Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 9 July 2014

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Education and Social Protection

Review of Apprenticeship Training: Discussion

1:20 pm

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The subject of our discussion today is apprenticeship training. Last week, the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, published an apprenticeship implementation plan. This involves, among other things, the establishment of a new apprenticeship council to oversee the development of this area of training and on-the-job experience. This follows on from a review of apprenticeships in Ireland. I am pleased to welcome Mr. Phil O'Flaherty, Mr. Keith Moynes, Mr. Denis Rowan and Mr. Chris Feeney from the Department of Education and Skills to discuss this issue. From IBEC, I welcome Mr. Tony Donohoe and Mr. Dermot Doherty and I welcome Dr. Peter Rigney from ICTU. I ask our guests to either turn off their mobile phones completely or put them in flight mode.
I wish to draw witnesses attention to the fact that by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. However, if they are directed by it to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise nor make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. I also wish to advise them that the opening statements they have submitted to the committee will be published on the committee website after this meeting. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect I have just outlined.

Mr. Phil O'Flaherty:

I thank the committee for inviting representatives of the Department of Education and Skills here to talk about the review of apprenticeship training in Ireland. My name is Phil O'Flaherty and I lead the Department’s further education and training section. I am joined by Keith Moynes from our higher education policy section and Denis Rowan and Chris Feeney from SOLAS. Today’s session is timely, as the Minister published an implementation plan for the review’s recommendations just last week.

Significant reform is under way across our education and training system and much of this is focused on close engagement with employers to ensure we tailor our programmes to deliver the best work opportunities for learners and continue to develop the sector as an engine for economic growth. The renewal of the apprenticeship system is a major part of that overall reform programme. While the time is ripe for a review of the apprenticeship system, the committee should appreciate that apprenticeship has served learners, employers and the wider economy very well over a long number of years. It is a good product, producing highly skilled crafts people in demand throughout the world and competing strongly in the world skills competitions.

Dual training models offer enormous potential to produce practically focused, work-ready people serving the skill needs of the economy across a range of sectors. That said, apprenticeship currently has a narrow industrial base which exposes it strongly to the domestic economic cycle and lacks flexibility in its overall structure. The economic downturn exposed difficulties with the model and it has taken an enormous effort on behalf of a range of stakeholders, including SOLAS, to provide opportunities for redundant apprentices to complete their training. It was in this context that the apprenticeship review was undertaken.

The Minister launched the review of apprenticeship in May 2013. It was led by an independent group, chaired by Kevin Duffy, chair of the Labour Court. We have two members of that group here today, as both Peter Rigney and Tony Donohoe served on it, and they can probably give some insights into the group's thinking on the recommendations produced. The review group invited submissions and consulted widely in producing its report, which it delivered to the Minister in December 2013. The Minister published the report in January.

A summary of the detailed set of recommendations contained in the report is in the full presentation I provided, but I will highlight a couple of key points. While strongly calling for flexibility in structure and delivery, the review group adopted a view of apprenticeship as requiring to be sufficiently substantial in depth and duration to deliver skilled workers who can work competently and autonomously. It stated that apprenticeship programmes should no shorter than two years and that at least half of this time should be spent on the job. It saw the potential for apprenticeships to be delivered leading to awards from level 5 of the national framework of qualifications, NFQ, right up to level 10.

The review group recommended the completion of the curriculum review under way for existing trades, leading to individual awards for each trade placed separately on the NFQ and with duration determined by learning outcomes. The group recommended that governance of apprenticeship should be led by a new apprenticeship council, hosted by SOLAS but with strong co-operation from the Higher Education Authority. The council should also co-ordinate a call for proposals for the development of apprenticeships in new enterprise sectors.

The Minister published an implementation plan for the review recommendations on 30 June. The plan adopts a phased approach to implementation, recognising the need to progress current work on existing apprenticeships and determine demand from new enterprise sectors through a call for proposals before embedding new arrangements in legislation. This reflects the fact that an approach that begins with legislative change is likely to be slow, will not be enterprise-led in the first instance and will not best facilitate the flexibility required to explore and respond to issues that may be raised in the call for proposals from enterprise sectors.

The plan sets out how an apprenticeship council will be appointed this month and details a series of actions to renew existing apprenticeships and develop new ones. These actions will be delivered in three phases. Phase 1 will focus on existing apprenticeships being reviewed under the existing governance structures, while the apprenticeship council makes a call for proposals from employers and education and training providers for the development of new apprenticeships. This call will be supported by dedicated resources. The council will assess the proposals against a sustainability test and report to the Minister in the first half of next year on proposals which stand the best chance of being developed into quality sustainable apprenticeships.

Phase 2 involves the development of the apprenticeships in the successful sectors. This will require establishing awarding arrangements, the development of detailed curricula and implementation arrangements. This process is likely to take some time and vary across sectors, and will be complete from late 2015 into the first half of 2016. In parallel, legislative implications will be examined to support the expanded system and provide protection for apprentices.

Phase 3 involves the embedding of new structures, including establishing the apprenticeship council on a statutory basis and bringing together the governance arrangements for existing and new apprenticeships. This will provide a stable base for implementing the remaining key recommendations of the review group.

The Department is confident that we now have a good basis for renewing apprenticeship in Ireland as a strong model of learning in further and higher education and training. We look forward to today’s discussion with the committee and the other contributors.

1:30 pm

Mr. Tony Donohoe:

I thank the committee for the opportunity to address it on a very important issue for the business sector. I look after education and social policy in IBEC. I am joined by my colleague, Mr. Dermot Doherty, who is from the Irish Medical Devices Association, one of the sectoral groups that has established a track record of working with education and training providers and has an interest in this area. IBEC's submission to the apprenticeship review group has been circulated to the committee and I will be pleased to address any issues arising from it that members wish to raise.

My comments, however, mainly concern the report of the review group itself and, more particularly, the Department’s implementation plan referred to by Mr. O'Flaherty. As committee members are aware, the current apprenticeship system, which is limited to 26 occupations, does not reflect the broader skill needs of the Irish economy. A fixed legislative structure makes it difficult for the system to adapt to economic and technological developments. A fixed duration of four years in all cases but one, and a fixed award, regardless of the learning outcome also creates inefficiencies. Female participation is negligible.

