The Guardian view on construction workers: the country needs more of them, fast
|
Version 0 of 1. Historical neglect of vocational training means the sector has a mountain to climb if government housebuilding and infrastructure targets are to be met During the 1980s, the construction industry provided the backdrop to one of Britain’s best-loved television comedies. Auf Wiedersehen, Pet chronicled the progress of three Geordie bricklayers as they fled a recession-hit country to seek work in Düsseldorf. That was then. A contemporary reworking would need to start from a radically different premise. Notwithstanding the contribution of a large migrant workforce, the modern construction sector is underpowered and dramatically understaffed. Annual job vacancies total about 38,000, half of which cannot be filled due to a shortage of skills. For a government committed to sustainably building 1.5m new homes and environmentally upgrading the existing housing stock – as well as renewing national infrastructure more generally – that is a serious problem. The Construction Industry Training Board has estimated that between now and 2029, about 240,000 new hires will be needed. The education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, hopes that some of them will be alumni of 10 “new technical excellence colleges”, whose locations were unveiled this week. The government has already pledged to invest £600m in the training of 60,000 construction workers by 2029. The 10 colleges are being handed another £100m to enhance the skillsets of a future generation of bricklayers, electricians, carpenters and plumbers. “New” is stretching it a bit. All the colleges already exist and have a track record in offering construction courses. Whether the scale of the government’s intervention is adequate to the size of the challenge is, to say the least, moot. But Ms Phillipson’s apparent determination to prioritise the sector is both necessary and welcome. One in eight young people are currently not in education, employment or training; making vocational career paths accessible and attractive is a social as well as an economic imperative. Sadly, there is a vast amount of lost ground to make up. Overall investment in skills has dropped calamitously since 2010, and a myopic ministerial focus on universities has seen further education colleges treated as second-class institutions. The apprenticeship levy scheme introduced by the Conservatives in 2017 was a dismal failure, as employers invested in already skilled employees rather than entry-level opportunities. Via Skills England – the new body it has created – Labour has moved to reform the levy. But comparisons with Germany’s longstanding vocational education system, which enjoys high status and delivers a rounded learning environment to students, remain deeply unflattering. The construction industry also has its own issues to resolve. Cultural expectations have transformed since the days when Auf Wiedersehen, Pet was broadcast. In a recent survey, more than a third of young people did not view a job in construction as a respected career path. More than half considered the sector not welcoming to women. Many employers are failing to invest in training. And as the use of migrant labour has become increasingly prevalent, there has been concerning evidence of exploitative practices. If hugely ambitious Westminster targets are to be met, foreign workers and new native talent will both be required (a home truth that the government is depressingly reluctant to acknowledge). Rendering the construction sector fit for purpose should be viewed as a national mission. The reward would be a viable vocational path for tens of thousands of young people. Labour is at least making a start. Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. |