Search

This paper uses evidence from an Australian research project into under-recognized skills in occupations, gathered through industry-level interviews and company case studies, to examine VET curricula. The project, funded by the Australian Research Council, focused on skill in jobs traditionally regarded in Australia as unskilled. As part of the project, the evidence about skill was compared with the relevant qualifications. The qualifications are contained in Training Packages, which form the basis of most formal VET training in Australia. The qualifications for the seven occupations were in three broad industry areas (manufacturing, services and property services) and had all been developed in recent decades, unlike apprenticed trades which have long-standing qualifications and curricula in Australia. The comparison exercise showed some mismatches between the skills that were found in the researched occupations and the content of the qualifications. Some of the issues are believed to have broader applicability beyond these specific occupations and qualifications and thus can provide evidence to improve the design of Training Packages themselves.

In 1990, Australia implemented an employer training levy, the Training Guarantee Scheme. The Training Guarantee was abolished by the incoming Coalition federal government in 1996 after much negative publicity about its impact, particularly on small business. Recently, there have been calls to revive the notion of an employer training levy as a result of statistical evidence that employer expenditure training has declined since 1996. In this context, employer training expenditure has been taken as a proxy for employer commitment to training. This article considers the statistical evidence on employer training in Australia and concludes that the case against Australian employers is far from clear cut. Data from a variety of sources suggests strongly that Australian employers provide a similar level of training to their employees as employers in other developed countries. The paper proposes that it is the distribution of employer training expenditure that is important to long term skills formation rather than the total expenditure.