MANUFACTURING SKILLS AUSTRALIA
This report has been prepared by Manufacturing Skills Australia in response to “A shared responsibility –
Apprenticeships for the 21st Century – Final Report of the Expert Panel 31 January 2011”.
Manufacturing Skills Australia (MSA) is the national industry skills council recognised by the Australian
Government to ensure that the skill needs of manufacturing enterprises are being met. It is responsible for
workforce development initiatives which include providing industry intelligence and advice to inform
government policy, supporting the development, implementation and improvement of nationally recognised
training and qualifications, and providing skills and training advice to individual enterprises to assist with
training and development processes.
Our vision is to be the pre-eminent organisation in Australia fostering and advocating for the workforce
skill development needs of a thriving industry. We provide bi-partisan leadership and value the empowered
and informed input of industry stakeholders. We strive to provide high quality information and workforce
development resources to support the participation of industry in developing an innovative, highly
productive and globally competitive manufacturing industry.
MSA is funded by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) and
works closely with Skills Australia, industry associations, unions, training providers, government agencies
and employers to continually evolve and improve skills for manufacturing.
Contact for this report:
Bob Paton
Chief Executive Officer
bobpaton@mskills.com.au
© April 2011
Manufacturing Skills Australia
PO Box 289,
NORTH SYDNEY NSW 2059 AUSTRALIA
ph +61 2 9955 5500 www.mskills.com.au
Документ1
Page 1 of 17
Manufacturing Skills Australia’s response to ‘A shared responsibility –
Apprenticeships for the 21st Century’
1. Executive summary
Manufacturing Skills Australia (MSA) is pleased to respond to ‘A shared responsibility – Apprenticeships
for the 21st Century’.
MSA commends the Expert Panel on their consideration of the complexities and challenges of Australia’s
apprenticeship systems. As the report highlights, the issues faced in moving to a new paradigm for
apprenticeships are challenged by the many factors that impinge on successful completion of
apprenticeships (pg 8). These range from effective careers advice, to recruitment, then employment
practices and arrangements as well as the adequacy of RTOs in delivering outcomes specified in Training
Package qualifications.
In its response to the report, MSA has addressed a number of key areas. These key areas and MSA’s
responses are summarised below.
MSA agrees in principle with the majority of recommendations in the Final Report of the Expert Panel.
MSA is not in a position to comment on recommendations 6 and 14.
After careful consideration of the report, MSA has identified three major issues that need to be addressed as
part of the restructure of the Australian Apprenticeship system:



The need to decouple apprenticeships and traineeships;
The need for a national approach to the identification of trade occupations and qualifications;
The need to re-brand and promote apprenticeships and trade occupations.
The Training Packages under MSA’s scope covered 35% of all traditional trade completions and 23% of
completions for other trades and technicians in 20091.
The need to decouple apprenticeships and traineeships
If Australia is to have the skills base that is required for a productive and innovative economy, the
proportion of apprentices and trainees entering into contracts of training must increase. Currently
apprenticeships and traineeships are considered the ‘poor relations’ of post-school career choices,
especially in the post-school education sector. The image of apprenticeships and traineeships as pathways
to careers of choice needs to improve. Career advisors and teachers also need to be educated to see skills
and knowledge gained through a vocational pathway such as an apprenticeship or traineeship as being of
value.
The decoupling of apprenticeships and traineeships and clarification of the differences in skills
requirements for each should be the first step. Currently there is a large amount of confusion surrounding
the two career pathways and apprenticeships and traineeships are often seen as one and the same thing.
The focus should not be on the qualification, in particular the level of the qualification. Rather the focus
should be on the achievement of a trade which is valued by industry and the community, and is recognised
as the commencement of a life-long career.
1
NCVER VOCSTATS accessed March 2011 (Appendix C)
Документ1
Page 2 of 17
The term “Traditional Trade” should be changed to “National Trade” or similar to better reflect the role
trades play in Australian society. “National Trades” should identify those trade occupations that are
relevant and critical to Australia’s economic well-being. The identification of “National Trades” needs to
be agreed by industry.
The need for a national approach to the identification of trade qualifications
The current situation whereby each state identifies what is recognised as a trade occupation (and relevant
qualification) in that state has lead to the situation whereby there appears to be a lack of transferability of
skills. Under the National Training System, nationally accredited qualifications provide nationally
recognised skills. These qualifications underpin the Australian Apprenticeship system. However when a
qualification is recognised as a trade qualification in one state and that same qualification is not recognised
as the same in an adjoining state, confusion reigns and “transferability of skills” may apparently be lost.
Similarly, when a ‘trade’ is declared in one jurisdiction and not others then employers and
apprentices/tradespersons can also become confused.
