The manufacturing sector has been facing skills shortages for decades. Therefore, what we are now seeing is not new but is a build-up of historical challenges. The difference now being that we are not just facing a skills shortage, but also a labour shortage. Editorial advisory board member Richard Brown writes.
The educational and training landscape has been blighted over many years of political initiatives that have driven detrimental change across the board.
Some of the political initiatives that have impacted technical skills are:
- EITB training centres replaced by a ‘patchwork quilt’ of different types of training provision.
- Technical colleges and polytechnics removed.
- Political drive of degrees for all.
- Legislation for education to the age of 18 introduced.
- Apprenticeships became the buzzword for politicians to right their wrongs of educational change.
- Introduction of the Apprenticeship levy.
- T-levels, a government backed career focussed qualification for 16-19 year-olds launched
The polymer industry was once represented by three bodies, Cogent, The National Skills Academy (Process Industries) and Technical Apprenticeship Service TAS, which were morphed into Cogent Skills, an Employer-driven Science Industry Partnership. However, the polymer industry is a poor partner in this relationship, as it was stated at the outset it was for the prosperous UK science-based sector by its Chair at its outset:
"This partnership will put employers in the driving seat, allowing us to identify ways of attracting the best young people and in turn securing the essential skill base for a prosperous UK science-based sector.” - GSK Director Malcolm Skingle, Chair of the Science Industry Partnership.
Cogent Skills are sector based, working with companies from across the science and technology industries embracing life sciences, industrial sciences and nuclear. Where does the core of the plastic industry fit into this? Maybe it’s the poor relation in this initiative!We are working in an industry that is being demonised by government and media turning the spotlight on plastics. This might be a handy way for government to steer public attention away from some of their significant failures of the past and for the media to give credence to on-going campaigns, but it is damaging the image of the industry reducing its attractiveness to future career prospects.
However, what they fail to say is that plastics have been responsible for saving millions of lives through their use in medical devices, transportation, and food preservation. The COVID-19 pandemic once again highlighted the need for plastic materials to prevent the spread of infection. So, the enemy is not plastics which has a positive impact on our everyday lives around the world providing technological advances that benefit many fields and promote innovation. A career in the plastics industry could have a real impact but how do we get the message across?We, as an industry, need to be raising our voices and getting involved at the grass roots level. The British Plastics Federation has recognised this and have provided the means to get involved via the Polymer Ambassadors and Career Ambassadors schemes providing the tools to enable companies to interact with their local schools to improve the view of that which has arisen around careers in STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths).
The Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (IOM3) organise annual polymer study tours, supported by The Worshipful Company of Horners and industry sponsors, for design and technology teachers to gain first-hand experience of the polymer industry in action. This is a mix of lectures, practical sessions, and site visits supporting teachers in educating the employees of the future. Some words from teachers that have attended a tour speak for themselves:
"I feel it is vital that I am able to use real-world examples of the polymers that I teach. The site visit was a great way to bring both the science and design aspects of the plastics industry together, in a way that has deepened my understanding of the subject."
"The course exceeded my expectations by far and I am confident it is going to transform my teaching of the subject. The course was incredibly well designed and paced with a packed and diverse agenda, all of it interesting."
Schools outreach is important whether via Careers Ambassadors, Polymer Ambassadors or attending career fairs to get the message across that there are STEM careers within the plastic industry, where young people can have an impact in several industries such as medical, automotive, and aerospace applications, right through to packaging, construction and agriculture.
However, Tony Blair’s mantra of "education, education, education" changed the expectations of many, who began to believe that education progression carried on through to university, with a plethora of subjects becoming available. This took the focus of many away from apprenticeships and vocational training, where a widespread snobbery existed. Whilst most parents were aware of apprenticeships and say they support them, they didn’t want their ‘little darlings’ to miss the aspirational goal, which is to achieve a degree.The revival of interest in the apprenticeship, with the introduction of the Apprenticeship Levy, was designed to put funding in the hands of employers and encourage them to invest in and create apprenticeships. This generated a raft of ‘modern apprenticeships’ as educational institutes scrambled to get a slice of the funding, adding ‘apprenticeship’ to the title of many courses. However, it is important that companies and education providers work in unison to enable better representation of what the industry requires in the courses offered. Too often, these so-called apprenticeship courses do not run, as the cohort sizes required are not met to make them financially viable with the level of funding on offer.