The starting point for any consideration of new apprenticeship models usually includes a reference to the well-established dual systems of countries such as Austria, Germany and Switzerland. Much of the commentary, however, tends to ignore the fact that Ireland cannot simply adopt systems that have been built over generations, upon very different economies, labour markets and social partnership arrangements. We also have to acknowledge the reality that apprenticeships, and vocational education in general, tend not to enjoy parity of esteem in a society that defines educational achievement in terms of Central Applications Office, CAO, points.

This is not to say that we do not have much to learn from other national systems. In fact the apprenticeship review group report has tried to distil some of the principles on which they are based to inform a model that could work in an Irish context. They include the following: employers and professional bodies are best placed to determine the content, outcome and demand for apprenticeships; expertise provided by education and training providers must also be at the heart of their design and delivery; apprenticeships must be able to respond flexibly to changing technology and market needs; apprenticeship development must be based on transferable skills including literacy and numeracy; different packages of work and learning, with distinct structures, curricula and pedagogy, may provide equally valid routes to enabling an apprentice to become competent in a job; distribution of the cost of training should be shared by all three parties, employers, apprentices, through the acceptance of a lower wage, and Government; apprenticeships should be available at all skill levels from school leaving, level 5 to advanced degree level 10, for countries such as Denmark have industrial PhDs; and governance or training delivery should not be predominantly within the domains either of further education and training or higher education, they should cross both levels which is very important in the context of the parity of esteem we seek for apprenticeships and the system should be underpinned by a robust and independent quality assurance regime.

The review group’s report certainly reflects these principles but the biggest challenge is moving from strategy to implementation. The Department’s implementation plan, which was published two weeks ago, can help us meet this challenge. IBEC supports its recommendation for the establishment of a new enterprise-led apprenticeship council. This council will issue a call for proposals from industry bodies working with education providers for the development of new apprenticeships. The proposers will have to set out the programme’s format, the main occupation needs to be addressed and how it meets a range of other criteria. Mr. O'Flaherty has described the sustainability test. The implementation plan comments that the capacity of relevant organisations to assume this role will have to be tested. I am optimistic about this. There are already numerous examples of businesses working with the higher education sector in particular to source their training. There are fewer examples in the further education sector but the recent further education and training strategy has named that and seeks to address it.

Some employers also provide input on curriculum development and work experience for students. This trend has been given further impetus through the more advanced Skillnets networks, Momentum, the Springboard programme and the ICT conversion programmes which are designed and delivered in partnership with industry.

I accept that the establishment of a new model requires a huge level of highly detailed work and the plan has set out a realistic timeframe. We should remember, however, that we will not see these new apprenticeships coming on stream until the first half of 2016. Thankfully, as the economic recovery takes hold, many companies are beginning to consider how they will meet their future skills requirements. It would be a pity to miss this opportunity. If the plan is to deliver, timelines must be adhered to and momentum maintained. The development of the new apprenticeships must also be properly resourced. As we move into the 2015 budgetary process, it is important that dedicated funding is allocated to promote the development and establishment of these apprenticeships in new occupational areas. This should be viewed as a critical investment in our human capital, which will underpin our future economic prosperity.

In conclusion, I thank members of the joint committee for the opportunity to present IBEC’s views on this important initiative and urge them to provide every support possible to ensure its successful implementation.

Dr. Peter Rigney:

I thank the committee for the opportunity to speak to it about what will be an extremely important aspect of Irish industrial policy and the education system in the immediate future.

We fully support the implementation of the review of apprenticeship and look forward to working with employers and the State in this area. Ireland is one of several member states to receive a recommendation on apprenticeship under the country-specific recommendations issued recently as part of the European semester process. In fact, one is struck by how many other countries, as well as Ireland, have received a recommendation in this regard.

We are right to be proud of our success in this country in the area of designated trades. However, our track record in embedding work-based learning in our education system is less impressive. In the past two decades there have been two major reverses in this area. One was the disappearance of the CERT apprenticeship system, leading to a situation where employers in the hospitality sector are now complaining about a lack of skills. Second is the failure, following the apprenticeship reform of the early 1990s, to designate a significant number of additional trades. A prime candidate for a pilot scheme for the extension of apprenticeship is the child care sector, which is facing a crisis of standards at this time. The State exercises a predominant role in the sector through funding and regulation, a position which it can use to advance public policy in the apprenticeship area.

Moving towards some type of dual system will present challenges, especially in the area of funding. Having said that, the EU initiative on a youth guarantee and the new phase of European Social Fund allocations will allow more financial latitude than we might have thought possible. Another avenue of resourcing could be made available through an expanded national training fund. That fund was established by diverting an element of employers' PRSI contribution - 0.7%, if I recall correctly - to a dedicated fund. There is scope to divert a similar small percentage of employees' contribution to an enlarged fund that would support an expanded apprenticeship system.

It is important to note in any discussion of apprenticeship systems that governance is not an end in itself but must serve a purpose. Societies design governance systems which achieve a purpose such as deliberation, information sharing or providing feedback. There is ample evidence that the governance of vocational education and training systems works best when it is structured on a tripartite basis which focuses on ensuring the relevance of training offered and anchoring the training system to the enterprise stakeholders. These strong links are pointed to by Viktoria Kis as an advantage of the Irish system in her 2010 study undertaken for the OECD. Robust governance systems keep the courses offered close to the labour market and act as a check and balance on the power of providers.

If we look at the operational issues which affected - or, more accurately, afflicted - FÁS in the period prior to 2011, it is clear that many of them arose out of work done by private sector contract providers. Similar problems arose with Skillnets, where a major breach involving both FETAC and HETAC providers was uncovered in the audit process and detailed in the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General. One of the lessons to be drawn from this is that the light-touch model of regulation adopted by FETAC and HETAC proved inadequate to deal with the risks posed by a very small number of unscrupulous private providers. There is a strong argument, therefore, for the education and training institutions of the State to play the predominant role in providing the education and training element of any widened apprenticeship system.

Despite many efforts undertaken over the past two decades by State authorities, employers and unions, most apprenticeships remain strongly male dominated. This is partly due to the fact that the construction, engineering and vehicle maintenance industries are in themselves strongly male dominated. An obvious way of broadening the gender participation in apprenticeships would be to broaden the range of apprenticeships available. However, we should not lose sight of the fact that the most significant gender issue in the Irish education and training sector is the under-achievement of young boys. The apprenticeship system as currently structured goes some way to address this.

