NEW ATF CHARGES FOR 19 - 24 YEAR OLD APPRENTICES.

For farriers to raise concerns with elected Farriers Registration Council representative Peter Baker. Anonymous postings will be deleted.
PNB
Posts: 2238
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

NEW ATF CHARGES FOR 19 - 24 YEAR OLD APPRENTICES.

Postby PNB » Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:58 pm

All,

Today it is announced on page 6 of Sefton House News [FTA publication] that ATF's will have to pay £3000 to FTA for each new apprentice, over 18 years, starting from July 2007.

The cost of a private apprenticeship will now be £11000.

Please read the article.

Any thoughts??

PNB.

Giles
Posts: 283
Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 4:41 am
Location: Wales
Contact:

Another stupid idea.

Postby Giles » Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:48 pm

That’s one way of making sure that there will be no mature students between the ages of 18 and 24. I suppose they want the extra money, but of coursed they wont get any this way. Who thinks up these foolish ideas, good job they are not in the real world and have to make a living. There seems to be a lack of common sense and logical thought, and these are the people in charge. Good job I dont rely on them for my life style.

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Postby john ford » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:21 pm

They also have not read the script as to the future of farriery in the next 10 years. With the cost of living going up, and house rents and prices going up, the next generation of horse owners won’t be able to afford to replace their horses when they die off. Many of the newest qualified farriers around here are scratching around for a living already and are having to travel miles to get work. The price war is just about to begin for many of them.

Giles
Posts: 283
Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 4:41 am
Location: Wales
Contact:

Playing people for fools

Postby Giles » Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:43 pm

John,
Moving on to the obvious conclusion, what with the cost of training and the decreasing income from shoeing, not many are going t take it up. But this does not matter as there are plenty of half trained farriers from the eastern block waiting to come here to shoe cheaply, so why waste government money that could be better spent on government employees. After all you don’t need to train farriers when you can get them for free. Then the owners can get a cheap job without the hassle of regulations I suspect, and it will all happen just in time for certain people to retire with a big fat pension and maybe more for a job well done in the governments eyes.

The fact that the welfare of horses is overlooked does not matter as it has been overlooked ever since the inception of the current act by the powers that be, other than to justify their actions when they give lip service to it.

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Postby john ford » Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:22 pm

I coundn't have said it better Giles, it bought tears to my eyes with laughing so much at the truth.

PNB
Posts: 2238
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Postby PNB » Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:34 pm

Giles,

You are quite right it seems this scheme is intended to generate money to meet the FTA's predicted shortfall. I just wonder if the ATF's will go for stumping up £3K or will they in at least the short term anyway decline to commit to signing up apprentices for the July intake. We will see shortly. My gut feeling is they may well walk away from AMA's, yes I take your point if ATFs walk away there won't be any extra money coming in from this new source, a loss of numbers will result in less government funding to boot. I suggest FTA needs 70% of the current funding to continue to function as they use that much for administration purposes.

Linking with the other thread now, Andy Thomas HTC, maybe the 4 colleges should be thinking about administering their own farriery students cutting out totally the FTA layer of bureaucracy. Just a thought is this viable.

PNB.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Postby csc » Sat Feb 03, 2007 6:44 am

you will probably find that the apprentices will be prepared to pay or there parents will
if you go to uni you have to pay and they do
i dont think this is a bad thing
what i do condem is the vast amount of moneys that the f.t.a. charge and i would welcome competition in tis area i think this will happen soon as at the moment the f.t.a. have a monopoly

PNB
Posts: 2238
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Postby PNB » Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:47 am

Stuart,

The LSC we are told specifically prohibit apprentices paying for their own education. FTA are fighting for this rule to be changed to allow the apprentices to pay, however at present it would need a government intervention.

In practical terms for an ATF to pay a bond for an apprentice employee must be close to the description of slavery, I PAID FOR YOU, YOU ARE MINE ATTITUDE!! that could arise.

For the lads to buy their own employment is this any more sanitary.

I suppose one remedy would be to deem apprentices "STUDENT STATUS" instead that of an EMPOLOYEE. Then this must mean / make the ATF the training provider, which obviously he currently is, the government then would allocate the NVQ monies to the ATF where it should have been allocated anyway, leading on from this for the ATF to provide outsourced supplementary education as and where needed basis. I have to ask if this was to happen where would the FTA stand.

