Memorandum 64
Supplementary evidence from the Alliance
Employment and Skills Board following the evidence session on
Wednesday 25 June 2008
The Committee asked for views on employer willingness
to contribute to funding higher level skills provision. I have
now had an opportunity to discuss this further with those heading
up the Collaborative Higher Education Alliance Partnership, an
initiative here in North Derbyshire and North Nottinghamshire,
aimed specifically at raising demand for higher level skills amongst
both individuals and employers in key sectors to the local economy.
The information is below.
Experience at a national level indicates that
employers are more willing to contribute for their existing workforce
rather than their potential one, ie Continuing Professional Development
rather than Under Graduates. Moreover, they are willing to pay,
often in full, for that which is tailored for them in terms of
negotiated content and mode, but less so for `off the shelf' provision.
The notion of co-funding has been negative for
both providers and employers in that it raises false perspectives
of what is being sought. Providers think they are going to get
less funding from HEFCE, and employers think they are being asked
to pay for something they previously got free. Neither is necessarily
the case. Within Train to Gain there is a problem in moving from
lower levels where provision may be subsidised, to higher levels
where employers are expected to pay. Employers don't always understand
the difference.
The employment sectors focused upon by the Collaborative
Higher Education Alliance Partnership—Logistics; Health
and Social Care; Food and Drink Manufacturing—are being
impacted upon by the economic slowdown and in this climate, it
will be difficult to get employers to invest, particularly SME's.
July 2008
| 
