Supervisory Training Proposal

Document Sample
Supervisory Training Proposal Powered By Docstoc
					Industry Partnership Meeting Summary
September 6, 2007
The meeting of representatives of the Great Lakes Building Trades and local
contractors was held on September 6, 2007 at 3:30 pm at the Maennerchor Club.

In Attendance were:

George Sommer-Sheet Metal
Dan Harmon-Plumbers
Dale Niemenski-Operating Engineers
Chip Folletti-Carpenters
John Tretter-Laborers
Gena Shingle-Erie Construction Council
Matt Sahlmann-E.E. Austin and Son
Emily Moore-Strategy Solutions
Nick Schultz-Strategy Solutions
Paul Newlin-RCWE
Jim Schreiber-Eriez Construction
Mike Nesterick-Painters
Doug Armstrong- MCA of NWPA
Tim Hepler- Electricians

Proposal for Supervisory Training

Nick distributed the Association of General Contractor’s proposal for Supervisory
Training. The training would take place in Erie with the location/s determined by
the group. The training schedule runs from October to mid-January and consists
of 10 modules that are delivered over a two eight hour classes. If the group
decided to send 75 workers through the training at a cost of $395 a module per
person, completing 10 modules to receive certification the total cost for the group
is $296,250. The preferred method of payment is included in the proposal
however the training coordinator will work with the group and is aware that this
training is being funded by a grant. This cost would come out of what the group
is awarded for the incumbent worker grant.

The 10 modules cover the areas of training that the contractors/trade
representatives requested. The minimum and maximum number of students per
class is 25, so the proposal suggests running three classes simultaneously with
Industry Partnership Meeting Summary
September 6, 2007
25 students in each. The number of students in each class per trade can be
determined by the group.

The group voiced some concerns with the proposal. Points of that discussion are
listed below:

      Concern that the timeframe for completion is too tight especially with
       hunting season
      Working out the logistics with the contractors to see if they will let the
       workers leave work for two days to complete this training
      Some unions have more interest in the program than others, some
       unions/contractors felt that other types of training may be more necessary
      There is a ¼ cash match required by the state for all training funds given
       to the private sector, the other 75% is an in-kind match which consists of
       wages, benefits, etc. There was also some concern that groups would not
       be able to get the cash match quick enough to start the training in Oct.
      Whether consortium training or individual training is more important

The group was then informed of the “train the trainer” idea, which could save the
group the cash match. The decisions regarding who goes to training, how many
classes should be run and when need to be determined by the group in order to
move forward with the proposal. Nick and the staff at the WIB will work with
Partnership members to answer any further questions about funding and training

Description: Supervisory Training Proposal document sample