The establishment of a national body that has responsibility for the identification of National Trades is
necessary to provide a declaration and recognition system for trades that is truly national in scope. This
body may indeed be the National Custodian as suggested in the report and a variety of mechanisms may be
used to identify National Trades. Whatever process is used, industry must be involved in the consultation
process, as must skills standards setting bodies such as the Industry Skills Councils (ISCs).
The need to re-brand and promote apprenticeships and trade occupations
MSA strongly supports the need to raise the status of apprenticeships and trade occupations if we are to
achieve a productive Australia for the future. As the first step to raising the status of apprenticeships, they
need to be decoupled from traineeships. Apprenticeships and traineeships need to be clearly defined and the
different outcomes for each clarified. One criterion for the identification of ‘National Trades’ should be the
application of the Skills Australia view on ‘specialised occupations’ i.e. those occupations that have at least
two of the following three characteristics:



long lead time—skills are highly specialised and require extended learning and preparation time
over several years
high use—skills are deployed for the uses intended (i.e. good occupational ‘fit’)
high risk—the disruption caused by the skills being in short supply is great, resulting either in
bottlenecks in supply chains or imposing significant economic or community costs because an
organisation cannot operate.
This is also in recognition of the fact that “while an apprenticeship and traineeship at Certificate III level
may have the same academic requirements, the skills requirements for an apprenticeship are very different
to those of a traineeship at that level.”2
2
Skills Australia 2010 Australian Workforce Futures: A National Workforce Development Strategy Commonwealth of Australia pg 21
Документ1
Page 3 of 17
Summary of response to recommendations
No
Recommendation
MSA response
1
Establish a National Custodian
Support
2
Clarify stakeholder roles
Support
3
Prequalification and training for employers –
Support
Excellence in Employment scheme
4
Structured support for employers
Support
5
Redirection of Australian Government employer incentives
Qualified support
6
Establish an Employer Contribution Scheme
No comment
7
Support during economic downturns
Qualified support
8
Regulate quality of VET in Schools
Support
9
National consistency in preparatory training
Support
10
Support for disadvantaged groups
Support
11
Strategy to raise status of apprenticeships and traineeships
Support
12
Promote competency based progression
Support
13
Improve implementation of RPL and RCC
Support
14
Support Fair Work Australia review of conditions
No comment
Документ1
Page 4 of 17
2. Comment on Recommendations
1. Establish a National Custodian to oversee reform that will ensure Australia has a high quality
Australian Apprenticeships system that:
 responds to the needs of the economy
 supports nationally consistent standards for employment and training of apprentices and
trainees
 focuses on retention and completion of apprentices and trainees
 supports high quality skill development to ensure all apprentices and trainees have well
rounded and highly respected skills required by the economy.
As a first step an independent taskforce should be established to work with the eight jurisdictions
to align their systems and develop a framework and process for the establishment of the National
Custodian. The taskforce would be led by an independent chair and have a representative from
each state and territory government, a union and an employer group.
MSA supports the establishment of an independent national body (such as the National Custodian) to
oversee the reform of the Australian Apprenticeship system. This body must have as part of its membership
representation from industry and from a skills setting body such as ISCs3. It is imperative that industry be
involved in any reform of the Australian Apprenticeship system as they are the users of the system. The
focus of the reform process should be on the needs of industry and industry should be involved in the
identification of these needs. This also recognises that industry drives the economy. It is also important that
a skills standard setting body such as the ISCs is involved in the review (rather than training providers) to
ensure that AQTF standards are being met.
The body should also have the responsibility to list vocational training orders (VTOs) or similar once they
have been agreed by the industrial parties. This power should be made explicit in the role of the national
body. Currently, devices such as VTOs are identified and declared at state level. This leads to inconsistency
and confusion about trades recognition across jurisdictions4.
The expert panel, in its report, raises the issue of “transferability of skills” (pg 30) and states that “there is
no body empowered to harmonise the differences in qualifications across state borders” (pg 41).
MSA contends that the AQF, in conjunction with the powers under the AQTF does provide a system of
national qualifications. The purpose of the AQF which encompasses all nationally accredited qualifications
including those undertaken through Australian Apprenticeships is to provide workers with the recognition
through qualifications of the skills required to work in their chosen industry in any jurisdiction in Australia.
The establishment of a national trades identification body to ensure consistency across jurisdictions rather
than state bodies having the responsibility would support the recognition of national trades and
qualifications5.
MSA has concerns that in defining the role of the National Custodian, the expert panel may have brought it
into conflict with existing bodies which currently have responsibility. The areas of conflict are:

measuring and assessing the quality of skills training within the Australian apprenticeships system.
MSA contends that the measurement and assessment of the quality of skills training within the Australian
apprenticeships system is part of the role of the National VET Regulator (NVR) and quality standards are
stipulated under the AQTF.
