Inevitable these training anxieties
Page 48
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
NOW THAT the Industry Training Board has sent out its levy demand notices, there has been some hard thinking about training and education on both the passenger and goods sides. Inevitably, anxieties have arisen.
The Board's employers' guide to the Training Grants Scheme for 1967-68 shows that there is often a considerable gap between the actual costs of training and education and the amount of grant received. There has been confusion on this point. The Board, however, makes the point quite clearly by stating that in this first year grants will be in the form of a contribution and that "no attempt is being made to reimburse the actual costs incurred".
Why is this? In this first year the Board is still in an exploratory stage, endeavouring to plot what training and education is taking place in the industry and endeavouring to assess its relative value.
The present picture, of course, is haphazard and rather piecemeal with overlapping functions on the one hand and great gaps on the other. Until the Board has built up something like a coherent picture of the position, there is no question of any specific activities being "approved" as yet.
One hopes that the Board will, by the second year (from September 1968), be able to approve particular courses and close the gap between actual costs and grant received for these courses. Difficult as the task is, the sooner this can be effected the better.
Currently, some employers have the idea that payment is being made twice; having paid the levy they are disturbed to discover that they must also make good this gap. This is a fallacious argument since the amount of grant received for a person undertaking training
is far in excess of the actual levy paid for that individual. But ideas die hard and it would be tragic if this could result in an attitude of paying the levy and taking no further interest in training.
Management training, for example, suffers badly in respect of this gap in grants—£6 a day being allowed for those over 21. The importance of management training is paramount and such courses need to be held in the right atmosphere and be of seminar character (between 20 and 30 attending) so that everyone has the opportunity to discuss and exchange views. Fees must be in excess of £6 if the job is to be performed properly, and this is an area where course approval with an increased grant is badly needed.
Another problem causing some perturbation is that training activities of less than one full day are not normally considered for grant purposes. Much of the educational sector of road transport takes place for half a day or in the evenings, the latter involving release where shift working takes place. This is a most important feature of so much of the work and it is a great pity that this work is only marginally taken into account.
From the operator's point of view release for part of a day can often be easier than a full day, while course providers find real difficulty in arranging a programme over a full day. Obviously, it is preferable to have a full day of training but the practical issues on both sides make this desirable feature more problematical. I hope the second-year scheme for grants will give the "half-days" more prominence---and more money.
Mr. Wilmot is Lecturer in Transport Studies, University of London.