training

C

celticbhoy

Moderator
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
4,200
Reaction score
0
Location
glasgow
lads do you think that the most important faucet in our industry today ieTRAINING,should be left in the hands of private profit driven companys??i myself am not sure where i stand on this but as there are quite a few company owners on here i just wondered what the general cocensus would be.
 
Im sure all owners think that training is very important and has a high priority, but there are lots of companies out there that do sod all training unless there forced.

We do pay a CITB levy but get very little back from this.

And to train a guy for him to leave you, as soon as he gets his ticket, and then start up against you as competition, is hard to swallow.

But its the Principal Contractors who could improve things by stopping to ask what training does your company do, rather than just ask, have you men got tickets
 
i was thinking that with private profit driven companys running training centres and such like,that there is an unsurmountable conflict of intrest in the schemes.such as pass rates there must be pressure to attain a extremely high pass rate for each and every centre as repeat buisness and new buisness are ultimately at stake,with higher profits demanded each year by investors the question has to be asked are these centres ultimately failing trainees for profit for the fat cats????
 
I find the private providers to be a far better proposition. We are desperately trying to support our local college and training group but the results are abysmal. We are one of the few who are actively seeking certain types of training in our area at the moment and every time I book a course they cancel at the last minute due to low numbers leaving us further and further behind. I've no experience with the actual main scaffold tickets but if there was another option for me to send the boy's to a private provider I would definitely look closely at it as I've posted many times about disappointing results from the NCC.

Public or private, is a hot debate which ever sector you work in, but as I have earned most of my working life from the private side of things I would go for the private companies every time. I find the fat cat's tend to be in the opposite camp.
 
One of the problems with public training is who would do it?
Construction Skills (CITB) are not a publically funded body - they are a self funding/profit making organisation along with CSCS/CISRS/CPCS and are all part of the same umbrella organisation. (that is my current understanding)
Private companies exist to make a profit - some provide better standards than others and act with greater probity - some do not. Criticism cannot be levelled at private companies for wanting to make a profit from services provided.
The current scaffolding training scheme is set up and run by Construction Skills - they pass out licenses to the private training providers to undertake training on their behalf (again that is my current understanding).
The issue is that this is effectively a monopoply - there is no alternative (maybe there should be ? - SCCR is there a gap in the market ? )
The industry has gone down this route in the misguided belief that having some form of training means that you are competent and the that is the end of the story - not strictly true as we all know.
Training is a legal requirement of the WAH Regs - it cannot be avoided - however the regs do not say what kind of training or by whom - and scaffolding is a highly technical high risk industry - people need to know what they are doing when chucking up tube - the consequences of getting it wrong are potentially devastating. So overall I'm in great favour of it.
I can understand resistance to the costs of training but not to the idea of training itself - I think that this is a cultural thing accross the whole construction industry as the industry is so transient, Hatterscaff makes some good points both with the issue of trained people leaving companies and with PCs not really caring about the real issues - just running on the assumption that a piece of plastic with a photo on will protect them in the event of a major catastrophe. It won't - HSE will look a lot deeper than you might think if there is a screw up of biblical proportions - trust me.
Until the idea that a training course is all that is needed to demonstrate competency is overturned in the industry and the Construction Skills (CITB) monopoly is broken then things will just continue the way thet are.
Rant over - sorry

Otto:cool:
 
Last edited:
Hi Otto,

I was always under the assumption that the CITB were in fact a public body. I knew they had to raise their own funds with training costs but if they are to be considered a fully private entity then why are we paying the levy?

Also, is it not the case that all training regardless of origin will be accepted by most contractors and it's not until something goes wrong that questions are asked.

I have no doubt that this is wrong but your thought's especially on the first point would be welcome.
 
