“In my view, market forces would have had us much further along the reskilling path because there would be no constraints on what companies could do.”
This is not a paywall. Registration allows us to enhance your experience across Construction Management and ensure we deliver you quality editorial content.
Registering also means you can manage your own CPDs, comments, newsletter sign-ups and privacy settings.
The levy system has long been a topic of debate, with SMEs and specialist contractors in particular often calling for reform. Many contractors find they end up paying more towards the levy than they can claim back in training grants.
Nevertheless, the CITB’s own Employer Tracking Survey typically shows a high level of support for the system, necessary to continue the Parliamentary Levy Order.
Asked about the article, CITB-ConstructionSkills chairman James Wates said: “I shall respond to Mr Blythe directly in my position as a past president of the CIOB.”
But there are on-going concerns about how the system operates. Seddons Construction, which typically takes on 50 apprentices a year, says that it is among the contractors that end up paying more in levy – currently £400,000 a year – than it can reclaim, according to director Nicola Hodkinson.
When CM “tweeted” about Blythe’s article, Devon-based fencing and security specialist FenSec got in touch, tweeting that the system was unresponsive to its needs: “Multi-tasking operators challenged by CITB as they find it difficult to meet the hours necessary for plant operator.”
And west London specialist dry-lining contractor Astins, which trains 10 apprentices a year and has set up a dedicated training facility to do so, said it was unable to claim funding directly from CITB as a training provider as the threshold for direct funding is 50 apprentices a year. Instead, it has to partner with a FE college that claims the money on its behalf, but then takes a slice for “accrediting” the course.
Justin Hopkins, who runs the Astins programme, said: “Astins and I are fairly neutral on the CITB levy system. But if someone can come up with a better system, then brilliant.”