3
Commonwealth of Australia, 2011 A shared responsibility - Apprenticeships for the 21st Century pg 43
Commonwealth of Australia, 2011 A shared responsibility - Apprenticeships for the 21st Century pg 41
5
Commonwealth of Australia, 2011 A shared responsibility - Apprenticeships for the 21st Century pg 41
4
Документ1
Page 5 of 17

reviewing the current skills requirements for apprentices and trainees and making
recommendations for up-skilling qualifications as occupations evolve, in partnership with the
National Quality Council.
MSA contends that the determination and reviewing of the current skills requirements of apprentices and
trainees is implicit in the role of ISCs in working with industry to identify both current and future skills
needs, and to develop and update Training Package qualifications to meet these needs. Part of the
consultation process is identifying and updating the underpinning national qualifications used in the
Australian Apprenticeship system. Once identified and updated, Training Packages and the qualifications
contained within them are endorsed by the National Quality Council6
MSA believes that any reference to the National Custodian undertaking these roles be removed.
2. Enhance the quality and effectiveness of the Australian Apprenticeships system by clarifying the
roles and consolidating the number of stakeholders in the system, ensuring that services are
provided by the most appropriate provider, duplication of service delivery is reduced and
administrative processes are streamlined. The National Custodian would ultimately be tasked
with this role and will require Australian and state and territory governments – in consultation
with industry, unions and other key stakeholders – to work together. In the interim the
independent taskforce would progress this work.
MSA supports a simplification of the current system. However before undertaking work in this area, it is
important that roles of all current stakeholders are clear. In its review of the current system, the expert
panel has allocated certain functions that ISCs undertake to intermediary organisations. ISCs undertake
both a standards setting/regulatory role and also a consultative and research role.
It should be noted that in Appendix O (pg 124) the following functions are also part of the role of ISCs:
Standard setting/regulatory functions 

Registration and certification of training packages and qualifications
Provide industry intelligence and advice to government and enterprises on workforce development
and skills needs
Consultative/research functions 

Undertake annual environmental scans to identify existing and emerging industry skill shortages
Consult with and advocate for industry and their training needs
In relation to duplication of service delivery, MSA supports a simplification of the system. One area of
concern is the issuing of “qualifications” by registered training organisations (RTOs) when State Training
Authorities (STAs) are responsible for the issuing of “certificates of achieved competency” (pg 18). There
remain instances where the employer does not provide verification of attainment of on-the-job competency.
Under the AQTF and NVR, only RTOs are able to assess and certify competency. It is important that any
assessment of competency on-the-job incorporates the employer’s input and feedback.
There needs to be a single issuing authority and once an apprentice has been assessed competent in all
areas, the contract of training is deemed completed i.e. MSA supports competency based completion.
MSA also supports the reintroduction of the issuance of ‘trade papers’ by the national trades regulator.
6
NQC Secretariat http://www.nqc.tvetaustralia.com.au/ accessed April 2011
Документ1
Page 6 of 17
3. Establish a formal accreditation process for the pre-qualification and training of all employers
of apprentices and trainees to ensure a nationally consistent minimum standard of high quality
employment and training is provided. In addition establish an Excellence in Employment
Scheme to recognise and reward those employers who have consistently demonstrated their
commitment to excellence in training apprentices and trainees.
MSA is supportive of the thrust of this recommendation. However, establishing a formal accreditation
process for the pre-qualification and training of employers of apprentices and trainees may be quite
problematic, particularly for small and medium size enterprises (SMEs) and micro-businesses. There is a
need to establish both ‘how’ and ‘who’ would be responsible for these arrangements. Any accreditation
process needs to have industry involvement in establishing the standards by which accreditation may
proceed and any such scheme should not be viewed as a mandatory requirement but as a positive activity
that employers could undertake.
MSA believes that one benchmark for recognition as a quality employer of Australian Apprentices7 should
be set through successful outcomes, i.e. the percentage of apprentices and/or trainees within an enterprise
that successfully complete their training.
In examining completion rates for Australian Apprentices (pg 48), MSA believes that the completion rates
quoted do not reflect what is happening on the ground. There are several issues around the current system
for calculating completion rates:



The statistics fail to take into account what happens when an Australian Apprentice leaves one
employer to commence employment with another employer
The statistics fail to take into account what happens when companies merge/demerge
It is difficult to ascertain if the estimations produced by NCVER account for the early completion
of Australian Apprenticeships
Appendix G (attached) is an estimation of occupational cohort completion rates for two traditional
apprenticeships – Mechanical engineering tradesperson and Fabrication engineering tradesperson. The first
table estimates completion rates for the 2005 cohort if they completed a full 4 year apprenticeship. The
second table estimates completions rates for the same cohort based on the average actual duration of 37
months8.
MSA strongly endorses the introduction of a unique student identifier (USI) that will assist in accurately
monitoring training statistics, enabling a much clearer picture of training outcomes to be viewed.