As Hatter scaff said you train your men they move on for 50 pence more per hour.After training the employer should have an awarding period were the apprentiship would be another 2 years perbation with gaining evidence to being awarded your ticket, which is awarded in part and only in full when there has been enough exsperance gained. A company who is sighning off the trained man or woman, half to put there name too the trained man that he is compidant to errect scaffolding. This will make us as employers think about are they good enough to do the job instead of knowing there crap and you needed him or her to have a ticket to work. NASC companys must have an amount of scaffolders trained at all times. They pass the part one and then there out on the spanners for 1 year, and then there on part two course. The industry is marked by non trained and not very well trained men, though could a time served and proven track record produce more and better trained men.As an employer we see part 2 ticket holders who shall i say are not good enough. we see part 1 and two scaffolders who cant do the job.We must supply trained men to errect and dismantel scaffolding. They have there tickets and thats were hse have there heads up there ass. Get the training right and get rid of the turds who dont train who have no policys in place and only want to invoice the job,they dont care if there jobs are safe for use. They dont care about taining and they certainly dont give two flying .ucks about HSE. Its all money to them...
 
Whilst I think that Construction Skills (CITB) may be able to raise a levy this is as a result of legislation - they are a sector skills council:

ConstructionSkills - Being a Sector Skills Council

The subsidiaries - CSCS/CPCS and CISRS are, I understand, profit making organisations run under the auspices of Construction Skills (CITB).

I stand to be corrected if I am wrong however - as I have said this is my understanding - In a previous life I worked for a CITB registered training provider (plant - before anyone asks) so my take is based on my experiences here.

All the best

Otto:cool:
 
With regard to the lads that move on to different companies after receiving training, do you not think that the time served before you train them is sufficient, I know that this will only delay training but be fair they will have worked for you before being trained and on lower rate as well. I know that as soon as they are ticketed the suddenly become super scaffs but I think you may take my point
 
Do you think if I asked nicely they would write some legislation for me so I could get a nice wee hand out as well?

---------- Post added at 11:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:16 AM ----------
Scaff27 said:
With regard to the lads that move on to different companies after receiving training, do you not think that the time served before you train them is sufficient, I know that this will only delay training but be fair they will have worked for you before being trained and on lower rate as well. I know that as soon as they are ticketed the suddenly become super scaffs but I think you may take my point
Click to expand...

You have a point Scaff27, I think it's just a fact of life the boy's will move on to what they see as bigger and better, and sometimes I think they actually need to move on just to be taken a bit more seriously. If the smaller firms have a fault it's the scaffs struggle to accept that the wee runt that has been humping gear up to you for the last 2 years is now a qualified scaff and deserves his time on the tools.
 
scaff72 no i dont think time spent before training is sufficient, most of that time was spent teaching how to do things, how to be safe and occaisionally slapping him about a bit for being so broken brained, none of that time was he actually making us any money
 
So your gear was fetched by who, did it magically appear. I think in your case the abuse you inflicted on the lad is sufficient for him to be trained
 
some cracking points lads,its true this forum dose give you every possible angle of discussion possible i think.for me trying to stop employment migratition is impossible due to the european directives on this,pesonaly id like to see one central training provider publicly funded but with the provision to make profit that in turn be ploughed back into the future development of the youth not into private villas.the only handsomely paid individuals would be the trainers so as we would be able to attract the best individuals for this task.
 
so you are saying cos he carried gear he was worth it , i could get some muppet to hump the gear you pillock

---------- Post added at 01:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:51 PM ----------

celticbhoy you are banned from posting on the forum till further notice im only 10 posts behind you :laugh:
 
Sorry Celticbhoy, it doesn't happen often but we will need to agree to disagree on this one. Just a bit too many layers of admin and red tape for me, the private sector has always been that wee bit lighter and leaner and just a bit more value for money. I can see your point in regard training though, uniformed throughout the country but if that is the aim of the citb they are failing miserably in my experience and opinion. Officially, they may be designated as a private entity but until they have to stand on their own 2 feet without the help of the levy cash they will always be public in my eyes.
 
no bother mate your prob right am just being romantic again,and hoping for a perfect society lol.
 
Celticbhoy, im now going to go thru all the new member posts and say hello to all the ones ive missed in last 6 month , i will be waiting for you at the 600 posts mark :laugh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom