Government consults on future of ‘time to train’

A new UK law, giving employees in big companies the right to request time for training, is already under threat, only a few months after it was introduced in April 2010. The recently elected coalition government has launched consultations on whether the Act should be kept as it is, repealed, or extended to smaller companies in 2011. The government’s move received a mixed reaction from social partner organisations. Trade unions fear that the outcome could weaken the new entitlement.

Background

The Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009 introduced, from April 2010, a right for workers in companies employing more than 250 staff to ask for time to study or train, on or off the job. The right applies after 26 weeks’ service with an employer. The type of training is not specified, but it is meant to improve the performance of the employee and the business. Employers are not obliged to pay for the training or the training time. However, they are obliged to consider the request and respond within a set time. Employers may turn down requests for several business reasons, such as cost, or an inability to reorganise work. The law had been due to be extended to organisations with 250 or fewer staff from April 2011.

Review of new law

The Conservative-Liberal Democrat government that took office in May 2010 (UK1005019I), replacing the previous Labour Party administration, has instituted a review of all workplace regulations, with the aim of reducing burdens on business. As part of this process, on 11 August the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) launched a consultation (119Kb PDF) of all interested parties on the future of the April Act.

The consultation document asks whether the 2009 Act’s regulatory approach to promoting training requests is the right way of achieving the desired outcomes. It states that there are some strong arguments for retaining the policy. These include its aims:

• to promote and support work-based learning;

• to promote training that delivers real benefits for business.

However, the document notes that the Act has been criticised because of:

• its costs;

• the impact on ‘good’ employers (the two thirds of employers who already invest in skills and training;

• the scope of the policy (the fact that it potentially applies to all employees of relevant organisations, including those who already have good access to training).

The options outlined by the government are that the right should:

• stay as it is in organisations with over 250 employees, and be extended as planned to small and medium-sized organisations in April 2011;

• stay as it is, but not be extended to smaller organisations;

• be extended, but that this should be delayed until economic conditions improve;

• be removed altogether;

• be retained, but made to function better. This would mean, for example, exempting employees who can already access training, allowing employers to refuse requests where good training review systems already exist, or amending procedures for dealing with requests.

The consultation was closed on 15 September, and the government plans to issue its response in December.

Reactions

Launching the consultation, John Hayes, the Further Education, Skills and Lifelong Learning Minister, said: ‘Before we make any decisions about the future of the right to request time to train, it is important that we gauge views of the regulation and whether it is improving training opportunities for employees.’

Brendan Barber, General Secretary of the Trades Union Congress (TUC), said that the right to request time to train has already ‘opened new doors for workers to get the skills they need to further their careers’. He expressed concern that the consultation will ‘weaken the right as a favour to business organisations who consider support to train staff as nothing more than burdensome red tape’.

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD), called for the right to be maintained and extended to smaller organisations as planned. By contrast, the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) called for the right to be abolished entirely. Adam Marshall, its Director of Policy, said that the extension of the right to small and medium-sized businesses would impose ‘process obligations’ that are ‘inappropriate, costly, and potentially confusing when they are combined with other legal obligations’. He added: ‘Regulations such as these also provide yet another route to employment tribunals, allowing disgruntled employees an opportunity to threaten legal action due to paperwork and bureaucracy.’

Mark Carley, IRRU, University of Warwick/SPIRE Associates