Entry requirements will vary from sector to sector. In the event of a broader range of occupations being designated, they will vary even further. There has been a suggestion, for instance, that some groups of employers would like to have level 8 degrees delivered in an apprenticeship format. The stakeholders in the sector will set the minimum entry requirements and it will be up to SOLAS to ensure these requirements meet the needs of the occupation concerned and are not disguised barriers to entry.

A more broadly-based system of apprenticeship would help to minimise dropout rates. It would also help to address the under-achievement of young men in the education system, which is a common phenomenon in Europe. Dr. Sean McDonagh, former principal of Dundalk IT, has pointed out that the country that finds a solution to this problem will derive a competitive advantage from it. In addition, a more broadly-based apprenticeship system would ensure an enhanced supply of intermediate-level skills for our economy and society.

1:40 pm

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you, Dr. Rigney. I will now take questions from members, beginning with Deputy Charlie McConalogue.

Photo of Charlie McConalogueCharlie McConalogue (Donegal North East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the delegates for their presentations. Reference was made to models of apprenticeship which have worked very well in other countries, particularly Denmark and Germany. Will the witnesses outline the elements that make those systems work so well but which might not work in this country? In the case of the German model, my understanding is that students separate into streams at age 16, one being more academic and the other a more vocational route. Currently and historically, Germany has had a very low percentage of students going on to higher education compared with other countries, presumably because of the significant numbers opting for the vocational route. It is a system that seems to work well for that country. Any additional information the delegates can give on the German system and which parts of it are not transferable to Ireland would be helpful. I understand some of it is cultural, with German companies having very much bought into the system. Will the delegates comment on the cultural position in respect of companies in the Irish market, including the various American companies which provide employment in different sectors such as pharmaceutical and information technology? Is there scope for developing apprenticeships that can feed into those sectors?

What is the situation in terms of the age profile of young people going into apprenticeships in this country? Is there a need to develop a greater connection between our second level education system and the apprenticeship system? For example, if the two were running in parallel and there was a greater crossover, students would not be obliged to leave the education system early. Mr. Donohoe mentioned that there has historically been more engagement with industry at higher education level in terms of developing pathways than there has been at further education level. Will he give his take on the dynamic behind that and how it might be addressed?

Photo of Jonathan O'BrienJonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the delegates and thank them for their submissions. I agree with Mr. Donohoe that the timelines are both ambitious and achievable. They are also very much interlinked. The point Mr. Donohoe made in regard to the need for funding to be pinpointed in budget 2015 is a critical one. The timelines that are envisaged would mean the Minister having to allocate resources in the second quarter of next year to bring this to the next stage. If those moneys are not put in place in the upcoming budget in October, we are setting up a roadblock that is bound to delay progress in 2015. There is some planning to do in this regard. All of the submissions we are discussing today refer frequently to funding, financing and costing, but I do not see any actual figures. How can we evaluate the amount of funding that will be required to ensure the timelines can be met?
We have had several references to the lack of gender balance in the apprenticeship system and the opportunity we have to address it. Dr. Rigney stated that an obvious way to broaden gender participation is to broaden the range of apprenticeships types on offer. He went on to observe:

However, we should not lose sight of the fact that the most significant gender issue in the Irish education and training sector is the under-achievement of young boys. The apprenticeship system as currently structured goes some way to address this.

I seek elaboration. Does the current structure, which is mainly aimed at men, mean balance should be addressed through apprenticeships for women? How can the gender balance be achieved? How will sustainability criteria be set out? Proposals for new apprenticeships will be measured by a sustainability test to see if they can proceed. Apprenticeships have previously been based on needs, rather than being led by enterprise, but once needs change the apprenticeships become redundant.

The report and some of the presentations touched on the issue of the transferability of skills and this critical area must be developed. We must create apprenticeship schemes that help develop numerous skills simultaneously. For example, if the construction industry collapses an apprentice engineer, carpenter or bricklayer may not find work and therefore must learn other skills during his or her apprenticeship that will help the transfer to a new area of employment or further education. Rather than joining a dole queue it is important that apprentices learn varied skills that will help them progress. This issue of the transferability of skills will create a challenge in designing new courses and I presume the sustainability test will take it into account. If the market for which apprenticeship skills were primarily intended collapses it is vital that those skills can be transferred elsewhere. I seek more information on this.

1:50 pm

Photo of Jim D'ArcyJim D'Arcy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When I was at school people said that as I was good with my hands I should be sent to the tech. Conversely, I was told I had hands for nothing. Being useless at most things I knew I had to become a teacher. It is a straight line to level 10 and I like the idea of moving all the way to level ten. It is wonderful that a young person completing an apprenticeship knows he or she can carry on all the way to a doctorate.

A charge now applies to apprenticeships that is based on the registration fee for third-level students but perhaps this discourages potential apprentices. How will SOLAS, which is responsible for much of this, deliver on the programme in the five education and training board areas that do not have training centres? Will the chief executive officer of an education and training board that does not have a training centre in its region have any input? This is an issue in some areas and I would like to see it ironed out as early as possible without a row. This might not be easy but it is important, though it may not be the Department's responsibility. I would like to know how SOLAS will address the problem.

A reference was made to the German system and one of our aims is to increase tertiary education by 10%. We need to educate people for jobs and some people currently undergoing apprenticeships will employ degree holders in future. They are the entrepreneurs and wealth creators of the future. An apprenticeship can be a very good thing and a university degree should not be viewed as the Holy Grail. It may be sufficient that 50% of school leavers continue into the degree system.

On further education, is it the case that colleges have no capital budget and cannot qualify for a summer works scheme? Perhaps the witnesses cannot comment on this but surely some thought must be given to funding colleges.

Photo of Aodhán Ó RíordáinAodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chair and the Department, IBEC and ICTU for the presentations. Many of the points I wanted to make have been raised so I will not go back over them. Gender balance is an issue and ICTU raised the matter of boys underachieving. What can the Department do to address the problem? Is it possible to broaden the range of apprenticeships and what kind of apprenticeships would have most benefit?

It was suggested that a portion of employees' PRSI could be ring-fenced to fund apprenticeships. The Department hates new ideas with regard to ring-fencing though it does not mind maintaining old systems of ring-fencing when it suits. Perhaps Dr. Rigney can expand on this and the comparison with the previous scheme of employers' PRSI.