PNB.

Has anybody actually worked out the cost to the ATF of training [a future to be SELF EMPLOYED FARRIER], and the amount of time the apprentice is available to undertake productive work under the proposed system??
Last edited by PNB on Tue Feb 06, 2007 6:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Postby csc » Sat Feb 03, 2007 3:54 pm

peter it is a case of supply and demand if a 20 year old wants an an apprentiship he will be the one paying otherwise atfs will employ under18 its simple maths

PNB
Posts: 2238
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Postby PNB » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:45 pm

Stuart,

With all the pre-entry requirements NUMERACY, WORD and the Forging certificate courses, work place experience, up front administration time what is it 7 months after meeting the above critera as well of course taking into account the probationary period two months , it is hard to see that many practical kids will meet the entry requirement age critera before the critical date. [We have no way of checking the past entry ages so at best it is a guess.]

Stuart, unless someone turns a BLIND EYE apprentices CAN'T at present, it is against the funding agencies rules for apprentices to pay for themselves, will FTA transgress these regulations? to effectively draw down funding for itself to enable it to sustain?? personally I doubt it.

PNB.

PNB
Posts: 2238
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

The cost of training an apprentice.

Postby PNB » Sun Feb 04, 2007 5:11 am

All,

During a working year any employee is available to work for +260 DAYS.
--------------
During the working year the apprentice has paid holidays of -28 Days
[from 2008]
During the working year statutory Bank Holidays - 8 Days

College courses 23 week divided by 4 Six weeks - 30 Days

ATF plus apprentice verifiers / H/S / Field officer / FTS - 4 Days
[out of work place.]
Off job non productive forge practice, 1 day a week. -40 Days

Sickness and minor injury. Estimated @ -10 days
------------
Off job days = 120 days


+ 260
- 120
-----
+140 available days for productive work. = 28 weeks out of 52 weeks paid wages @ the statutory minimum rate. Half a years productive work for a years pay. Are apprentices true employees ??

It was concluded several years ago to attempt to employee an apprentice under these terms was non viable, that was before the NVQ book work started.

One has to ask how do the ATFs do it? / or even why?? when at the end of it they don't even get someone to work for them. Farriers nearly all go self employed!!

Now!! ATF's are asked to front up £3000 as well.

PNB.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Postby csc » Tue Feb 06, 2007 6:43 am

a mature apprentice naw pays £11000 did any one read age discrimination in the latest sefton house mag?
anyway back to my point thats 20 weeks at college at £150 per week to the college lets be generous call it 200 20 times 200 thats £4000 as the mature apprentice does not need the beaurocracy as mwn told us that because of government funding they need beaurocracy but with no funding? never the less m w n wants to treat everone the same especialy as he earns £7000 for every non discriminated mature apprentice
put that one in your pipe peter and smoke it

PNB
Posts: 2238
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Postby PNB » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:52 pm

Stuart,

So the mature apprentice doesn't need the FTA administration, I remember MWN saying that to us at the last FRC meeting.

The reason FTA are involved is due to a suggestion many years ago probably near to 15, [possibly in the BAK DAYS] that self funded and grant aided trainees should get the same level of education, ie, college education. I was on training committee when that happened. Some how that has been interpreted as mature and grant aided trainees / employees need the same level of administration!! which I personally feel is BALLS.

The fact is I feel probably that FTA need the "Surplice to college cost money" that the self funded trainee / employee has to stump up, to meet FTA spending.

It was suggested several years back by "Admin" that mature self funded apprentices get a raw deal as the service they buy from FTA is for the purpose of subsidising the administration of the government grant that doesn't have any relevance to the private trainees as they get no government support. The grant given to the State Aided apprentices does not cover FTA's overheads any longer, it did once then a huge profit was amassed, but it was short lived and the surplus is eroding away, [£300K last year alone]!!

Stuart, Is that smokey enough for you. How did the LANTRA group meeting go today. Who is the new chairman??

PNB.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Postby csc » Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:50 am

peter you are right tecknecaly the mature aprentice does not need to donate around£7000 to the f.t.a. to administer them as i said m.w.n. wants everyone to be equal within the training system a expencive option for the mature probably with family in toe
i think it is a complete rip of and could be contested by the individual on the same basis as the banks ars naw having to repay

PNB
Posts: 2238
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Postby PNB » Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:47 pm

Stuart,

Today I have spoken to LANTRA, they wish to open up a direct line to the working craft, [UKHSU]. We should discuss the options at the Windsor Lad tonight.

