Select Committee Report on Construction Has Some Positives

Construction union UCATT have described the BERR select committee’s report into the construction industry as patchy.

UCATT welcomed the committee’s recognition that the Government as the largest construction client should be playing a far more active role in regularising the industry. In particular the committee recommends that the Government must ensure that there is stable direct employment on its projects.

UCATT also welcomed the committee’s recognition that fatalities and major injuries on construction sites will only decrease if the Health and Safety Executive "devote more resources to inspection".

The recognition of the huge 600,000 strong unregulated informal economy that is allowed to exist in the construction industry was also notable.

Alan Ritchie, general secretary of UCATT, said: "These recommendations demonstrate that the committee understands that unless there is positive intervention in the industry workers will be exploited and are at risk of being injured or killed whilst at work. The dogma of the free market and self-regulation has failed in the construction industry."

However UCATT were disappointed that although their was recognition that bogus self-employment and unlicensed gangmasters were major issues in the industry, the committee did not go further in their recommendations.

Mr Ritchie, added: "Bogus self-employment and gangmasters are making many construction worker’s lives a misery. Workers are stripped of their rights and exploited on a daily basis. The Construction Industry Scheme [the unique self-employment tax scheme in the construction industry] is an abject failure; it cannot be reformed and must be scrapped. Equally the Government at the earliest opportunity must extend the Gangmaster’s Act to the construction industry, to stop the abuses levelled at predominantly migrant workers."

While the select committee noted the crisis facing apprenticeships and training in the construction industry. UCATT were highly disappointed that the committee gave it support to the misnamed Program Led Apprentices. Unlike a craft based apprentice, young people taking PLA’s do not have an employer for the first two years when they are solely in a classroom. After this period if they can then find an employer they spend 9-12 months on a site. The courses are inferior as a young person can only get an NVQ Level 2, those studying under the traditional craft based apprenticeships, who spend the majority of their time on sites, can achieve NVQ level 3.

Mr Ritchie, further added: "PLA’s are a corruption of the very notion of apprenticeships, which are about onsite learning. I am pleased that the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills do not count PLA’s in their apprentice figures. Yet again some construction bosses are trying to find a cheap way to tick training bosses on Government forms, while denying youngsters a proper start in the industry."