It is essential that engineering, ICT and science Australian Apprentices should be clearly delineated. The
category of engineering Australian Apprentice is a category of apprentices who are traditional trade
apprentices. ICT and science Australian Apprentices are non-traditional apprentices/trainees. To combine
all three into one category produces a false picture of what is happening in these sectors.
7
8
Commonwealth of Australia, 2011 A shared responsibility - Apprenticeships for the 21st Century pg 51
Commonwealth of Australia, 2011 A shared responsibility - Apprenticeships for the 21st Century, Appendix N pg 121
Документ1
Page 7 of 17
4. Establish structured support for employers to provide high quality employment and workforce
development experiences for eligible apprentices and trainees. The focus of Australian
Government support should be on assisting employers to provide high quality on-the-job and offthe-job training through support services such as mentoring and pastoral care.
Anecdotal evidence gathered by MSA for its 2010 Environmental Scan supports the need for the
introduction of structured support for employers of apprentices and trainees. This was again the situation in
20119. MSA believes that ISCs are well positioned to identify how structured support can be provided and
also have a place in providing that support.
Furthermore MSA believes that the role of group training organisations (GTOs) in supporting employers
should be recognised and clarified, and even expanded to encompass a stronger pastoral role, not just an
employment role. The performance of GTOs also need to be included in any Employer of Excellence
scheme .With this inclusion, the scheme should also involve host employers where they draw apprentices
from a GTO.
A further consideration could be the development of a scheme similar to the Engaging Employers strategy
contained in the Investors in People – UK (United Kingdom) Commission for Employment and Skills
program10.
The introduction of the NVR later this year is a major step forward in ensuring the ongoing quality of the
vocational education and training (VET) system, including the delivery of high quality on-the-job and offthe-job training.
MSA contends that the generic profile of apprentices and trainees provided (Appendix F, pg 112) does not
make explicit what is happening in the trades and technical areas, especially in occupations covered by
MSA. Appendices A and F (attached) provides a profile of Australian Apprenticeships in manufacturing
from 2003 to 2009. As can be seen, the profiles in both traditional trade occupations and in non-trade
occupations has changed significantly with mature age Australian Apprenticeships increasing in both areas.
This data supports the premise that the Australian Apprenticeship system already supports mature age and
existing worker uptake of contracts of training. MSA believes the issue in relation to existing worker
uptake may lie more within the Industrial Relations system and is not related to the training system11.
MSA is concerned that the review recommends that machinery operators and drivers not be eligible for
support from the Australia government. Up-skilling of process workers is one of the key drivers of MSA’s
workforce development policy; for driving improvement and gains in productivity. The number of
manufacturing workers without post-school qualifications is higher than the industry average (45.7% of
manufacturing workers do not have a post-school qualification compared with the across all industries
average of 39.3% of workers. 63.7% of machinery operators and drivers do not have a post-school
qualification. 12) For manufacturing to be sustainable in Australia, and as the third largest driver of the
economy, it is imperative that traineeships for process workers continue to be funded. Such up-skilling is
also necessary to offset the loss of skilled workers to the resources sector. Manufacturing, through the
training of engineering tradespersons, is the major supplier of skilled workers to the resources sector.
9
Manufacturing Skills Australia 2011 Environmental Scan
http://www.investorsinpeople.co.uk/About/PolicyDevelopment/Pages/Engagingemployees.aspx accessed April 2011
11
Commonwealth of Australia, 2011 A shared responsibility - Apprenticeships for the 21st Century pg 32
12
Australian Bureau of Statistics Education and Work, May 2010 Table 11
10
Документ1
Page 8 of 17
5. Redirect current Australian Government employer incentives to provide structured support
services to eligible apprentices and trainees and their employers in occupations that are priorities
for the Australian economy. While a wide range of occupations should be trained through
apprenticeship and traineeship pathways, Australian Government support should focus on
occupations that have tangible and enduring value for the economy – both in the traditional
trades and the newer forms of apprenticeships and traineeships, such as community services,
health services and information technology.
MSA agrees that the current one-size-fits-all mechanisms for incentives are not agile or flexible (pg 58).
Decoupling apprenticeships from traineeships will assist in establishing the different skills requirements of
apprenticeships and traineeships. While an apprenticeship and a traineeship at certificate III level may have
the same academic requirements, the skills requirements for an apprenticeship are very different to those of
a traineeship at that level13. This would enable incentives to be targeted more effectively.
When identifying eligible apprentices and trainees, the process needs to not only consider those areas
experiencing skills shortages. MSA agrees that support for eligible apprenticeships and traineeships “will
be most effective if governments and industry can work collaboratively” (pg 58).
There also needs to be consideration of the impact of any reduction in availability of incentives for
occupations where there is a predominantly female workforce. The impact could well have a serious
detrimental effect on participation rates of women in the workforce as well as any up-skilling activities for
those workers.
7.