Mr. Phil Flaherty:

I will try to be as comprehensive as possible though some of the questions are more relevant to other witnesses. Deputy McConalogue raised the issue of international models and there will be varying views on this as we can learn from some aspects and others represent too great a cultural leap. The review group did not move towards the formal reintroduction of vocational and academic streams in upper second level schools. Vocational routes exist in the leaving certificate programme but, from an institutional perspective, people in Ireland do not attend a school based on vocational or academic inclinations, unlike people in countries like Germany.

There has been a long-standing concern on the part of parents that there should be a very broad offering across vocational and academic subjects at senior cycle in post-primary schools. Colleagues from SOLAS will confirm the figure but I understand that well above 70% of people who enter apprenticeships complete the leaving certificate. At present, therefore, apprenticeship is very much a post-secondary option. Of course, the position varies across trades. In that context, the entry rates among those who have only completed junior cycle in secondary school are higher in respect of certain trades.

Early school leaving is obviously a big issue for all countries in the European Union. Ireland's performance in this regard has improved somewhat and the rate here - less than 10% - is below the overall EU target for 2020. We want to reduce that rate even further nationally. Vocational opportunities and apprenticeships are a means of ensuring that there are options available for people who learn best by doing and they certainly make a contribution in terms of reducing the rate of early school leaving. It should be noted that the general picture in this regard has been improving for a good many years.

To return to the question on international models, we are of the view - I believe IBEC would probably agree with us - that great opportunities exist. A number of companies with operations in Ireland originated in countries with strong apprenticeship traditions. The European Alliance for Apprenticeships has indicated a willingness to engage more fully with the Irish apprenticeship system, especially if we expand the range of sectors in which it operates. The experience of companies such as Siemens, SAP and others in the context of how they are set up to deal with apprenticeships is something from which we can learn. The labour markets in countries such as Germany and Austria are highly regulated and the concept that, under law, people must have specific qualifications in order to undertake particular activities in the economy is very embedded. This clearly supports an apprenticeship system because if a person is obliged to obtain a qualification in order to become a baker or whatever, there is a model of training in place to support him or her in doing so. That would be a very big leap for Ireland. We have a pretty liberal labour market and the flexibility which exists within it is seen, as least by some, as being of assistance in attracting foreign direct investment among other things.

The type of regulation to which I refer supports the apprenticeship systems in Germany and Austria. In addition, the chambers model in those countries is very strong and allows the concept of apprenticeship to be supported and led by enterprise. The structures upon which apprenticeship can be built in Ireland are probably becoming stronger. What the Irish Medical Devices Association, which Mr. Doherty represents, has done is a good example of how a sector can be organised around training, Skillnets and things of that nature. We are, however, a long way away from a situation where companies would be legally obliged to be members of chambers and to contribute to them by supporting training models. Nonetheless, we have a great deal to learn from countries such as Germany and Austria in the context of how to set up an apprenticeship model in a given area, how to define a curriculum, etc. There is, of course, no need to reinvent the wheel in many respects because being a process engineer in Ireland is not necessarily any different to being one in Germany or Austria. If curricula have been defined in particular areas, we can use them.

Deputy O'Brien and others were correct to state that it is going to be important that we make resources available in 2015 and beyond to act as seed capital in the context of the development of apprenticeship. There will be some resource implications this year from the perspective of personnel being available to support the apprenticeship council with regard to the work it will be obliged to do. At this stage, I cannot say much more other than to indicate that this will form part of the Department's budgeting arrangements.

2:00 pm

Photo of Jonathan O'BrienJonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Department have even some idea of what needs to be put aside?

Mr. Phil Flaherty:

To some extent, what comes back in terms of the proposals will condition some of that. There would be an order of magnitude that we would see as being important in 2015 in order that sufficient scale might be achieved. Obviously, how much of that will be deployed will depend on the strength of what comes back in the context of the proposals that are actually put forward.

On the sustainability criteria, I agree with the point made in respect of the transferability of skills. There is a need to ensure that people who pursue apprenticeships are supported with regard to the type of foundation skills - such as literacy, numeracy, the ability to communicate, etc. - they require. There must also be clear progression routes, both occupationally, in the context of where one can go in the labour market, and academically, regarding where one can go within the education and training system. That is going to be important and it will probably have implications in the context of sustainability and how narrowly defined apprenticeships might be. I refer here to not having apprenticeships that are very narrowly focused in order that those who pursue them will not be left vulnerable. A key aspect will be that progression opportunities - both laterally and vertically - will be set out.

I will now deal with some of the points Senator Jim D'Arcy made. On the apprenticeship charge, I will to some extent give the classic Civil Service answer in that it was a budgetary decision taken by Government in the context of all of the savings the Department needed to make in 2014. In the context of whether it has acted as a discouragement, we very much hope not. We hope that people would see the value of apprenticeship and of the training apprentices receive. A person who pursues an apprenticeship is employed and receives a wage. He or she also receives an allowance the periods during which he or she is off the job. That allowance would be a long way north of what would be payable under, for example, a student grant scheme, which is worth bearing in mind.

The Senator inquired about education and training boards which do not have training centres. There is an ongoing process in this regard. Like the Oireachtas, the Department is seized of the need to ensure that this does not become a huge bone of contention.

Photo of Jim D'ArcyJim D'Arcy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is so much good to be done in this area.

Mr. Phil Flaherty:

Absolutely. It is a difficult issue. There is a unit within the Department which is managing the transition process relating to SOLAS and the education and training boards. We have asked the boards - both those without training centres and those which have such centres and which serve the areas relating to the latter - to come up with proposals regarding how all of this is going to be managed and to how the work of the training centres can be fitted in to the relevant reporting structures. Those proposals were only received in the past week or so and the Department is considering them.

To some extent, the area of apprenticeship is not the most difficult, although it is a difficult issue more broadly because it continues to be legally the responsibility of SOLAS and is delivered through the training centres almost on an agency basis in some respects, unlike education and training more generally, which is the statutory responsibility of the individual education and training boards. That issue is in hand and hopefully solutions will be found and there is a process in place to manage that. I will leave it to my colleague on my right, Mr. Keith Moynes, to speak about the appropriateness on our ambitions in respect of the third level sector.

