A shared responsibility - Apprenticeships for the 21st Century
Feedback to the Expert Panel from the
Building and Construction Industry Consultative Council Industry Advisory
Body
This submission is a response from the Building Industry Consultative Council Industry
Advisory Body (BICCIAB) on the Australian Governments Expert Panel report A shared
responsibility – Apprenticeships for the 21st Century released on the 21st of February 2011.
BICCIAB is a Victorian Government industry advisory body that includes representation from
the Master Builders Association of Victoria, the CFMEU (Construction Division), the Plumbing
Trades Employees Union and the Master Plumbers and Mechanical Services Association of
Australia.
Contact details:
John McNally
Executive Officer
Tel:
03 9349 3300
Mobile: 0403 421 964
Email: john@bicciab.org
Web: www.bicciab.org
The feedback contained within this submission has the support of the above industry
stakeholders.
BICCIAB welcome the report findings acknowledging traditional apprenticeships as a sound
method of providing a skilled workforce. Another finding consistent with BICCIAB’s views is
that ‘competency’ awarded in a VET in Schools pathway (mandatory given credit into a trade)
does not always produce an efficient method of entry into the industry. Unfortunately there are
instances of adverse impacts on the student, employer and RTO that must be given due
consideration.
It is also welcome to see an acknowledgement of the differences between traineeships and
apprenticeships. Making decisions based on outcomes of all ‘New Australian Apprenticeships’
combined rather than looking at each individual industry or even trade is detrimental to good
policy development.
Expanding support services for apprentices and employers and improving the quality of
training both on and off the job are key to increasing the completion rate and providing a highly
skilled workforce. The details regarding how this will occur, along with implementing the
recommendations, are to be determined by the proposed ‘national custodian’. BICCIAB
welcome the opportunity to provide further input into this tripartite taskforce. Until the finer
details are known our comments are based on principles and concepts raised in the report.
The notion of an Employer Contribution Scheme (recommendation 6) raises a number of
issues and the industry has not yet agreed on a response to this recommendation.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the following questions from the stakeholder
consultation process document.
What support does an apprentice/trainee or employer require:
a) prior to starting an apprenticeship or traineeship (including pre-apprenticeship
training or Vocational Education Training in schools)?
b) commencing an apprenticeship or traineeship?
c) progressing through an apprenticeship or traineeship?
BICCIAB stakeholders confirm that there is a need to support employers in providing a
valuable training experience for our apprentices. Assistance for employers to help meet quality
training goals is required, however it is important that this process not be detrimental or seen
as a barrier for employers taking on apprentices. Implementing an onerous administrative
system would not be supported.
A method of improving support services would be to extend the role of Apprenticeship Field
Officers to include signing the training contract with the employer and apprentice,
strengthening the regulatory role of this key service.
Further detail on how employers can be supported must be investigated before the whole of
industry would support Recommendation 3 (establishing a formal employer accreditation
process), however there is general support for Recommendation 4 (providing mentoring and
pastoral care services) with the additional note that all apprentices and employers should be
supported – not just those deemed ‘eligible’ by the government.
Recommendation 8 on improving the quality of VET in Schools is strongly supported by
BICCIAB. Before considering the need to regulate however, a close examination is required on
the quality of outcomes of VET in Schools programs. BICCIAB have stated on many occasions
that the ability of the student to achieve competency as part of a ‘day a week’ VET in Schools
program, versus a traditional apprentice employed full time is difficult if not impossible to
achieve. Exposure to the trades and an opportunity to develop skills should be available to
secondary school students, however BICCIAB do not support direct credit from this pathway to
a trade qualification ie a School Based New Apprenticeship. This pathway does not allow the
individual to develop workplace competency and believe that a quality RPL process would
identify new entrants with industry competence, where required.
There are different arrangements for Australian Apprenticeships around the country.
What has been your experience in engaging with these differing arrangements?
Recommendation 1 and 2 states that a ‘national custodian’ should be established to oversee
reform. Whilst there is a need to streamline and remove differences between the States and
Territories, BICCIAB have concerns that the role outlined is not clearly defined and will result
in another level of bureaucracy that RTOs and industry will be required to comply with. A
worthwhile approach would be an authority with the power to not only reform the current
system but oversee Australian Apprenticeships, with the ability to respond quickly to emerging
trends and issues that arise in the system.
The current negotiations on a national licensing system for the plumbing industry are a good
example of promoting and achieving national consistency.
Recommendation 9 calls for national definitions for preapprenticeship and prevocational
training. BICCIAB do not believe the outcome will create more training places nor result in a
higher quality of entrant to the industry. A ‘definition’ is not necessarily a barrier to
preapprenticeship training. The focus would be better placed on developing nationally
consistent pathways acceptable to industry. The Victorian building and plumbing
preapprenticeship model has excellent support from all industry stakeholders. This is a result
of closely involving industry in the development process and reflecting their industry specific
needs.
Building Industry Consultative Council Industry Advisory Body
08.04.11
Page 2
In a tight fiscal environment, how should the Government target assistance to the
Australian Apprenticeships system to support a skilled economy?
The building and construction industry, like other sectors, is cyclical in nature and during
downward trends employers are reluctant to invest in skills. Short term fixes or knee jerk
reactions by government are to be avoided. A consistent measured approach needs to be
implemented.
Recommendation 5 generally translates into redirecting employer incentives to support
services. Yes, we are in a ‘tight fiscal economy’ but our government should place the required
resources to support quality education and training – particularly if it values our trades as
‘tangible and enduring value for the economy’. Support services, particularly mentoring, are
integral for keeping young people in training and the current system is unable to provide
assistance to those at risk of not completing their apprenticeship. Industry specific services are
required that link with Apprenticeship Field Officers.
There are contrasting views on the notion of removing employer incentives. This ranges from
strong support for maintaining incentives to taking a holistic approach to improving support
overall that may not include the provision of financial incentives. Until there is further detail on
this issue BICCIAB are unable to comment further.
Recommendation 7 states that a flexible approach should be taken during periods of economic
downturn. BICCIAB generally support this notion, though any ‘flexibility’ methods chosen
should not jeopardise the quality of the outcome of the apprenticeship. For example, if an
apprentice is able to continue on with their training in an off-site environment, their ability to
gain competency on-site should not be reduced. This would avoid unfortunate situations (that
occur currently with qualifications awarded with no on-site experience) where an apprentice is
qualified technically but has spent limited time on the job.
BICCIAB support a model where the apprentice has the opportunity to continue their off-site
training, with their assessment completed once they have returned to work and can confirm
workplace competency.
What can be done to raise the status of Australian Apprenticeships? How can
stakeholders participate in raising the status?
BICCIAB strongly support initiatives to raise the status of Apprenticeships in the industry
(recommnedation11). This can be done by rewarding high performing apprentices and
employers, providing access to post trade training to foster career development, encouraging
peer-to-peer promotion of the trades and making our trades a safe and rewarding job with
viable career paths. Improving the quality of information for careers teachers in schools would
also assist in achieving these goals. Developing websites, brochures and all the traditional
marketing avenues have all been done before – ask the potential new entrants into the
industry what their views are and develop strategies based on this feedback.
This is also relevant to recommendation 10 (supporting apprentices who face specific
challenges). Develop industry specific strategies based on consultation with these groups and
the local employers who will be taking on a ‘non-traditional’ apprentice.
What are the barriers to more widespread adoption of competency-based progression
in apprenticeships and traineeships? How can these barriers be overcome?
Recommendation 12 seeks to promote a culture of competency based progression and whilst
BICCIAB support competency based progression it must be acknowledged that there is still
minimal understanding of how this translates into a training agreement. BICCIAB have
Building Industry Consultative Council Industry Advisory Body
08.04.11
Page 3
concerns about the ability of some RTOs to manage the flexibility required with CBC and
acknowledge scepticism that this is an avenue to ‘fast track’ apprentices through the system.
There are significant industry concerns regarding competency based wage progression, with
sectors of the industry strongly opposing such a system. BICCIAB support the philosophy
underpinning competency based completions, however it has concerns that adequate safety
nets are still not in place. Therefore BICCIAB do not support recommendation 12 in its entirety.
Recommendation 14 supports a review of apprenticeship wages and conditions by Fair Work
Australia. The notion of apprenticeship wages is a much larger issue requiring considerable
industry consultation before any further comment can be provided.
Building Industry Consultative Council Industry Advisory Body
08.04.11
Page 4