Facilitate a cooperative and flexible approach by governments and industry bodies to allow for
the continuation of both training and employment of apprentices and trainees during periods of
economic downturn. Early intervention should be a key element of this approach. Support for a
range of measures to be in place until economic recovery occurs could include:




reduction of work hours offset by additional training
increased off-the-job training
placement with other employers within the industry
increased mentoring and support.
MSA supports the recommendation on the proviso that any response must be industry driven. Without the
support of industry and recognition of that support, any interventions during an economic downturn are
likely to fail.
With regard to the recommendation of ‘increased off-the-job training’, there needs to be a set of clear
standards for simulated workplaces and such simulated workplaces need to be well supported. ISCs must
be involved in the development of such standards in conjunction with the NVR and the accreditation of
such simulations. In circumstances where a simulated workplace of a satisfactory standard is not available,
MSA would expect that deeming of full competency could not be made by an RTO. In general, a simulated
workplace is one where the range of experience spans the equivalent of a productive work environment,
and that the scope, conditions and variability of work is similar to a real workplace. MSA believes that few
current ‘simulated workplaces’ meet these criteria.
13
Commonwealth of Australia 2011 A shared responsibility – Apprenticeships for the 21st Century pg 35 - 36
Документ1
Page 9 of 17
8.
Formally regulate the quality of VET in Schools within the VET system to enhance the
consistency and quality of training across all jurisdictions and to recognise the potential of VET
in Schools as a pathway into an apprenticeship or traineeship.
MSA supports the formal regulation of the quality of VET in schools for both of the reasons outlined in the
recommendation. There also needs to be clearly articulated the difference between VET in schools
programs and Australian School-based Apprenticeships (ASbAs). VET in schools is a state-based program
that may not lead to a qualification or even use the components of the National Training Framework. In
many cases students use VET in schools to obtain direct entry into further education rather than using it as
a vocational pathway. Students do not always complete the qualification as they only undertake one or two
units of competency and there may be little to no work placement component (confirmed through
discussion with NCVER).
ASbAs are regulated through the Australian Apprenticeships system. There is a requirement for the student
to be in part-time employment. Again issues arise from differences in state requirements re hours of
employment, which qualifications are recognised for ASbAs and whether there is continuing employment
as an apprentice/trainee after graduating from school.
As part of the regulation process for VET in schools programs, there needs to be standards developed that
ensure the on-the-job components of qualifications can be adequately met. As most VET in schools
programs are delivered under auspicing arrangements between the school and the RTO, the organisations
involved need to be able to provide clear evidence of how such components will be delivered. MSA has
anecdotal evidence of students under VET in schools programs being deemed ‘competent’ where there has
been no structured workplace experience sufficient for the student to gain the necessary practice and
application to become competent. These instances seem to have fallen ‘under the radar’ of any regulatory
processes for RTOs.
MSA recommends that the National Custodian have the responsibility for identifying and authorising the
delivery of VET in schools programs so that the link between these programs and national vocational
career pathways is made explicit.
9.
Increase national consistency in preparatory training by directing the National Quality Council
to develop definitions for pre-apprenticeship and pre-vocational training.
MSA supports the recommendation. However the recommendation does not go far enough in that there also
needs to be clear delineation between ‘pre-vocational’ and ‘pre-employment’ training. Currently these
terms are used interchangeably when they should represent training for entirely different reasons. MSA
requests that there be clear definitions for ‘pre-apprenticeship’, ‘pre-vocational’ and ’pre-employment’
programs and that the term ‘pre-vocational’ not be used interchangeably with ‘pre-employment’.
‘Pre-apprenticeship’ programs should be defined as “nationally recognised programs delivered by an
accredited training organisation that include units of competency relating to the skills required for an
apprenticeship”.
‘Pre-vocational’ programs should be defined as “nationally recognised programs delivered by an accredited
training organisation that include units of competency leading to a vocational outcome”.
Reference to ‘pre-employment programs’ needs to be added to the recommendation and ‘pre-employment’
programs should be differentiated from ‘pre-vocational’ programs and defined as “programs that are
designed to lead to an employment outcome for the participant”. MSA views pre-employment programs as
labour market programs.
Документ1
Page 10 of 17
MSA agrees with the panel’s statement regarding the strengthening of pre-apprenticeship programs (pg 76)
– “...this industry led process represents the best vehicle for the establishment of nationally consistent preapprenticeship programs.”
10. Provide additional support for apprentices and trainees who face specific challenges, such as:
 Indigenous Australians
 disability
 located in regional or remote Australia
 having poor language, literacy and numeracy skills.
Australian Government support will be provided to these apprentices, trainees and their
employers to assist in overcoming barriers to participation and completion of their
apprenticeship or traineeship. Support will be through the provision of tailored structured
support services and the continuation of some current Australian Government employer
incentives.
In the recommendation there is no mention of the support needed to assist workers entering Australian
Apprenticeships in which there are gender imbalances (pg 35), such as women entering metal and
engineering Australian Apprenticeships (Appendix D attached). MSA would like to see any response to
this recommendation highlight this area.
Furthermore, MSA requests that additional support be provided for women undertaking Australian
Apprenticeships, whether through an apprenticeship or a traineeship. Women are underrepresented in the
uptake of Australian Apprenticeships, especially in the occupational groups of technicians and trades
workers and machinery operators and drivers (Appendix I pg 115). These two occupational areas cover the
majority of workers in manufacturing.
In the report “No More Excuses”, ISCs identify poor language, literacy and numeracy (LLN) skills as one
of, if not the major challenge facing industry and educators in Australia today. The lack of these skills is
seriously impacting many Australian Apprentices’ ability to complete their training. 14
11. Implement a strategy to raise the status of apprenticeships and traineeships including promotion
as a valued career choice for both males and females. This should be led by the Australian
Government, in consultation with state and territory governments, industry bodies and unions.
The National Custodian, when established will lead the ongoing effort to raise the status of
apprentices and trainees.
MSA strongly supports the recommendation and sees a great need to raise the status of apprenticeships and
traineeships if we are to achieve a productive Australia for the future. As the first step to raising the status
of apprenticeships and traineeships, apprenticeships and traineeships need to be decoupled.
Apprenticeships and traineeships need to be clearly defined and the different outcomes for each clarified.
Decoupling apprenticeships from traineeships will assist in establishing the different skills requirements of
apprenticeships and traineeships. While an apprenticeship and traineeship at certificate III level may have
the same academic requirements, the skills requirements for an apprenticeship are very different to those of
a traineeship at that level.
Furthermore, MSA recommends that apprenticeships be re-branded and that the term “traditional
apprenticeship” be changed to “national apprenticeship”. This will clearly define that these careers are
“national” in scope and remove the perception that apprenticeships are “physically demanding, unsafe,
14
Industry Skills Councils 2011 No More Excuses – An industry response to the language, literacy and numeracy challenge
Документ1
Page 11 of 17
dirty and are considered poorly paid” (pg 85). In the process, it needs to be made clear that a “national
apprenticeship” has a very different outcome that is not solely based on the duration of the training.
To support raising the status of apprenticeships and traineeships, career advisors and teachers need to be
supported to understand the value of apprenticeships and traineeships to the Australian economy and as a
career pathway for all students (not just those considered as to not have the academic skills to progress to
higher education). MSA proposes that this could be undertaken through an ISC network of support for
career advisors and teachers.
12. Promote a culture of competency based progression in apprenticeships and traineeships, in
partnership with industry bodies and employers. Additionally, a greater acceptance and
achievement of competency-based wage and training progression should be supported by all
stakeholders.
MSA supports competency based progression in apprenticeships and traineeships, especially in partnership
with industry bodies and employers. The VET system is built on the ideal of competency based
progression, therefore an Australian Apprenticeship system based on the achievement of competency
should reflect this ideal.
MSA does not wish to provide comment on matters relating to wages and/or awards.
13. Improve the implementation of Recognition of Prior Learning and Recognition of Current
Competence and support provisions for such recognition in modern awards to ensure that
flexibility and mobility are supported.
MSA supports the recommendation to improve the implementation of Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL)
and Recognition of Current Competence (RCC) within the Australian Apprenticeship system. RPL and
RCC are both integral components of a competency based VET system. Through processes such as RPL
and RCC, existing workers within the manufacturing sector can be supported to obtain recognition of skills
and competency that they have gained through on-the-job, informal and non-formal learning, increasing the
skill base in industry sectors (such textiles, clothing and footwear) which currently have a low formal skills
base.
Although it is not within MSA’s scope to comment on matters relating to wages and/or awards, MSA
considers that a better acceptance of the outcome of any positive RPL/RCC activity as recognition
equivalent to a more formal training outcome would greatly assist in a more widespread adoption of valid,
reliable and fair recognition of competency already held.
3. Statistics
MSA is concerned that some of the data presented in the Appendices is flawed. In particular MSA
questions the data in Appendices F and M. The data in Appendix F (pg 112) purports to show “in training”
statistics as a percentage of apprentices and trainees for the year. However according to NCVER (see
Appendix B attached) in-training figures are a ‘point-in-time’ figure and are not cumulative figures.
Appendix M (pg 120) provides data from 1995 on under two headings – “Trade occupations” and “Nontrade occupations”. NCVER did not begin to classify commencements into these categories until July 2000.
Prior to that date, only one set of data was provided15. Appendices E and F (attached) show data relating to
Australian Apprenticeships commencements for manufacturing under the two headings from 2002-03 when
NCVER began classifying data by industry.