2:10 pm

Mr. Keith Moynes:

Senator Jim D'Arcy asked what is the right level for higher education participation and Mr. Tony Donohue mentioned at the start that Irish society attaches a particular esteem to higher education. From the point of view of the system, the key question for us is what is the right mix for the individual and for society. There is a diversity of models that must form part of any system that bring us to what is the right answer for society. We have a very high participation level in higher education and graduate employment levels are back to where they were at pre-crisis levels. Much of the investment in higher education is paying off but clearly there must be other models and apprenticeship must be a part of that. There are initiatives such as Springboard, to return to Deputy O'Brien's point about the transferability of skills, under which people are being reskilled and there is a further education and training strategy. The key question is about the mix and the individual. The learner must be at the heart of this together with the skills that they need. We have a high level of participation, but increasing employer engagement within that system and giving people different avenues into the system will all form part of the mix, rather than a binary way of looking at it where it is either higher education or nothing. That is the mix we would like to take as a system and that is informing where we are going.

Mr. Phil Flaherty:

To answer Senator Jim D'Arcy's last question around the capital budget element, in the broadest sense the further education and training strategy recognises that a dedicated capital budget for the further education sector is required. Such provision has been somewhat ad hocup to now in that in terms of the overall capital allocation that was available for the Department, there would have been savings and a re-allocation to deal with particular capital needs as well as more larger planned capital developments in further education and training, and in the Cavan-Monaghan area quite a lot has been done. There is a need to systematise that to a much greater extent and ensure that colleagues in SOLAS have a proper engagement with that process and a full engagement on the capital side because the Department has given them the full current allocation around further education and training, except for some of the teacher pay elements for the PLC colleges. It is important we have a system in place that allows for the capital element to be included in terms of SOLAS and for that to be properly planned. We would agree on that.
On the Senator's question on the eligibility of works under the summer works scheme and the qualifying criteria for it, my colleagues in the schools division would be more well versed than I would be on that but I would be happy to respond to the Senator on that off-line if that is okay.
On Deputy Ó Ríordáin's point on the gender balance issue, in some respects, it is sad to say that our solution to gender balance in the area of apprenticeship is to broaden apprenticeships beyond the sectors in that we are not saying there are not roles for women in construction and engineering and such areas. In fairness to SOLAS and employers, efforts have been made in that direction even in the traditional sectors in ensuring that when bigger employers such as the ESB took women into apprenticeships that they would do so in twos and threes because it was perceived that it could be quite a difficult work environment and that it would be a more welcoming one if a few were taken on together. If we expand beyond the existing sectors, that should go some way towards addressing the gender issue. The point Dr. Peter Rigney made is also important. When we consider progression to third level and achievement in skills in literacy, numeracy and other areas, girls are outperforming boys fairly decisively. The area of apprenticeship has been a little bit of a counterweight against that and it is worth taking that into account in any discussion on the issue of general balance.

Photo of Jonathan O'BrienJonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In the context of broadening the opportunities, account must also be taken of people with disabilities. There is an opportunity there.

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will come back to Mr. Phil Flaherty. Do either of the SOLAS representatives wish to comment?

Mr. Denis Rowan:

Yes. I believe there is a great opportunity here. We have built up apprenticeships in trades and the structure is robust. It was time for it to reviewed. The one-size-fits-all model was not appropriate to today. We have built up knowledge on how to run them. The expansion of it is the main issue. My view on it, having only been in the area for the past month or two, is that it must be slow and done right. It should not be a rush job to find ten new ones and get them up and running fairly fast. The curriculum should be designed to the standards, have the endorsement of employers, employers should be involved in it and it should be appropriate for the long term. The numbers involved is also an important factor in terms of whether we will train 100 people or whatever number. It is better we do it right. It better to start off and have two or three good apprenticeships a year and after five years there would be 15 rather that trying to run 20 in the first year. We are up for it and we have started to do some work on it. We have changed our staffing levels, we are waiting on this to develop and we will be at the centre of it. It will be a team approach involving not only us in the training centre but those in third level, employers and the stakeholders all working together. That is vital because the opportunities for young people are enormous. There is an opportunity for them to acquire a skill, a job and an award that will be worth something to them.

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Dr. Peter Rigney.

Dr. Peter Rigney:

On the issue of gender balance, when I dealt with industrial relations I worked with Irish Rail, which was a big recruiter of apprentices. To increase the number of women apprentices it took in each year and we learned a number of things. First, it is a single process. One does not get bodies through the door until the results of the CAO process are known. Second, there were many false perceptions about the regulations. People said that one had to have technical drawing but one does not. One has to have either technical drawing or art and as a result of that the potential female constituency was widened. The perception was that one had to have to have science, but one had to have a science subject and when domestic science was included the constituency was widened. If apprenticeships are confined to specific male dominated industries, they will be male dominated, all other things being equal, despite the efforts by employers and despite the bursary system operated by FÁS-SOLAS. Therefore, the best way of having a gender balance, which reflects society as whole, is to have a broader range of apprenticeships.

That said, the issue that does not tend to be stated is that the biggest issue facing the Irish education system is the under-achievement of young males. That is a major issue and if one does a Google search for Dr. Seán McDonagh, the former head of Dundalk Institute of Technology, and what he has written on that, one will find it is an eye-opener.

We cannot take our eye off that ball. As we all know, girls mature more rapidly than boys and, frequently, boys of a certain age will not take to being disciplined in a classroom scenario, whereas in work they will frequently accept being informally disciplined with short, monosyllabic words and put in their place.

On the question of sustainability, the group did not go into that in any great detail because it is question of how to regulate for peaks and troughs. In an ideal world we should have had a way, at the height of the boom, of telling someone they could not become an electrician, a plasterer or a bricklayer because in the long term we do not have the demand for those. I suggest if we did that the Deputy's clinics would be overflowing with people complaining that their sons could not get a job, and some people mentioned the constitutional right to earn a living.

On the other hand, at the bottom of the boom we have to have the long-term vision to decide, if plasterers are not taken in this year, what can we do to keep the facilities in place. Plastering is a discipline in which one must stop working before the age of 65 because one's joints begin to give out. Six years down the line from the slump, where will we get people to build houses a couple of years from now? Mr. Flaherty would be asking what he should do with all the empty classrooms. Difficult discussions have to be had about the issue of sustainability, but there are not necessarily any easy answers.

On the question of the German model, the German authorities are asking anyone who will listen in Europe to take on their model. Fair play to them because they are putting in their money and asking countries like Spain, Slovenia and Slovakia to implement their model.

The most interesting aspect I would bring to members from our deliberations on the committee is that we had one of the most eminent training academics, Professor Hilary Steedman. Her main piece of advice was, whatever we do, we should not follow the UK model. That was the most interesting piece of advice I got on the matter.