It is the responsibility of our industry to change the perception and raise our voices as to what is required to be delivered in an apprenticeship. Currently there is a Toolmaker & Die Maintenance Technician Apprenticeship Standard without any representation for the plastic industry. The Level 2 Science Manufacturing Process Operative and Level 3 Science & Manufacturing Technician standards are being revised and need to have a polymer specific pathway to be of use to the industry to increase uptake of the apprenticeship. The work of the BPF Skills and Education committee is key in delivering the industry needs from this redevelopment. We cannot complain if we do not get a suitable qualification that is underfunded if we are silent and not involved.
Unfortunately, the status of a skilled individual in the UK injection moulding industry is low compared to other countries. In the UK we put a considerable emphasis on the individual possessing essential knowledge to set a moulding machine and its process to produce the correct outputs and quality, often without the underpinning knowledge as to why, hence the role as a setter.Many of our global competitors adopt a more scientific approach to gain a detailed understanding of the moulding process and related equipment resulting in the interrogation of all aspects of the process to simply setting parameters.There is not an independent body for certification of plastic training, only for apprenticeships delivered in-house or by an independent training provider registered on the Register of Apprentice Training Providers (RoATP). The new Polymer Processing Technician Apprenticeship Level 3 was approved for delivery on 9th August but until a suitable end point assessment organisation (EPAO) has given commitment to the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) to be approved, delivery cannot start. To date this has not happened. Recognition must be given to the employers involved in developing this much needed revised Level 3 who were Alphagary, Berry Plastics, Broanmain, Cooper Tires, Data Plastics, Gabriel Chemie, Genuit Group, Linecross, Numatic, Recipharm, Polymermedics, Plasgran, RPC Superfos, Rutland Plastics, Sumitomo (SHI) Demag Plastics Machinery (UK) Ltd, Uniplas and Veka PLC.There are also several training providers who have developed training courses to deliver to the industry these being, Paulson Training, Polymer Training & Innovation Centre at the City of Wolverhampton College, PS Partnership, RJG UK, Sierra 57 Consult, Solutions 4 Polymers and Sumitomo Demag. Whilst most of these courses are self-certified by the training organisations, Sumitomo Demag and Sierra 57 Consult have reached out to the IoM3 to get their courses Quality Assured and PD approved recognising the value of ongoing training for professional development and increasing the knowledge and skills capital of businesses. This approach also provides reassurance to learners and employers that the courses they are undertaking are provided by an organisation with a robust foundation in delivering training and that the content meets the IoM3’s high standards.
This still leaves the question unanswered as to whether the industry requires a national body to ensure all training delivered is robust and meets the future needs of the industry like that of the Construction Industry Training Board (CITB). We must ensure that the industry has a competent and inclusive workforce now and in the future. Shouldn’t there be approved training organisations that deliver training courses and qualifications to a defined and industry-agreed training standard outside of the apprenticeship structure to upskill existing staff and offer occupational traineeships offering a learner a high-quality work experience?Currently the procedures that employers rely on to bring in the next generation of talent, such as apprenticeships and other work-based training, are only in some measure equipping firms and their workforces with the skills that are needed for the future. The apprenticeship levy continues to frustrate companies, and there is only limited awareness of government initiatives intended to provide support for employers to invest more in training.
Employers are becoming more focused on upskilling and retraining their existing employees, the focus being to ensure that their technical skills keep pace with changing needs of the business, and to retain that talent in the business for the future. Training is a business investment however. Investment in plant and equipment is so often seen as the main route to growth and sustainability. Unsurprisingly then many businesses see that ‘state of the art’ plant and equipment is the panacea to improvement. Having the best machinery in the world will not guarantee significant performance enhancement without the associated skills.It is the businesses that are already making investments in their current and future workforce that are preparing for the future. With the right environment and right support, the workforce can and have delivered tangible results.
The manufacturer’s organisation MAKE UK has recently published a paper titled ‘2030 Skills - Closing the Gap’ in which they state:
- 36% vacancies in manufacturing are classed as hard to fill – lack of skills, qualifications or experience (24% average across other industries).1
- In 2022, there were 95,000 live vacancies in the manufacturing sector, and; lost productivity due to vacancies in 2022 equated to £21 million per day lost UK GDP output1
- Only 26.5% of manufacturers were confident in their ability to acquire the skills they will need in the net 10 years.1
The report highlighted the trends driving skills and jobs as:
- 56% of manufacturers said that flexible working was a key trend driving changes to jobs and skills between now and 2030.1
- 59% of manufacturers cited automation as a trend that is changing jobs and skills needs for their business,1
- 50% of manufactures cited wider digitalisation where new digital technologies can boost productivity.1
- 37% of manufacturers cited environmental issues as a factor in changing skills needs. Key to this is the access to high-level skills such as innovation and management, as digital and green skills are needed to meet the challenge of net-zero.1
Automation, digitalisation, and the environment all reinforce the view of an increase in demand for higher level technical skills over the longer term and invites the question as to whether we will have enough people with the right skills to fulfil manufacturers' long-term ambitions. The change in skills need to align to manufacturers’ wider growth ambitions.
And yet, when it comes to apprenticeships and T levels:
- Only 50% of manufacturers recruit apprentices - this should be 75–80% to meet industry demands1. How much of this is down to the structure of the levy restricting access to funding and lack of approved RoATP within the polymer industry?
- 58% are aged 16–18 years but only 10% over 22 years - this provides a real opportunity for the manufacturing sector
- Pre-levy there were 75,020 apprentices, post-levy there were 59,970; post levy and pandemic there were 39,510 – the levy needs looking at as a matter of urgency!
- £3.3 billion unspent levy returned to Treasury in the last three years under the Government’s use-it-or-lose-it apprenticeship levy rules.
Recently we heard the rhetoric from Rishi Sunak that “One in five graduates would be better-off financially if they had never gone to university.” He went on to say “But the fact that almost 30% of graduates don’t progress into highly skilled roles or further study after graduating just isn’t good enough. Too many young people are being sold a false dream of doing a poor-quality course that doesn’t offer the prospect of a good job at the end of it. We’re protecting students and taxpayers against rip-off degree courses that have high drop out rates and don’t lead to good jobs.”
He has promised to strengthen apprenticeships and T Levels and make sure that parents and students are aware there are other routes into the workforce other than a university degree – often with better career prospects and at a lower cost. He also said that they would make it easier for employers to take on apprentices - cutting the steps needed for businesses to take on an apprentice by a third. If this is delivered it would have a major impact over the bureaucracy currently involved in accessing the levy funding for SMEs. Widening access, boosting jobs. Growing the economy becoming the mantra for the current government.The UK plastic industry is the third largest employer in the UK with 155,000 people employed. The turnover of the industry is £25bn, consisting of 5,800 companies. However, around 25% of the companies are small SMEs that are family owned, with the majority of the owners over 55, many of whom will be retiring in the next 10 years so.
It’s becoming more important to prepare the workforce with the skills required to ensure succession planning and business continuity.
Apprenticeships and skills training are vitally important to ensure people can be successful at work and meet their career aspirations and businesses can fill skills gaps. However, the Treasury aren’t being transparent about where billions of pounds of apprenticeship funding, which is being misdirected, is used. Are they using the unspent levy in a way that best supports the places most in need of levelling up, or is it being used to create more entry-level apprenticeships, after numbers have plummeted in recent years? Over £3 billion in funds, that businesses haven’t used, appear to have been lost into a Treasury black hole. Lack of transparency undermines confidence that money for apprentices is being used in the most effective and fair way. The fact that so much apprenticeship funding is lost to the Treasury is a symptom of a system that is far too rigid and confusing to navigate for businesses. Going forward the system should be made more flexible and companies supported to be able to access levy funding to boost apprenticeship opportunities. The Apprenticeship Levy has become a stealth tax on employers who should be able to use the monies towards training schemes, but in practice the options are limited. The Apprenticeship Levy was sold by the government as a ‘win-win’ for manufacturing but it’s fair to say in its current form it is a ‘lose-lose’ outcome. Manufacturers are restricted in what training they can spend it on, how they spend it and when they can spend it. So, it’s important that as an industry we invest in people and skills, that are within our current workforces as well as the next generation coming into the workplace. Despite commitments to invest in people there remain barriers to doing so.
The factors we hear that stop skills investment often are:
- lack of time to train as a barrier.
- lack of external finance, e.g., government support.
