the standard for greenkeepers. In some cases the government will also subsidise the greenkeeper’s wages
Education
A glaring difference between New Zealand and the UK is the approach to greenkeeper education. In New Zealand there is a single education institution for all turf sectors (golf, bowls, cricket, horse racing etc). In 2006, nearly 80% of all NZ greenkeepers (including crew and unpaid volunteers) had professional turf qualifications. This included 87 greenkeepers who hold a Bachelor’s degree. Greenkeepers can do anything from a one-day course to a pHD whilst staying in a single system. The New Zealand apprenticeship scheme is supported by central Government and a three year apprenticeship is the standard for greenkeepers. In some cases the government will also subsidise the greenkeeper’s wages. During their apprenticeship, the students learn about managing all types of turf surfaces, which extends their employment opportunities. After completing the apprenticeship, greenkeepers are encouraged to continue formal learning, which may entail a diploma or degree etc. Because turf education is organised through a single body, it is much easier to control the quality of teaching and to rapidly change the system and curriculum to suit the changing market conditions.
The high level of education means that
greenkeepers are viewed as professionals and can demand a higher rate of pay and respect within the industry (which moves me onto my next point!).
Perception of Greenkeepers
I wasn’t long in the industry when I noticed a difference in the perception of greenkeepers between New Zealand and the UK. I had heard about greenkeepers being perceived as ‘grass cutters’ before, but not on the scale that I have observed in the UK. From speaking to ‘more mature’ greenkeepers in New Zealand, it apparently used to be the same way there. Around 15 years ago, the New Zealand industry realised that nobody wanted to be a greenkeeper anymore. It had become difficult to attract young people to the industry as the profession was not respected and pay and conditions were poor. The New Zealand Greenkeepers Association set out to actively promote greenkeeping as a true profession. The new generation of motivated greenkeepers looked towards America for a new name and a new role. After much debate, they changed their title to
Superintendents as they felt that the perception of greenkeepers was of ‘old chaps in a cloth cap mowing a bowling green’.
But a name change alone was not going to achieve much. The New Zealand Golf Superintendents Association (NZGSA), as it was now known, played an active role within the turf institute and the Industry Training Organisation. The NZGSA promoted the value of education and many greenkeepers retrained to bring their technical, business and
communication skills up to date. As the greenkeepers became more educated, they communicated more effectively and took on greater management responsibilities. A reality TV series was screened that revolved around life working one of the
top golf courses (including the two young women working on the crew), which also helped to promote greenkeeping as a desirable profession.
The industry as a whole became more highly respected within their clubs and, with this respect, came improved wages and working conditions.
Agronomy Visits and the role of the STRI
The way agronomy visits work over here is totally different to New Zealand and this affects the role of the agronomist. The New Zealand Sports Turf Institute (NZSTI) is industry-owned and managed. New Zealand Golf and the
Superintendent’s Association both play an active role on the NZSTI board of management and provide input into the strategic direction of the organisation. The NZSTI receives levy funding from New Zealand Golf and every golf course (no matter how rich or poor) receives at least one agronomy visit each year from an NZSTI agronomist. In New Zealand agronomy visits typically involve a one-on-one course walk and meeting with the Superintendent. Reports usually focus on providing additional information requested by the greenkeeper and brief minutes of the visit. The role of the agronomist is as an advisor to the Head Greenkeeper, helping him or her to make informed decisions and to set goals
for the management of the course. They are used as a resource to find further information or as a sounding board for new ideas. In the UK the situation is very different. Firstly, there is
no levy system so often the clubs that really need help can’t afford it. When the agronomist arrives for an agronomy visit he or she is typically greeted by a squad of golfers and Committee members (plus the greenkeeper when invited). My record so far is ten people on a course walk and, yes, I have had visits where the greenkeeper was not invited! To begin with, I wasn’t quite sure of what to make of this different approach. I certainly find more time is spent explaining basic turf principles to the lay-men and it can be difficult to keep everyone present focussed on the main issues at hand. Whilst the agronomist’s role is still to advise the greenkeeper, there is also the situation where turf issues have to be related back to the club; in New Zealand this, generally, is the role of the greenkeeper. Here, the club are only usually involved in a visit if the course policies or strategic goals are discussed (or if there is a big problem!). I feel that clubs in New Zealand are much more likely to view the greenkeeper as a paid professional whose judgement is to be trusted. In the UK there is certainly more questioning of the greenkeeper’s judgement.
Where are the women?
One of the interesting differences in the UK is that there a very few women in the industry here. In New Zealand the number of women in the industry has
The high level of education means that greenkeepers are viewed as professionals and can demand a higher rate of pay and respect within the industry 10
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 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108