On the question of the national training fund, in 2000, with the prospect of the former communist countries being admitted to the European Union, the Government took the view that the level of European Social Fund, ESF, funding we are getting for apprenticeships would not last beyond accession. At that time, I understand, employer's PRSI - Mr. Donohoe will correct me if I am wrong - was 12.7%.

2:20 pm

Mr. Tony Donohoe:

Yes.

Dr. Peter Rigney:

It was changed to the effect that employers would still pay 12.7% but the 0.7% would go into a national training fund which would pick up the slack for the end of ESF. I am suggesting that if resourcing is the problem - the Department of Finance does not like this, and will regard it as the end of civilisation it if it is attempted again - there is no reason a similar sliver of employee PRSI could not be taken and put into the national training fund. The Department of Social Protection might or might not like that. I say "might or might not" because a proper education and training system is one of the best guarantees against long-term unemployment. I think I have covered all the questions addressed to me.

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Dr. Rigney can contribute again if necessary.

Mr. Tony Donohoe:

To take Deputy McConalogue's questions, there has been a response to the German model. One of the big differences is they have been at it for so long. I attended a conference on apprenticeship in Brussels about a year ago and a British academic suggested that they had been doing this since 1152. I do not know how they came up with that date but the point is that it has its roots in the medieval guilds. They also have the institutional arrangements that Mr. Flaherty mentioned - that is, German companies have to be members of business organisations, employer organisations, by law. If the Deputy wants to suggest that to our legislators I will not have an objection, but we do not have that kind of embedded employer or trade union involvement in our structures in a way that goes back over decades. What we do have is a responsive education and training system which has a proven track record of working with business, and increasingly so in recent times. That goes back to the 1970s when the institutes of technology responded to the first wave of ICT companies coming here in a very effective way.

The review group did not spend too much time considering the binary secondary system they have in Germany, because in practical terms that will not change, and such a change would probably not be desirable. It is much more to do with parity of esteem, a phrase I have used a few times, in terms of what happens afterwards. The guidance counsellors in the secondary system and teachers generally have a role to play, but what will sell this model is if people come out with good-quality, sustainable jobs. If the model works it will speak for itself. If people coming through this system are outperforming third level graduates - I will come back to Senator D'Arcy's comments on third level - and if it worked properly in the jobs market it would speak for itself.

The Deputy's final question was on disconnection with further education, as opposed to higher education. The Skillnets network, albeit a relatively small initiative with an investment of €15 million, is a very good model and is similar to what we are proposing for apprenticeships. We are not proposing the establishment of a separate organisation but the idea of education and training providers and employers coming together and making a proposal which, if it passed different criteria, would then be funded. The higher education institutions tend to be more receptive to that. We could conjecture the reason, but FÁS was embedded with employers on the training side in regard to level 6 or below. The further education system has been much more fragmented. It has worked and responded well in some areas but not so well in others. That was borne out by the recent review of further education, which, in fairness, sets a blueprint that, if followed, would address the concern I raised and that the Deputy picked up on.

I echo Deputy O'Brien's comments on funding and the fact that we need to start sooner in terms of seed funding.

With regard to meeting fluctuating demand and the fact that over 80% of apprenticeships in 2006 were in the construction sector - we saw what happened to that sector and to the apprentices - economies always move in cycles and there will always be changes in demand. There are two ways of addressing this, the first of which was mentioned by the Deputy, namely, transferable skills, but there is also the idea of plotting progression routes, as he mentioned, out from levels 5 and 6 into higher education and the idea of job clusters. That is something we have been thinking about internally. We have been thinking about this in terms of sectors - for example, what would work for the medical devices sector. However, many of the jobs, whether they are to do with Six Sigma, computer-aided design or quality engineering, are transferable, so perhaps we should start thinking in terms of clusters of jobs. That is the sort of detail I presume the Apprenticeship Council will get into when it is considering sustainability, but if a quality engineer is employable whether he or she is in medical devices, food, ICT or a range of other sectors, future-proofing it as far as we can in that way is something we could consider.

Senator D'Arcy's comments were on charges for apprenticeships. Mr. Flaherty covered that to an extent, particularly with regard to the equality dimension between the third level student in an institute of technology and the apprentice. The apprentice gets much more State support. However, the entire area of third level funding needs to be examined, as well as the way in which students are supported. The Minister announced a review of that last week under the chairmanship of Peter Cassells, and it feeds into this conversation in terms of the idea of student loans, etc.

An interesting point was raised around tertiary education targets and their legitimacy. There is no easy answer, except to say it shows the limitations of targets. What we should remember about the higher education system is that much of it is vocational, which is a potential strength. This is something that was raised when the committee was discussing the technological university a few weeks ago. In European countries, particularly in Germany, tertiary education is academic. It has a strong academic focus, whereas we have a potential strength with some of our universities and institutes of technology where the courses are vocational and have a critical role to play. If one can plan progression routes and have them transparent and visible, this flexibility that the German system does not have is a potential strength of the Irish system.

The issue of gender balance was raised by Deputies Jonathan O'Brien and Aodhán Ó Riordáin. It has probably been covered in broadening the range. It is a subject that recurs, particularly in the area of science, technology, engineering and maths, the so-called "STEM" subjects, regarding attracting young women into related occupations. There have been many initiatives and role models. It is encouraging that the president of Engineers Ireland is a lady. It is that kind of message that must keep being reinforced. To go back to my original point, if there are good quality jobs as a result of this initiative, as I genuinely think there can be, it will sell itself to both genders.

2:30 pm

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Issues have been raised with me by people who contacted me on the topic. I revert to the fees issue which was raised by Senator Jim D'Arcy. One of the recommendations in the Department's summary is that apprentices continue to be paid both on and off the job, with no reduction in earnings during periods spent in education and training institutions. The payment of fees very much contradict this. Fees, in effect, represent a cut in the training allowance which is supposed to match what apprentices would receive on the job. Dr. Rigney might come in on that issue. What does the ICTU think about the charging of fees for apprentices?

A model of employer-driven demand for apprentices still seems to be the one recommended in the report. Should employers drive it? They may be conservative or vested interests may be an issue. What is being done to ensure that, ultimately, we will provide the number of apprentices in these areas which will be good for the economy and which will ensure we will have the people with the skills? Has there been any analysis as part of the reporting process of the number of apprentices we need to enter the trades? Has any figure been put on this?

Mr. Rowan referred to the need to do it properly. What things are coming on stream in terms of new sectors? What is going to come up and what is being planned in the short term?

