Page 1 of 1
Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:17 pm
by Tony McC
Has anyone any experience of the so-called training offered by the Hard Landscape Training Group (HLTG) operated by BALI?
I've been asking for information on progress for 6 months and heard NOWT. I even emailed the alleged organiser, Kath Walker, and I've not even had the courtesy of a reply even though she was full of good intentions and had big plan for me and the website when the scheme first kicked off back in the spring, but since then....naff all.
Back at GLEE in September, I spoke with the Bradstone team that were subsidising some of the training days, and even they seemed uncertain as to what was happening.
Has this turned into yet another complete bollocks, just as the Interpave/Interlay scheme did? I won't be suprised if it has because the powers-that-be, who know f-all about laying paving, are more interested in their own careers rather than providing the training that our trade desperately needs if we're to raise standards and provide a skilled workforce for the future.
So: I'm looking for feedback. Have you been on a training scheme organised by the HLTG? If so: was it any good? Have you even heard of the HLTG? Would there be demand for a genuine, quality training course if it was to be properly organised and supported by one or two of the more progressive-minded manufacturers?
I'm now providing training aids to a dozen or more colleges, universities and county councils that teach hard-landscaping - I'm sure this could be extended to existing contractors and used to help train young'uns coming into the trade at 16-21 years of age. Is there any interest?
Look at it this way: I can't be any worse than the useless twits that have run the training schemes up to now!
Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:24 am
by mouldmaker
My experience of Bali is limited, and it's a while since I had any dealings with them, so this isn't necessarily relevant, but I remember there was talk way back in my T&C days of a HLTG or suchlike, but Bali's main strength did, at that time at least, seem to be in talk rather than deed.
Why not go it alone, Tony? Your site, and therefore your expertise, seems to be pretty widely known, and I'm sure having a "PavingExpert Approved" logo on a contractor's van would have a certain cachet!
As a manufacturer rather than installer I sometimes have to hold my hands up and admit there's stuff I don't know about installation, but I always know where to look, or where to point my customers if a question arises.
Edited By mouldmaker on 1134462538
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 7:27 pm
by simeonronacrete
We have been "supporters" of the HLTG since it got underway and hope that through it we will get to meet contractors interested in applying our resin bonded aggregate surfacing. The more professionals out there who can do it properly, the better for our customers (and our profit line - let's be honest!).
We haven't been inundated with requests for training - in fact I can count the number of requests on the finger of one hand.
We have had contact with Kath, and even met her. So she does exist.
Let's hope that the HLTG is a viable extension to other trade groups that helps interested parties learn more about what industry has to offer, to raise profiles and standards and avoid many of the postings which so often appear on this site as complaints and moans about poor workanship.
And in time we will all learn to love one another, that hate, jealousy and petty differences will vanish from our minds, that the Chancellor will reverse his U Turn on A Day Pension rule changes, The Simpsons will have their own channel and be advert free....I could go on forever with this.
Anyway, have a good weekend all.
p.s. who will win X Factor???
Sim
Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2005 12:34 am
by Tony McC
Oh, I know Ms Walker exists: I have spoken with her in the past, and she was supposed to be arranging a meeting, but she failed to keep true to her word and buggerall ever came of it! Interlay were similarly gifted when it came to making empty promises. 
However, what concerns me is that the HLTG is failing to communicate with the hundreds of contractors that would be interested in just this sort of scheme. The fact that your product has attracted relatively little interest, Sim, only evidences that lack of communication!
It would be nice the believe the HLTG would eliminate the problems our industry faces, especially regarding accusations of shoddy practices and non-existent skills, but I fear that will always be with us, no matter what we do. However, there is a growing body of professionally-minded contractors and operative that would like some accreditation for their skills, something to say that they are NOT cowboys, and that they do actually have some integrity. When I first spoke with Ms Walker, I naively thought the HLTG could be just that, but I've seen nothing over the past 6 months to persuade me that my growing cynicism is undeserved.
I sent out just over 1,000 emails to contractors on the mailing list and NOT ONE reply from anyone with experience of the HLTG. Admittedly, I've had only 52 replies, but every single one is negative and around half of them would like to know more as this is just the sort of thing that interests them. That little exercise took me about 10 minutes. What has the HLTG done in the past 6 months?
Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 12:51 pm
by john culpin
I don't know anything about the BALI group, but I do attend a local landscape college's Industry liason group. The last meeting brought to light that a) the government doesn't want to fund any training that may benefit industry, prefering to say that industry should pay for it its' self, and b) that EDEXCEL the body that sets and approves the course content will not take on board any feedback that the college gives them ie if the course content has little or no relevence to todays commercial world.
On the possitive side the college is looking to running a series of short courses offering industry driven qualifications.
I don't think we can rely on manufacturers or underfunded trade bodies to supply this training it's going to have to come from us the contractors.
Many thaks for a great website.
Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:59 pm
by Tony McC
After a wait of only 16 weeks, I've had a "Bulletin" dropped in my inbox by the elusive Kath Walker. It's mostly out of date, but I've decided to publish it anyway, so the rest of the industry can see what has been going on, or not going on, as the case may be.
I'm appalled on two levels. Firstly, because it took the so-called National Co-ordinator almost 4 months to reply to a legitimate and polite (for me!) enquiry, and secondly because buggerall has been achieved in the past 9 months, and boasting that there are courses on safe handling of pesticides and chains saws is simply inadequate.
This scheme has really, really annoyed me. I offered help, and heard nothing. I've been ignored to the point of offence and in the meantime they've done next to bloody nothing. As I have pointed out in my response to Ms Walker, over the same period they have been functioning, I have trained more operatives on my own than they have as a group.
Anyway, the "Bulletin" is now online on this week's News page - judge for yourself whether this crowd are a help or a hindrance to our industry.
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:25 pm
by JACK BARTON
Hi Tony,
Like many other contractors I want to raise the profile of our profession and this would really be helped by some good training for those new to the landscaping industry.
I would love to expand my business but finding skilled employees who I could trust to work to my standard is a major hurdle.
The failure of this latest venture to provide training is a real disappointment. I can't understand how a well respected manufacturer like Bradstone could be associated with such an abject failure of an organisation as the HLTG.
Perhaps it is time for all the manufacturers to set up and fund a joint scheme, after all it would be in their interest and help promote the new Trust Mark scheme.
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:44 pm
by Tony McC
I've had a response from Ms Walker and the HLTG - give me a day or two to digest it (I'm tied up with summat else just at the mo') and I'll let you know what's happening.
With regard to a manufacturer-funded training scheme, I think that it is the only viable way to achieve anything approaching a decent training organisation. The manufacturers are making a good living from sales via contractors, and they should be prepeared to put something back into the trade. However, I feel contractors should pay summat towards training because it is them that stand to benefit most over the longer term. The one thing I did admire of the HLTG scheme was that places were subsidised, but not free.
The difficulty for many manufacturers is they cannot see a financial return in funding training. There's no guarantee that a trained contractor will use/recommend products supplied by the manufacturer(s) that support training. However, a trained workforce benefits the industry as a whole, and association with a valued and respected training organisation can only be a benefit for those who contribute to its funding. In this, some manufacturers are more enlightened than othersm, but in my opinion, it would be detrimental to the training organisation for it to be funded by just one or two manufacturers: it needs contributions from ALL the major manufacturers. That's the only way it can be strong enough to be seen as truly impartial and independent.
Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 3:21 pm
by Tony McC
OK - what follows is Ms Walker's response. She claims to be unable to post and asked that I post it on her behalf, which I will do. However, I should point out that I did respond to some of her comments and asked if she wanted to reconsider her allegatiuons before making them public, but she said that she just wants to "call it quits".
This is the official HLTG response to the issues raised in this thread. It's published verbatuim (which means I haven't altered the text in any form whatsoever - no changes, no additions, no deletions)......
"The Hard Landscape Training Group and I as Organiser are receiving a slating on this Website. I am sorry the Bulletin did not come up to Tony’s high standards but, I am not an innovative journalist - I just tell things as they are!
Unfortunately I was not able to follow up my preliminary contact after Tony cancelled our initial meeting. Due to other work and family commitments before Christmas this was not followed up promptly and for this I apologise, but if I had not intended to stay in touch with Tony he would not have received a copy of the Bulletin. From his reputation I expected a lambasting and oh boy, the criticism has come up to expectation. He did warn me he would be hard to please but he didn’t tell me he makes judgements before he knows the facts! The first being that HLTG is not part of BALI.
The accusation that the HLTG were not keeping Bradstone up to date with progress on the sponsored Training Courses prior to GLEE, is totally incorrect. HLTG spent precious funds having flyers printed for GLEE and they were on the Bradstone stand to be distributed – I gather Tony did not receive one of these
Bradstone were encountering problems making it difficult for them to fulfil their side of the Sponsorship – NOT HLTG – to date we have only been able to run a very limited number of sponsored courses. We are still working with Bradstone and will organise more courses if they feel they can proceed.
Please be assured that I WILL be working with Hard Landscape Sector Contractors to make the HLTG a pro-active Group that benefits the industry, but a successful Group does not happen in an instant. Disparaging comments on websites do not help to overcome difficulties – a positive attitude is more constructive for the industry.
HLTG’s one page Website about which Tony was so dismissive was as much as could be afforded by the new Group, the alternative was no site at all!
The following all affect the speed at which any Training Group becomes effective:
• Availability of Marketing/PR funds
• Encouraging companies into undertaking training.
• Finding a national supply of good industry based Instructors
I am disappointed that HLTG is perceived as a waste of time by Tony, it is only now in its tenth month, and it does take time and continued effort to establish a Training Group. We have delivered over 400 trainee training days to date.
The Training Group will not be successful without the support of the industry. Instead of being dismissed as useless if, as you say you are all looking for industry based courses then HLTG should be given a chance to prove itself.
HLTG has been set up to benefit the industry – no-one takes any profits from the Training Group. Support from reputable Contractors is essential to ensure progress..
It will take time and commitment, from the industry as well as the Group to make it successful. What are you afraid of?"
Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 3:45 pm
by Tony McC
And now for my response...
Firstly, I neither asked for nor expected "innovative journalism", just a simple source of accurate information. What I received was largely out-of-date and/or irrelevant. I was so underwhelmed I decide to publish it in its original form so that other redaers could form their own opinion and not be led by me.
Next: I NEVER cancelled any appointment. No appointment was ever agreed. If there was such an appointment, let me know the time, date and location and I'll check my diary, but I *know* that there was never any such appointment. Ever.
Next: I make enquiries and then reach an opinion. I don't make judgement *before* the facts at all. I waited months, expecting something, anything from HLTG, before raisng the issues, which I first did by private email. It was 6 weeks later, when no reply to my email had been forthcoming that I decided to publish my concerns on the website.
If I ask for information, and none is provided, what "judgement" can I reach except that I'm being ignored and that the HLTG is not the sound organisatiojn it needs to be if progress is to be made.
Next: having reveiwed my comments, I did state that HLTG was "operated by BALI", and I apologise if that is not the case, but somewhere along the line, I was told BALI were to be the overseeing authority. I have tried to find a letter or email to that effect, but no luck so far. I have a feeling it came from a comment made by an employee of a certain manufacturer that is NOT Bradstone. However, the fact remains: if BALI is in no way connected to the management of HLTG, I apologise unreservedly.
The accusation I made regarding Bradstone not being kept up-to-date came from within Bradstone, from two people in particular. I'm not sure I have the right to name them, but those comments were made to me during a discussion that took place regarding the role of HLTG and its future.
And I *did* receive one of the flyers - my primary contact at Bradstone was less than pleased that I hadn't been made aware of the one-day courses prior to me picking up the leaflet at GLEE.
Positive attitude - how can I be positive when I hear NOTHING for months and my emails go unanswered?
Website - I built all my own site, and it's probably cost me no more than you've spent on the one-page information-free website that is currently online. I offered help with a website months ago, when we spoke on the 'phone, and my offer was never taken up. I have self-evident skills (allegedly) in website creation and, more importantly, in creating content that is directly relevant to the hard-landscaping trade. I operate this website on a not-for-profit basis, as I believe the only way to run a successful information resource is for it to be non-commercial, and so I did not request any fee or other remuneration when I offered my help back in Spring 2005. I would gladly have provided a HLTG website completely free of charge, if only my offer had been accepted.
Waste of time - 10 months and 400 trainee days - 40 per month? Speaks for itself. Not only that, the relevance of some of these "trainee days" has to be questioned. Short courses looking at pesticides and Japanese Knotweed are all well and good, but they are not *directly* relevant to hard-landscaping.
I offered my assistance 10 months ago and I was ignored. I feel I have a right (and a duty!) to complain, and will continue to do so for as long as I perceive there to be no progress. I have several manufacturers, ranging from small regional producers to a couple of multinationals, that are keen to help a dedicated training group such as HLTG, but they are waiting for me to say I think it is worthwhile and they won't get egg on their collective faces by becoming involved.
All I'm afraid of, seeing that you ask, is betting on a three-legged donkey. Many contractors and several manufacturers rely, in part, on my judgement. I have a duty to them, and to my wider readership, to say it as I see it. How can we provide help and assistance if we never know what's going on???
I don't want to argue, and I'm saddened that it has needed to me to publish criticism on a website before a response was forthcoming. This should have, and could have, been done behind closed doors, but HLTG ignored me, either by accident or design, and the only way I've been able to get answers is by "going public". Surely that can't be right?