Martin Chambers PPCIOB, director, Shaylor Group
Could the proposed 0.5% apprentice levy be the death knell for the Construction Industry Training Board (CITB)? Well, only time will tell, but either way a blanket industry-wide payroll levy should, in my opinion, be viewed as good news.
First, it is industry-wide so it shouldn’t disadvantage anyone – not even the ultimate bill payer, the client. Secondly, maybe it will prove to be the move that actually stimulates a real, consistent and long-term shift in attitudes towards craft and management training.
For too long the so-called main contractors – they would now be better termed process managers – have simply been the users of the skills base created by micro, small and medium contractors.
What we really need is for these guys to embrace the need and start to become genuine providers of training, in all its guises. I for one certainly hope the latter proves to be the case.
Maria Seabright, finance & HR director, Greendale Construction
The introduction of the new apprenticeship levy will have a detrimental effect on employers within the construction industry taking on new apprentices. We as an industry already pay a levy to the CITB – this levy is significantly high to many organisations. How will we manage to pay yet another levy?
The government is strongly pushing the engagement of employers/apprentices within the industry but
I think knowing that we will have to pay an additional levy will deter employers from taking on apprentices. We talk about a skills shortage, so surely this will not help with this situation.
Rebecca Lovelace, director, Circle Three Consulting
It can be tempting to look at apprenticeship levies as a tax on construction businesses, rather than an investment in future capacity. Still facing a major skills gap, we have to develop both short and long-term strategies to identify future skills demands, and to understand and invest in meeting those needs. Doing this well requires a focus on quality not just quantity of training provision, and uncertainty about levies will hamper decision-making.
But there will be a host of new employers engaging in a more direct way with the skills agenda. What is
key is to ensure absolute clarity on, and access to, training provision for these employers at the same time as minimising the administrative burden on employers, and establishing quality control standards for the range of new competencies and qualifications that the industry requires.
Bruce Boughton, people development manager, Lovell
The government is trying to replace taxpayers’ money with the new levy – after all, we’re in times of deficit reduction. The point should be made that the government is paying the college fees at the moment, so we’re paying for something the government used to pay for.
The two levies do two different things: the new levy funds the college fees of apprentices, and the CITB levy is more wide-ranging, funding training and support for the industry. I think we’re really fortunate to have the CITB.
The scheme overall is a force for good. Apprenticeships are a key part of how we bring more people in, so it is incumbent on us to find new ways of doing that. If this levy gives people more confidence to bring people in, then it’s a good thing.
Mark Wakeford, joint managing director, Stepnell
The impact on our industry will wholly depend upon who controls the funds and how they are spent. My aspiration is that new funds will be used to provide high-quality apprenticeships that are set and managed by industry for industry.
I hope that by raising the awareness of training nationally we will more than double the number of training days from the paltry 1.2 days per year per employee.
If we can gain employer buy-in to the new qualifications then I hope that we can raise the profile of apprenticeships in general and they can become an accepted alternative to university for the majority of professional and trade new entrants to our industry.