-END15
National Centre for Vocational Education Research VOCSTATS database accessed April 2011
Документ1
Page 12 of 17
Appendix A
Age profile of Australian Apprentices in training (manufacturing) 2000 – 2010 by MSA Training Packages
Age
groups
14 or
below
Age 15
Age 16
Age 17
Age 18
Age 19
20 – 24
years
25 – 34
years
35 years
and over
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
0
0
0
0.95%
2.2%
0.6%
2.7%
1.9%
3.3%
1.9%
4.3%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.6%
3.98%
5.6%
5.8%
6.0%
5.3%
3.2%
5.1%
5.8%
3.1%
3.5%
6.1%
3.98%
5.9%
6.6%
6.5%
6.7%
6.9%
4.4%
6.1%
7.2%
6.96%
6.8%
7.1%
4.7%
6.3%
7.2%
6.9%
6.8%
6.97%
4.0%
6.0%
7.6%
6.9%
6.9%
6.6%
3.3%
5.6%
6.4%
6.6%
6.4%
5.98%
2.9%
4.6%
6.3%
6.2%
6.2%
5.3%
0
0
0
4.5%
5.9%
8.2%
8.8%
8.2%
7.8%
6.9%
6.1%
0
0
0
4.1%
5.4%
8.96%
9.7%
9.1%
9.2%
7.8%
7.5%
Source: National Centre for Vocational Education Research VOCSTATS accessed March 2011
Age profile of traditional trade apprentices in training (manufacturing) 2000 – 2010 by MSA Training Packages
Age
groups
14 or
below
Age 15
Age 16
Age 17
Age 18
Age 19
20 – 24
years
25 – 34
years
35 years
and over
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.1%
6.98%
14.4%
19.3%
22.2%
21.6%
16.8%
4.0%
9.4%
16.6%
21.0%
22.6%
23.0%
19.1%
2.2%
11.9%
18.96%
23.4%
24.4%
24.8%
21.0%
6.4%
12.1%
19.1%
24.8%
25.3%
25.5%
22.2%
4.3%
12.4%
19.98%
24.5%
25.8%
25.5%
22.8%
6.6%
12.8%
20.1%
24.4%
25.2%
25.6%
22.3%
5.2%
11.0%
18.6%
23.9%
25.1%
24.9%
21.2%
8%
9.6%
16.6%
22.6%
24.2%
24.2%
19.8%
0
0
0
5.5%
6.5%
8.5%
9.9%
10.5%
11.5%
11.0%
10.2%
0
0
0
1.9%
2.2%
3.0%
3.2%
3.5%
4.0%
3.8%
3.3%
Source: National Centre for Vocational Education Research VOCSTATS accessed March 2011
Документ1
Page 13 of 17
Appendix B
Extract from communications with NCVER 15 September 2010
In-training figures are a ‘point-in-time’ figure, so we say 437 000 apprentices and trainees were in-training as
at 31 March 2010.
It’s not a cumulative figure like commencements, where we would say there were 284 000 commencements in
the 12 months ending 31 March 2010.
In-training is made up of in-flows and out-flows to the system, so it already takes into account
commencements in and completions out (with a few other things thrown in as well like
cancellations/withdrawals out, expiries out, recommencements in, etc). It’s a complex equation, which is why
we derive it here at NCVER.
Under ‘contract status’ you have the option of selecting ‘in-training’ – but you can only select one quarter (one
point in time), you cannot add the quarters.
Monika Vnuk
Senior Research Officer
Data Collections and Analysis Branch
National Centre for Vocational Education Research
Appendix C
Apprenticeship and traineeship completions
By MSA Training Package and trade status, calendar year 2009
Trade status
All apprenticeship
and traineeship
completions
Non-trades
Traditional trades
Other trades and
technicians
TOTAL
112,873
42,654
3,782
159,309
Apprenticeship and
traineeship
completions – MSA
Training Packages
6,992
14,964
875
22,831
Source: National Centre for Vocational Education Research, VOCSTATS accessed March 2011
Документ1
Page 14 of 17
Percentage of all
completions
6.19%
35.08%
23.14%
14.33%
Appendix D
Apprenticeship and traineeship commencements
By MSA Training Package and gender, calendar year 2009
MSA Training Package
AUM – Automotive Industry
Manufacturing
AUR – Automotive Industry
Retail, Service and Repair
LMF – Furnishing Industry
LMT – Textiles, Clothing
and Footwear
MEA – Aeroskills
MEM – Metal and
Engineering Industry
MSA – Manufacturing
PMA – Chemical,
Hydrocarbons and Refining
PMB – Plastics, Rubber and
Cablemaking
PMC – Manufactured
Mineral Products
PML – Laboratory
Operations
THC – Recreational Vehicle
qualifications only
TOTAL
Total
number
118
Male
Male %
Female %
116
98.3%
2
1.7%
11,415
10,686
93.6%
729
6.4%
2,238
744
2,169
301
96.9%
40.5%
69
443
3.1%
59.5%
778
8,171
737
7,972
94.7%
97.6%
41
199
5.3%
2.4%
9,258
749
7,490
695
80.9%
92.8%
1,768
54
19.1%
7.2%
459
399
86.9%
60
13.1%
173
169
97.7%
4
2.3%
888
543
61.1%
345
38.9%
126
123
96.0%
5
4.0%
35,117
31,400