- lack of appetite from employees (often also attributed to a lack of time).
- internal budget has been consumed by the Apprenticeship Levy.
- access to relevant training provision.
The government has set out a blueprint for reshaping the technical skills system to better meet the needs of employers and the wider economy.As part of this new approach, the Department for Education (DfE) introduced local skills improvement plans (LSIPs) and a new local skills improvement fund (LSIF), which replaces the strategic development fund (SDF). The LSIF will be available over two financial years, £80 million in 2023 to 2024 (£40 million revenue and £40 million capital), £85 million capital in 2024 to 2025. It would appear initially the SDF funding though was used to reshape teaching and training provision and enable facilities to be updated in preparation for the 2023/24 rollout of the LSIPs.The Government also announced the creation of the Unit for Future Skills (UFS), an analytical unit which will collect labour market data to inform the development of education, skills and employment policy – this is intended to focus on future skills needs. It will be important that all these initiatives support effective collaboration between manufacturers and local training providers, and thereby facilitate more productive engagement ,which has been so often lacking.
There continues to be a mixed understanding of the support that is provided through the Government for manufacturers to access skills and training. While the awareness of apprenticeships is mixed among manufacturing employers and policies, such as the apprenticeship levy, are confusing, and not always considered effective – other initiatives as mentioned above, suffer from lower levels of awareness and understanding. Programmes such as T Levels should be a promising step towards bringing in higher numbers of young learners to the sector, but awareness is also low among employers and there remains concern over aspects of the policy such as industry placements.We are now seeing the education push to move students into university starting to show cracks, with it recently reported that dropout rates from university increasing with the reasons cited as cost of living, being on the wrong course and mental health problems. The loan system is broken, and the student debts are becoming enormous. Currently reported as circa £36,000 per graduate, and an interest rate of 7.1% applied, this will saddle a student with debt for the rest of their lives. We must make students aware that going straight to university is not the only way to get on. For a long time, university has been the aspiration for young people and parents alike. However, as an industry we must show there is a platform we can offer that can deliver high quality technical routes that can lead to a degree apprenticeship.It is therefore critical that the voice of the plastic industry is heard and communicated. One of the channels to do this is via the BPF’s Education and Skill Committee whereby the BPF can then pass on the views and requirements of its members onto the relevant bodies. What more can be done to open access to the labour needed immediately? Maybe thinking outside the box is needed; investing in our current workforces to take on skilled roles that they could achieve with the right encouragement to fill those job roles in the future.
When upskilling and training employees, there are tax breaks available as the work-related training tax exemption allows companies to offer their employees training programmes while recouping part of the cost through tax breaks. This allows employees to broaden their knowledge and skills to benefit the business, providing a clear incentive, enabling them to offset the cost of training through their tax bill.Growing future leaders and managers is also important and the government’s Help to Grow: Management scheme is a long-awaited attempt to address some of these issues. However for many manufacturers, awareness and understanding of the scheme is low. This is a 90% government-funded leadership course, spread over 12 weeks to fit around your business. It is designed to help boost the business performance and resilience of your business.
Another opportunity for those in the sector who have recently become economically inactive or are planning to retire is for them to make a contribution without being on the frontline of industry, that is by entering the teaching workforce to pass on their relevant direct experience of working in industry.As we look to the future, having the tools to adapt, innovate and be agile are vital. Training and development however, cost pressures, a lack of the correct expertise, and at times being stuck in old habits, holding many manufacturing businesses back from reaching their full potential. The major challenge we all face, which is significant, is the increasing skill gap in our businesses due to an ageing workforce and incoherent training policies from the government.
So, it’s fair to say that employee training is a smart business decision, because if you’re not training them, who will? Skilled employees need less supervision and less management to get the job done, leaving them time to address other business challenges. Untrained staff cost significantly more to employ and support than skilled workers in the long-term. Although despite this training, at times is perceived as unglamorous and a necessary evil that gets in the way of day-to-day business. It is necessary to recognise that well trained staff are critical to future success of a business. If you are failing to plan training, are you planning for your business to fail?
It was George Santayana who said: “Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it”. The size of the prize of a highly skilled plastics sector can only be achieved if we work together, get our voices heard and accelerate training and development. In this manner we will unlock growth and deliver a stronger sector for the future, thus retaining jobs in the UK.