It may just be, that as in the near future all students have to remain in formal education until the end of their sixth form year, no apprentices will qualify to be fully grant aided at that stage. I feel the £3000 up front payment may well kill the Farriery AMA.

PNB.

PNB
Posts: 2238
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

At last a craft meeting with LANTRA. [Suggested].

Postby PNB » Thu Feb 08, 2007 5:41 am

All,

It was agreed last night that the idea started at LANTRA that a meeting should happen between them to re-establish their link with the working craft [UKHSU] was an excellent idea. The farriers present at UKHSU last night which included 2 apprentices was in fact a record at an UKHSU meeting. The meeting was fully in agreement and applauded the idea that the CRAFT should meet LANTRA and build on the Newbury experience .


PNB.

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Postby john ford » Tue Feb 13, 2007 3:58 pm

TO ALL.
If an ATF has to fork out £3000.00 for each apprentice can anyone tell me the answer to these questions? (1) Is this payment to be paid in full before the apprenticeship starts? (2) Does the ATF get this money back after the apprentice finishes? (3) Does the ATF still have to pay the apprentice the minimum wage 52 weeks of the year? What happens to this money paid out by the ATF, if the apprentice gives up his/her apprenticeship part way through the apprenticeship? (4) What guarantees are given to the ATF if he/she pays out this money?

PNB
Posts: 2238
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Postby PNB » Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:17 am

John,

Your question's, 1, The £3000 will be paid in installments throughout the period of apprenticeship. 2, It is a PAYMENT not a bond. 3, The apprentice is still an employee and gets full wages throughout the apprenticeship. 4, I don't know but once you have bought something you usually don't get anything back. I feel this will cause great bitterness if an apprentice relocates. 5, We don't know the answer to that, except the £3000 it says does not fully cover the amount the government stipulates the employer has to pay. The report says "and will be reviewed in line with inflation and government grants for future intakes". So I suppose during time the the £3000 will alter I wonder if it will become more or less!!.

I have now spoken to 6 active ATF's none of whom are happy about this £3000 charge and all are considering whether they can afford to continue training apprentices. All but one presently say the FTAMB charges will stop them, the one says he will have to study the detail and consider if training is a viable future excersise. The most indignant ATF tells me he will simply refuse to pay.

I have spoken with the FRC, it is established that past experiences indicate when anything like this happens it blows over and that other than in the very short term ATFs still take on apprentices regardless of the changes.

I understand there were very strong feelings expressed at yesterdays apprentice interviews at Sefton House. I am attempting to get a minute of what transpired there. ATFs should if they wish write letters to demonstrate how they feel. I will if I am provided with letters regarding this matter present a file to council at the time this item is put forwards for "Ratification by the [Farriers Registration] Council", at its meeting in London on the 7th March".

I would suggest that all ATF's who have strong feeling about this matter come to that meeting on the 7th March and council the FRC members one on one. We usually meet up with the chairman for a pint and a snack after the meeting. You will need to formally apply to the Registrar however if you wish to attend.

PNB.

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Postby john ford » Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:02 pm

Thanks for that Peter, now another question I wish to put to you as our representative on council and to the FTA: If an ATF took on an apprentice and entered into a private agreement that this money would be taken out of his/her wages during the 4years 2 month apprenticeship, or be paid back in full at the end of the apprenticeship, would this be legal and can the FTA refuse such an agreement even if the apprentice was happy to do so for the chance of an apprenticeship?

PNB
Posts: 2238
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Good point.

Postby PNB » Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:43 pm

John,

A private contract, how could anybody do anything about that two people have rights to enter into contracts as they wish. I feel nothing could be done about it.

It seems if FTA were however to sanction such an agreement they may lose the LSC grant, if that would be to total grant for all AMAs or just for the individual lad, it is something I will raise at the time of the debate.

Surely it should only apply to the individual lad as FTA have no control over private contracts. There is a bit of a stumbling block to your idea however as at worst the ATF will only have to pay 50%, the government grant will cover 50% of the estimated cost. 50% of the current costs is currently estimated by FTAMB to be £4097, which may indicate the £3000 is just "Your starter for 10".

Who knows!!

