The C & G farce....

[secret squirrel]

Again as a short pre-amble, I'm not knocking time served or apprenticeships (I don't know why I always put this but it does seem sensible).

This thread isn't even about plumbing quals.

In 1984 I joined the Army and did some C & G quals which were 777 part 1 and 2. On leaving the army 5 years later as a communication expert, being able to read morse code to a high level, work digital, HF & VHF, data burst, frequency hoppers blah blah etc etc. I had decided that I wanted to continue in the communications industry. However, it turned out that my quals were about as useful as the proverbial "chocolate tea pot" every where I turned it appeared that I had to attend college to get more qualifications by another body.

Here "WE" are again, my C & G along with a lot of other qualified people with this qual are told that it is as much use as a "F@@t in a space suit" I appreciate that quals are not always necessary, (my better half is the only one in her work place without a degree in banking or finance and only answers to the general manager).

I also agree that this is a small industry and everyone know everyone and you'd employ someone you know. This is the same with EVERY industry I've worked in. People get a phone call and told to apply etc. Publishing the job is only a formality etc.

My issue is the C & G body, Bpec and the rest of the bodies. It appears that you need these quals but its about who you know and who you've done work for etc.

IF all these quals are worthless Bpec unvented, C & G, Water regs, energy efficiency, part P. Not just plumbing but communications, plastering, carpentry etc etc......

I've never been asked for A level O level certificates ever!

What is the point of them, any of them?

 

[dontknowitall]

As a fast tracker, I agree with you (even if loads of others might not). I think when you're working for an employer they probably are more important. The reason I took these exams was twofold. 1) they were part of the course I did and 2) I wanted a better understanding of what was involved in plumbing.

One or two others on the forum (myself included) have compared this to passing the driving test. They say it only teaches you drive, while driving experience teaches you how to drive safely.

I did the advanced driving test (and rolled a car a few weeks afterwards) but the reason I did it was I knew I wanted to drive fast, but wanted to learn more quickly what all the safety issues were. It could be argued that doing the advanced test was fast tracking for experience (despite my crash!) It was another qualification which no one has asked me about but it was more for me than anything else.

I also feel there's another element to this and that is keeping more people in employment. The only people who really get anything done in the construction industry are the builders, electricians, plumbers, etc. As far as the "qualifying industry" is concerned, I reckon most of the positions are made up of non jobs, but at least it keeps more people off the street.

And, for the record, my feeling is that experience is more important than pure qualifications and I can understand the ill feelings of those who've been in the industry for many years who now see a heap of new people entering with little knowledge apart from knowing the theory.

There's a catch 22 though as to why this seems to have happened. Jobs don't seem to last for life and if you're middle aged with family and made redundant there is no way you can toddle off for one evening a week for 2-3 years while learning a trade and spend the rest of the week at home. You need to keep earning.

While plumbers are not taking people on (and who can blame them when most will turn into competitors?) and while the government - sorry State - does not provide full time courses attached to experience in the field, the fast track courses are the only option. There are few industries outside construction where training is less than six months and you can set yourself up as self employed.

Returning to the qualifications, the system appears to be in a right mess as it seems C&G is only a stepping stone to an NVQ and it's next to impossible to obtain an NVQ without proven experience. It's just jobs (or non jobs) for the boys.

Secret Squirrel - you hit the nail on the head though. In all of life, it's not what you know but who you know.

I seem to have rambled on here ...!!

 

[secret squirrel]

dontknowitall,

Nope, I don't think you rambled on but brought up some very good points worthy of further discussion by others.

I agree that all knowledge is good regarding a structured way of learning (fast track or otherwise) whether plumbing, electrics or any subject for that matter.

For want of a better expression it "peeves me" that C & G amongst the rest of them, a levels, o levels, degrees etc. Seem to have a monopoly on quals. They all seem worthless, everything is easy than it was the year before, the standard continually drops....IF you believe what you read in the press.

I agree the state is pathetic and concentrates it efforts on the school leaver OR the terminally unemployed.

I have a whole list of useless qualifications ranging from basic German to curtain making, book keeping, law, fitness, scuba diving etc. You can not move on in ANY field of education without first completing the basic entry level then you can't get employed in that field because you don't know anyone or your too old.

Its all fixed but open to how? every college has to pay the bodies for exams etc and depending on the marking mechanism used these bodies set the pass rate.

Scuba diving is an example, you have to do your open water (padi) which limits you considerably, so you pay again to become an advanced diver, then to become a master diver you need to complete 5 speciality dive quals ranging from night diving to boat diving. The you have to do a first aid course and move on to be a rescue diver then further up its dive master, where you basically work for free...... each time your paying....