On the gender issue, I note that when I was driving down Dawson Street the other day, I saw people working on the Luas line. There was a woman there, which was unusual. One takes note in the circumstances. One is seeing more and more of this and there is an extent to which it is happening naturally. I do not know whether she was a construction worker or an engineer, but the issue of the status of apprenticeships will have a knock-on effect in terms of there being more women entering them.

Mr. Phil Flaherty:

On the fees issue, the Chairman is right to identify that the review recommends a continuation of the arrangement whereby apprentices have continuity of income throughout the period of their apprenticeship. However, I am not sure I agree with the characterisation of the charging of a fee for a service as being, in essence, a reduction in wages. It might also be worth bearing in mind that the review raises the possibility of employers paying both on and off the job where this might be feasible. I suspect this might not be a one-size-fits-all solution, but the review went a little further than simply stating the existing arrangement should continue.

On the employer-led model, I note that the call for proposals is, in some ways, a move - at least in the initial stages - in the direction of testing proposals against demand forecasting. There is a very sophisticated set of employment forecasting resources in SOLAS which has a strategic labour market unit. The unit produces occupational forecasts on a regular basis which informs the work of the expert group on future skills needs. In considering proposals for new apprenticeships regard will be had to where the growth and the demand are likely to occur. It is very difficult. Dr. Rigney hit the nail on the head when he said it was a difficult issue in terms of existing apprenticeships. The beautiful thing about it is that it is super sensitive to the level of demand in the economy in so far as the route into apprenticeship is to find a job. When one has a job, the State guarantees that it will row in behind it in terms of education and training. However, this has led to some of the difficulties around peaks and troughs and apprentices being made redundant. Some possible solutions have been discussed, but it is difficult to say - this is recommended in the report - in the early stages of implementation that after the 100th electrician, we are going to say to the 101st, "Sorry, we will not train you." It is one thing when one is planning a new apprenticeship from the ground up, but it is very challenging in terms of the existing trades and needs to be examined. It raises all sorts of issue around equity. The throwaway example of the 101st electrician is, probably, not valid. One would have to do it by calling on employers to state how many apprentices they wanted. It would be a radical shift away from where we are in the existing trades. It runs in the opposite direction to some of the employer-led recommendations made in the report.

I may leave it to Mr. Rowan to say what is likely to come up in the short term. Mr. Donohoe might have a view also. There have been a number of approaches to the Department and SOLAS from interested groups at the early stages. Dr. Rigney referred to the demise of CERT and the groups have included people in the hospitality and tourism sectors and those at intermediate ICT skills levels. There are also our colleagues on the medical devices side. I attended a session they held in Athlone recently.

Also, some interest has come up in the engineering sector. In parts of the engineering sector that are not currently engaged, there is some apprenticeship as well. I am sure Mr. Donohue would be aware of various sectors that feed into the IBEC structures, but these are some of the sectors that have indicated an interest at this stage.

2:40 pm

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do Mr. Rowan or Mr. Feeney have anything to add?

Mr. Denis Rowan:

I will give the committee some information that we have to date. The forecast for the year was that 1,900 young people were to be registered. That is based on our research team looking at last year, this year and next year. To the middle of June, there were 1,214, so we will be way ahead. It is difficult to predict the demand precisely. A total of 1,214 young people have been registered this year to the middle of June. September would be the next peak time. We expect the number to increase quite a lot. That is a 49% increase on last year. In effect, that is a significant return to what it was.

As to what type of ideas we have or people who have approached us, Mr. Flaherty has covered them. I have to say that we are not developing an apprenticeship; we are looking at, and may test out, some ideas that may eventually lead to apprenticeship. We do not want to pre-empt the work.

The areas of chefs, retail and ICT are the three areas on which we have been approached and on which we are having talks. We are working through those. If we test something out, it will be a programme that will be an apprenticeship look-alike but it will not be an apprenticeship course.

Photo of Jonathan O'BrienJonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Are these pre-apprenticeship programmes or are they separate?

Mr. Denis Rowan:

They could become apprenticeships in time. The local authority will call for the proposals and it is the local authority that will deem something to be an apprenticeship or not. We will not be in that space. Any work that we do between now and then over the next year will take into account what the apprenticeship review stated and embed some parts of that into it to test them out.

Dr. Peter Rigney:

The running on the question of apprenticeship and fees has been made by our major affiliate, the Technical Engineering and Electrical Union. They make the case - in my view, quite persuasively - that apprentices are being charged fees which are allegedly for student services, despite the fact that for the majority of their short time in college they are not in a position to avail of those services and, additionally, they are paying PAYE and PRSI, so they are making their contribution to society in a different way.
As regards potential for further apprenticeship designation, while that will emerge, it is important to remember that traditionally in apprenticeship - solicitor apprenticeship is a classic case - apprentices accept a low wage for a period of time in training to progress to a higher wage. Hospitality is traditionally a low-wage sector. If one looks at the Galway city edition of The Connacht Tribunefor the week before last, the local head of the Irish Hotels Federation stated that people will not work in their sector even though they pay the third highest minimum wage in western Europe. Regardless of the rate of the minimum wage, apprentices will not accept low pay for a period of time in order to then work for the minimum wage. This has to be sold to the mammies of Ireland who sit beside their offspring when they are making out CAO forms. That is the situation.
The other matter about the German model is that Irish society has bought into the idea of a leaving certificate that will qualify a person for everything. In an ideal world it might be great to have the German dual system and say that one must make a choice at the age of 15 or 16 years, but I do not think Irish society will accept that. Irish society, as I stated, has bought into the idea that everyone does the leaving certificate. That is a societal value that we hold. It may be wrong from the point of view of the sociologist, but it is the value that we as a society hold.

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My understanding is this review states that the minimum period would be two years. Obviously, it could be longer than that. How long could it be? Is it four years?

Mr. Phil Flaherty:

All apprenticeships are currently at four years. It does not set a maximum. It probably is difficult to conceive of an apprenticeship that would go beyond four years but-----

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is possible.

Mr. Phil Flaherty:

Yes.

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In teaching, for example, they are increasing the amount of time that teachers have to train. A concern has been raised with me that they fear that reducing the years for apprenticeship will reduce the quality and standards of the education provided to the apprentices. That is one point.

On the fees, one point the Department should take note of is that there is an issue of inequity, which has been raised with me, in the sense that an apprentice doing a shorter block release pays the same fee as someone who is doing a longer one. Is that correct?