Money paid back at the end of the apprenticeship, that would be an employment BOND, it has been reported to me in the last week, that a £5000 payment is required by one ATF to encourage the apprentices to stay with their ATF for the full term of their training, seemingly this is being sanctioned by FTA presently, the £5000 is to be returned at the completion of the full apprenticeship. It is suggested that only one ATF is doing that presently, I know of one other ATF who says he is going to do the same in the future!!

PNB.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Postby csc » Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:27 pm

i spoke today with MWN with regard to the A.T.F.s £3000 bill for 19 to 24 year olds 50 % of the cost must be bourn by the employer this is gov policy not contrived by the F.T.A. who have been fighting it from the start.
there will be a split of payments envisaged at 2 payments for year 1 of £250 year 2 and 3 two payments of £375 and year 4 two payments of £500 if a aprentice leaves his master there will be no refund the new atf paying all further instalments
theF.T.A. are looking into a student loan system rather like university students have to do
on the question of age discrimination aparently the learning skills council is exempt and older apprentices can try the carrer development fund
if you feel strongly about this and feel that the apprentice should pay like uni students do then please write to your MP IT MAY BE A GOOD IDEA FOR THE UKHSU TO DO SO?

Italian stallion
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:40 pm

Postby Italian stallion » Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:07 pm

csc,
If you consider that out of the apprentice funding FTA use 70% of that sum in admin costs, surely FTA should streamline there own setup first rather than tell us this new payment is goverment policy, talk about passing the buck.!!!!!

E.W.

PNB
Posts: 2238
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Does the current training make sense.

Postby PNB » Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:14 pm

EW,

I have proposed an agenda item for council on 7th March that other possibilities regarding training providers and funding are fully explored. [ Please come to the meeting council your elected members]. We can meet up for a yarn and a pint after.

I also feel the administration cost of the farriery AMAs are far to high.

It seems there maybe a bit of a conundrum for ATFs presently, because FTA needs NVQs to attract funding, but globally [including the private apprentices] it seemingly is going to cost the ATF and a mature student more with NVQs to subsidise their trainees [or their own training], than it would cost without the funding NVQs attract.

My reasoning in part being, the application of NVQ requires something close to an extra 10 weeks to be spent at college, at a cost of £1500 [give or take], a sum that would be saved if NVQs were dropped due to reduced time out of the work place, to say nothing of the gain for the ATF occurring due to extra time spent working for their employer at home.

Try this without NVQs time spent at college could be reduced maybe to little more than 13 weeks, 13 times £150 [estimated current cost] = £1950, FTAMB are going to charge the ATF £3000 and do charge the private lads £11K, how has this happened?? even based on the current 23 weeks at college the cost is only £3,750, something has run away, possible it is time to fit a a new BRIDLE!!!!

Take this a bit further and link up with Liam's thinking on the NAFBAE board, Are NVQ's "education positive" [MWN 2000], now the craft has a proper syllabus, a physical training structure it is difficult to argue why NVQs should not be "Done and Dusted with"[Liam].

The craft didn't want them anyway!!. Seemingly the whole system has been put in place in order to draw down the available £1.3million [PA] euro carrot [Figure stated at apprentice interviews, 1st group, on Tuesday last]. We were originally instructed this grant was introduced to stimulate the take up of AMAs within crafts where apprenticship no longer existed. It is probably worth noting farriery did have its own apprenticeship matrix which has functioned well for near 850 years, thanks to the WCF. The AMA /NVQ has pancaked in other crafts, ironically within farriery it is the AMA and NVQ that seems to be actually destroying established apprentice education system.

Further, UKHSU have a seminar on Wednesday 21st February at the Bear Hotel, Hungerford, [ New innovations in farriery] 7pm till late, time will be put aside for debate. Phone the SPONSORS "SEFCO" to book a seat limited space!! [01488 73607] .

.
Someone check out my reasoning, I will be delighted if you find I am wrong.

PNB.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Postby csc » Sat Feb 17, 2007 9:21 am

italion stallion i totaly agree the f.t.a. is a cumbersome beurocratic dinasor and you would have thought that the powers that be would question this, seemingly not, showing that those who represent us seem not to question and find it distastefull when we do.
my bigest gripe is the mature apprentice what a rip of that is
however the U.K.H.S.U.are looking into alternative training providers


Return to “farriers - contact your FRC rep”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest