the PeoPle - OPERC - Off-highway Plant and Equipment Research ...

Another industrialist PEP spoke to
said: “We have successfully argued
for a single standard for some time
and the industry developed the very
comprehensive National Occupational
Standard and NVQs that emerged
from this. The problems are that:
● this standard has not been
policed adequately enough by a
politically independent body who
would put transparency at the top
of the agenda;
● successive governments clearly
do not consult with all parties as
equals but rather come to the
table with a pre-set agenda and
work with those who are willing to
implement it;
● just when we are starting to see
the benefit of S/NVQs along
comes the next wave of money
making initiatives - the QCF!;
● independent bodies have been
proposed, such as UKAS, as part
of a pan-European initiative but
the costs of such are preclusive
for many of the smaller schemes
who remain highly successful
despite the cartels that have been
established in some quarters of
industry; and
● many within industry do not
understand the key differences
between training and competence
let alone have heard of the
National Occupational Standard!
“It’s a hopeless situation and a
complete failure to move forward
for the benefit of all – rather it’s the
‘preserve the gravy train routine’
that we have all come to know and
despise! Perhaps this is one benefit
of the current recession – it provides
a perfect excuse to make change and
cut bureaucracy. Cut the red tape
and you can still preserve quality
given the promotion, adoption and
administration of the NOS. To be
lean, mean and effective, British
industry has to turn its back on these
communist ideas of running national
training provisions.
Michael
“
Easton
Sales and Marketing Director
In an interview with Professor David
Edwards, Birmingham City University
(OPERC founder), he said: “We are
all, in industry, as guilty as each
other in that genuine attempts to form
strategic industry alliances have thus
far failed, but I remain hopeful that
common sense will ultimately prevail.
The diversity and range of skills and
knowledge out there is phenomenal
but petty politics, duplication of effort,
unfair commercial advantages and the
ever present pressures of commercial
gain represent a huge monolith that
impedes industry progress in terms of
its operator training and competence
provision. The current recession has
forced the hand of government to
introspective review and to assess
where public sector costs and red tape
can be reduced so that urgently needed
funds can be diverted to aid industrial
growth. It is perfectly clear that society
cannot afford to invest further in service
without industrial output and export to
fund that service.
To be lean mean
and effective, British
industry has to turn its
back on these communist
ideas of running national
training provisions
He continued: “One way forward is
for industry to demand that a logically
phased approach to planning the future
of operator training is adopted. One
of the major problems of Lord John
Prescott’s well intentioned actions is
that threats incite ‘reactive’ vis-à-vis
measured ‘proactive’ approaches.
Perhaps at that time, the threat came
from government frustration at poor
industrial safety performance, but the
outcome was an ill-conceived plethora
of organically grown safety schemes
and cards. These schemes have since
progressed organically and largely at
their own pace and direction – totally
independently of competitors. Today
there are as many card schemes out
there as there ever was. Rather than
forge a cohesive national provision
to operator training and competence
SPECIAL REPORT
development, the various interested
parties remain ever more fragmented
and the training provision itself is even
more finely granulated, confusing and
costly.
“In its simplest form, the first stage
should be for all training provider
schemes, awarding bodies, sector skills
councils and other relevant parties to
form a virtual National Academy with
the specific aim of writing, monitoring,
controlling and implementing future
revisions of the NOS. The last thing
industry needs is another government
quango! Past ventures to achieve this
goal have thus far failed because they
were perceived to be exclusive so
inclusivity is critical. A deadline should
be set for launching a revised national
training standard which would then see
stage two being implemented - that
is, a legal requirement to meet this
standard once set, whilst preserving
individualism and competition within the
sector. Creating one recognised stamp
of approval that has been developed
in a transparent, fair and equal
manner in the absence of the ivory
tower syndrome is not an insuperable
problem and is easily within our grasp.
Implementing such an innovative
venture would require a willingness
and courage of all parties involved to
proportionally share in the benefits and
risks. “
April 2011
21