Mr. Phil Flaherty:

No.

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Flaherty might clarify that.

Somebody said to me - I am raising issues that people have mentioned to me - that they believed the institutes of technology should have been consulted directly for the review but they were not. As a major part of the system, they were only able to make a submission. They feel they should have had more direct consultation. Does Mr. Flaherty have any comments on that?

Mr. Phil Flaherty:

On the three issues, when the minimum period of apprenticeship was set - Dr. Rigney mentioned the recommendation that we should not adopt the UK model - it was sending a fairly strong signal that those short periods of training that are entitled to apprenticeships - perhaps developing relatively low skills - was not the direction that Ireland wanted to go, that we saw it as a sustained period no shorter than two years, and it was a minimum. It was not a recommendation that there be a reduction to two years.
The point with regard to duration - this speaks to the review of the curriculum and the existing apprenticeships - is that it must be led by the learning outcomes that are required in order to undertake the occupation. It depends on how complex they are, how long it takes to embed those skills, and how long one needs to spend on the job and off the job. That is the key determinant of how long an apprenticeship would be. Because the group adopted a view of apprenticeship as being deep, sustained and leading to autonomous and competent workers, it recommended that the period should not fall below two years, but that is very much a floor, not a target.
On the short versus longer block release, without getting too technical about this, the annual student contribution is currently €2,500. That is what one pays. It is increasing to €2,750 for 2014-15. Typically, apprentices are taken in in three 10- or 11-week blocks during the year, which roughly equate to the three academic terms, and they pay one third of that figure. Therefore, it is pro rata. As the Chairman correctly stated, there are some apprenticeships which involve longer periods in the institutions - for example, for those studying electrical instrumentation on aircraft, where the blocks are longer. In those cases, the pro ratafee is different. If their block release is longer, they pay more. It is a greater percentage of the annual amount. That is probably not welcomed by those apprentices, but it is equitable insofar as it is based on how long one spends in the institution.
On the question of consultation with the institutes of technology-----

Mr. Tony Donohue:

Sorry; I would like to pick up on the last point. Apart from the submissions, of which there were over 70, we had three and a half days of face-to-face submissions from groups that came in to the Department.

Institutes of Technology Ireland was among those. Therefore, there was face-to-face dialogue.

2:50 pm

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That clarifies that.

Mr. Tony Donohoe:

The question of duration is important. Mr. Phil Flaherty made the point that this was a floor, not a target. This is a floor and we were very mindful of differentiating between apprenticeships, internships, traineeships and all the other work-based learning models. We also felt it should be tied to the learning outcomes. No disrespect to tilers, for example, but the current apprenticeship period for a tiler is four years, the same period applicable to people who are doing aircraft maintenance. Clearly, that is not an efficient use of time or resources.

Let me pick up on the point as to whether the enterprise-led model is a good one and whether there is innate conservatism. I do not believe there is because I cannot think of any other model that would work. Labour market forecasting is a relatively inexact science. We have very good forecasters in this State but one needs the intelligence that businesses bring. In the consultation informing the work of the review group, we asked our members what would get them to the table on apprenticeships because we have to sell the idea to them. Three points arose. First, and most important, was that there has to be a genuine demand. It does not matter how much the State is prepared to support apprenticeships if there is not a skills demand. Without this, employers will not get involved. Second, there has to be a genuine influence on the occupations and occupational standards, rather than the details of pedagogy and curriculum design. The latter are quite rightly the remit of the education and training providers. There should be at least some influence on the occupational standards, particularly. Third was the possibility of State support for the training and education elements. Those three boxes have to be ticked before a company will engage.

There are a number of sectors to be considered, and some have been suggested. I agree that there are great opportunities in hospitality, retail, advanced manufacturing, ICT, etc., but they will be realised only through the process we have suggested, which has the virtue of being flexible. If the demand does not exist and the proposals are not thought through properly, they will not receive support. That is the beauty of this model. It has to be underpinned by all the other agencies of the State in terms of quality assurance, qualifications, accreditation and matters pertaining to the State providers. I genuinely believe the proposal has potential.

Photo of Jonathan O'BrienJonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One of the recommendations is the development of the pre-apprenticeship programmes. Could we have some information on what is being proposed?

Mr. Tony Donohoe:

We did not get into the detail on the specific pre-apprenticeship programmes except to acknowledge that some young people will continue to leave school at 16. They learn in different ways. Perhaps the classroom does not present the optimum educational experience for them and they might prefer experiential learning. I believe it will emerge from the proposals that arise that if there is potential for a pre-apprenticeship piece to qualify people to get onto the apprenticeships, the mainstream-----

Photo of Jonathan O'BrienJonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will it focus on literacy and numeracy?

Mr. Tony Donohoe:

That has to be part of it. A criticism of some of the current apprenticeships is that there was not a focus on the more transferable skills, including literacy and numeracy. They have to be part of the conversation.

Dr. Peter Rigney:

We did not go into detail on the question of pre-apprenticeships but, given that the State invests a lot in Youthreach, there may be a way of specifically orientating Youthreach graduates towards an apprenticeship system. With the existing trades, that requires fluency in mathematics. It always strikes me as strange to see the statement at the bottom of apprenticeship advertisements that foundation mathematics is not acceptable. If employers will not accept foundation mathematics for an apprenticeship because it does not give people the required fluency, why are we providing it? I do not know the answer to that question. If it is worth nothing in the labour market, is the State mis-selling a product to students?

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does Mr. Doherty want to say anything from the perspective of his sector?

Mr. Dermot Doherty:

Speaking on behalf of the Irish Medical Devices Association, I believe the review is very welcome, specifically in that it is employer led. The medical devices sector in Ireland employs up to 25,000 people, which makes it, per capita, the biggest medical technology employer within Europe. In February of this year, we conducted a survey of our members. Over 80% stated they are interested in an apprenticeship in medical devices. At present, we are examining a proposal for a pilot apprenticeship at level VI in mechanical engineering. Contrary to what was outlined earlier, there is an option in this case to move from level VI to level VIII. At present, there is a two-year programme, with a one-year add-on for level VII, and obviously a one-year add-on for level VIII. As a sector, we really welcome this.

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Since there are no more questions, we will leave it at that. The meeting has been very informative. I thank all the delegates.

The joint committee adjourned at 3.07 p.m. until 1 p.m. on Wednesday, 16 July 2014.