89.4%
3,717
10.6%
Source: National Centre for Vocational Education Research VOCSTATS accessed March 2011
Документ1
Female
Page 15 of 17
Appendix E
Manufacturing industry commencements
MSA Training Packages by gender
Financial year commencements by gender
Traditional trade qualifications
Financial year
Total number
2002-03
4,552
2003-04
5,705
2004-05
6,960
2005-06
7,143
2006-07
6,835
2007-08
7,288
2008-09
5,089
2009-10
5,333
Non-trade qualifications
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
6,244
5,919
9,836
8,531
8,801
7,298
7,677
7,850
Full time %
97.2%
97.1%
97.2%
96.7%
95.4%
94.1%
92.9%
93.3%
Female full time %
7.6%
3.2%
4.4%
3.1%
2.4%
3.0%
2.2%
2.3%
96.1%
95.1%
95.9%
96.0%
95.5%
97.9%
78.5%
95.5%
17.2%
19.3%
19.0%
19.2%
16.7%
14.1%
18.9%
13.8%
Source: National Centre for Vocational Education Research VOCSTATS accessed March 2011
Appendix F
Manufacturing industry commencements
By age and trade status
Traditional trade occupations
Age
Total number
Calendar year
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
19 years and
under %
10,003
10,858
11,320
10,973
11,376
11,139
8,277
20 to 24 years
%
25 to 44 years
%
45 years and
over %
63.8%
61.6%
61.6%
62.4%
62.0%
61.6%
60.2%
18.0%
17.7%
17.1%
17.5%
17.5%
16.6%
16.3%
15.5%
17.3%
18.0%
17.0%
18.0%
18.9%
19.2%
2.6%
3.4%
3.3%
3.1%
2.4%
2.9%
4.3%
17.7%
17.7%
17.8%
16.7%
17.4%
16.2%
13.1%
15.8%
16.2%
14.7%
15.0%
14.6%
14.1%
13.3%
48.7%
47.4%
47.3%
47.6%
47.9%
47.9%
49.2%
18.8%
18.6%
20.1%
20.7%
20.9%
21.8%
24.3%
Non-trade occupations
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
32,148
31,283
29,546
28,603
26,697
25,420
24,626
Source: National Centre for Vocational Education Research VOCSTATS accessed March 2011
Документ1
Page 16 of 17
Appendix G: Estimation of cohort completions rates for selected occupations
(a) by nominal duration
Occupation
Description
NSNL*
(Y/N)
Qualification Name
Nominal duration
Average actual
duration
Mechanical
engineering
tradesperson
Employees machine and prepare
aircraft systems, metal parts,
subassemblies and precision
instruments. This group does not
include automotive mechanics.
Employees produce metal fabricated
products such as structures, frames,
plate assemblies, pipe-work and vessels
using tools, welding and thermal cutting
equipment and fabrication techniques.
Y
Certificate III in
Engineering Fabrication Trade
48 months
Y
Certificate III in
Engineering Fabrication Trade
48 months
Fabrication
engineering
tradesperson
?
Commencements
(Calendar year
2005)
4,045
Completions
(Calendar year
2009)
3,014 (74.5%)
37 months
4,573
2,994 (65.5%)
(b) by average actual duration (mechanical engineering tradesperson given same time period as fabrication engineering tradesperson)
Occupation
Description
NSNL*
(Y/N)
Qualification Name
Nominal duration
Average actual
duration
Mechanical
engineering
tradesperson
Employees machine and prepare
aircraft systems, metal parts,
subassemblies and precision
instruments. This group does not
include automotive mechanics.
Employees produce metal fabricated
products such as structures, frames,
plate assemblies, pipe-work and vessels
using tools, welding and thermal cutting
equipment and fabrication techniques.
Y
Certificate III in
Engineering Fabrication Trade
48 months
Y
Certificate III in
Engineering Fabrication Trade
48 months
Fabrication
engineering
tradesperson
37 months
Commencements
(Calendar year
2005)
4,045
Completions
(Calendar year
2008)
2,722 (67.3%)
37 months
4,573
2,970 (64.9%)
Sources: A shared responsibility – Apprenticeships for the 21st Century and National Centre for Vocational Education Research VOCSTATS accessed March 2011
Note: the data provided in tables 1, 2 and 4 of the report is aggregated across categories. In estimating completion rates, MSA has chosen to focus on
occupations and calculate using data from Appendix N of the report. Two estimations are provided using nominal duration and average actual duration as the
time periods.MSA is aware that these are only estimations and in no way precise measurements of completions rates.
-END-
Документ1
Page 17 of 17