Right to Train?

The Government is currently consulting on the right to request time to train, which states Secretary of State for Innovation Universities and Skills, John Denham, would give "all employees in England a right to a serious conversation with their employer about their skills development".

It doesn't seem revolutionary, but the Government insists it will "spark the skills revolution we need" – and indeed we do: as the consultation document states, the UK workforce languishes 16th out of 29 on the OECD scale on skills; and only 35% of UK employers have a training budget. Nevertheless in these figures reflect progress from 1997 – for example two and a half times as many workers start apprenticeships each year now compared with 1996/97.

In 2003 the Government introduced the similarly-couched right to request flexible working, which was introduced for a limited group of employees. These 'rights to request' are exactly that, they carry no obligation on the employer to grant them, and any one of a range of about ten 'business reasons' is enough to reject them. However, the Government estimates that 92% of requests for flexible working have been accepted.

In granting this constrained right for workers, the Government has made concessions to business. If, following this consultation, the new right is implemented then the Government will delay until 2015 the scheduled 2010 review into whether workers should have the legal right to workplace training where they lack at least a level 2 qualification (i.e. equivalent to five good GCSEs). As John Hannett of USDAW stated, training is win-win, "access to training in work-related skills helps to build morale and loyalty amongst employees. In addition, the company’s skills base and productivity increases".

Nevertheless the Government is optimistic that the measure will engender a culture change in favour of lifelong learning, leading to up to 300,000 people each year undertaking training as a result of granting this right.

One issue of contention in the consultation paper relates to the role of unions and union learning reps. When the Prime Minister announced the proposals in May, the TUC, in a detailed response, welcomed them as they would "give unions - and in particular union learning representatives (ULRs) - an important role in helping individuals to shape their requests to learn new skills". Despite this, the Government clearly states "there will be no legal requirement for employers or employees to engage with their unions and ULRs on time to train". There are fears that the role of ULRs in coordinating union-led learning initiatives could be undermined.

Whether the Government's estimations are realised, it needs to think of innovative ways to reach many of those most in need of skills training: the one-third of people with poor literacy and numeracy that are currently on benefits.

The consultation document 'Time to Train' can be downloaded from the DIUS website. The deadline for responses is 10th September 2008.

The Future of Tobacco Control

The Government is currently consulting on 'The Future of Tobacco Control' and identifies four main areas requiring further attention:
1. Reducing smoking rates and health inequalities caused by smoking
2. Protecting children and young people from smoking
3. Supporting smokers to quit
4. Helping those who cannot quit

Just over a year ago, the Government banned on smoking in public places. Likewise it raised the age for buying tobacco products from 16 to 18. According to Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) the public are now in favour of further controls to discourage smoking, including 85% who want retailers convicted of selling tobacco illegally to children to be banned from selling tobacco products.

The last decade has seen a decline in the proportion of smokers from 26% to 22%. Yet 87,000 deaths per year are directly attributable to smoking – as the consultation document points out.

In the consultation paper it states quite unsurprisingly: "The chances of being a smoker are substantially greater among people living in rented housing, receiving state benefits, who don't have access to a car, are unemployed or living in overcrowded accommodation". Yet you can sense the incredulity when the following statement "the reasons why this should be the case are not well understood".

It's ironic that the Department of Health does not understand this, when the NHS Direct website clearly states, "unemployment, poverty and lack of education can trigger addictions to develop, as can stress and professional or emotional pressure". As the consultation document notes, smoking remains the primary reason in the gap in life expectancy between rich and poor.

HM Revenue & Customs’ latest estimates on smuggled tobacco show that around 18% of cigarette and 62% of handrolling tobacco consumption is smuggled, while 70% of all large scale cigarette seizures are counterfeit. According to ASH, 1 in 20 smokers in professional groups admit to buying smuggled tobacco but among poorer smokers the figure rises to 1 in 5. This inevitability should encourage the Government to think of other ways other prices rises to tackle smoking.

One of the most publicised suggestions to reducing smoking in the consultation is the plan to ban the display of cigarettes in shops, and to remove branding from cigarette packets so they have "plain packaging" apart from information required by law and health warnings.

Those interested may also want to refer to the Smokefree Action Coalition’s (SAC) recently published ten-point national action plan. SAC comprises most of the major cancer and heart disease charities, trade unions such as the RCN, the Socialist Health Association, and local action groups.

The consultation document 'The Future of Tobacco Control' can be downloaded from the Department of Health website. The deadline for responses is 8th September 2008.