"remember when replying to this thread its not all about fast track, apprenticeships and plumbing, I'm trying to broaden the issue"

 

[Jimbob]

haha
qualifications are second to experiance and references. I have friends in army who got NVQ's in this and that, but end of the day when they come out, its not going to be worth alot.

NVQ in my book means... Not Very Qualified

 

[secret squirrel]

Jimbob,

I agree with you regards quals, why don't you need a degree in law to become a lawyer? the one of the bodies covering accountants is the AAT level 1 is a joke setting up a portfolio health and safety etc....

I would argue the point that quals are second to experience and refs, I would say its a third behind knowing the right people.

There are people I know in London in very highly paid jobs that meet up in Starbucks for a coffee and to have an "interview".

Ok, hows this for a comparison, someone whose just done a degree in media studies, who also has poor A level results, goes for a job and instantly commands more money than a skilled tradesman whose spent the last 4-5 years working in a trade on an apprenticeship?

 

[ChipDoctor]

Squirrel,

I agree with much of what you have said but sighed to myself and thought, it's just the way people relate to each other and nothing will change that.

I was once told in relation to successful sales that 'People buy from people'. Sounds obvious at a superficial level but below that it means you and I and everyone else have to trust the person we're dealing with before we'll do business. That is why the best salesmen spend a huge amount of time trying to build up a relationship by finding out your likes and dislikes. When they have that rapport and trust is established on both sides sales and business can be made.

You can have the best product in the world but if the relationship is not there you won't sell it.

What has this to do with qualifications? They establish a base that allows someone to believe at the very least you know what you are talking about and so they are more likely to do business with you. That could be buying something you recommend or selling your time to them to do a job they cannot do. Over time the human relationship is built up and the fact that you have a degree, C&G or an A level in flower arranging is not important.

The qualifications get your foot in the door only. What then matters is how quickly you build the relationship of trust with a potential employer or customer. That is why the interview is so much more important in a job search than the qualifications as it's there where you have (arguably) only the first 5 minutes to show that you are one of the good guys. I have interviewed many people and I still cannot stop making my mind up about someone's capability in the first 5 minutes. I went against that gut reaction once, trusting in a man's experience and qualifications but he ended up getting the sack a year later as no one could work with him.

I could ramble on further but I hope I've made my point. Cheers

 

[HTB]

Squirrel,, you do need a degree in law (or recognised equivalent) to become a lawyer, what makes you think you don't?

However, I agree much of what you say, but I'm all for qualifications as proof of knowledge.

 

[secret squirrel]

HTB,

After you have finished a degree, you then go to a firm of lawyers and if they decided to take you on they then sponsor you to go away and do further training (cost about £12k). This is when you do your lawyer bit, your then working as an "apprentice" lawyer being supervised. Dependent on the firm you then "flit" from one branch to another doing Property, criminal, family law etc until you decide what your good at Or have an apptitude for.

A top London law firm will look at anyone with a good quality degree from a good university. I know a partner in one of these firms who has a degree in English!

If you have a first in English Lit from Cambridge/Oxford you will stand more of a chance than someone with a law degree from a good Uni. Again, I have a very good friend who was working for a local law firm (for free) with a degree in law, promised a job, then "hoofed out" for someone with an unrelated degree (+law qual) because they came from a top uni. When my friend asked why? he was told thats the market at the moment. He was also told that if he wanted he can continue to work for free!

Same as banking, again, I know someone who earns £60k plus who is relatively senior and the job required a degree education, this person has a degree in MUSIC!

The other end of the scale, a good friend of mine speaks four languages fluently, qualified in all of them. Earns £35k. She picks up vocabulary books and reads them for fun!

When I found this out I was a bit shocked.

 

[REDSAW]

HTB,


Same as banking, again, I know someone who earns £60k plus who is relatively senior and the job required a degree education, this person has a degree in MUSIC!

The other end of the scale, a good friend of mine speaks four languages fluently, qualified in all of them. Earns £35k. She picks up vocabulary books and reads them for fun!

When I found this out I was a bit shocked.

you mean, you know a banker with a music degree, speaks 4 languages and all in b*** s**t. ah, thats how the country got into this mess. lol

 

[Winston]

Certificates just indicate the ability to remember what you have been taught it does not however prove that you can put into practise in real life.

 

[secret squirrel]

I agree with you winston.

Posting this thread was quite interesting because quite often I read in the forum quals are not worth anything etc. I thought I'd try and broaden the issue to get forum members views on all quals etc.

I thought there'd be a far better response and a more diverse range of opinion, as there hasn't been, when I read on ANY forum about quals not being worth this or that I will skip over them.

When I'm feeling braver I have another idea for a thread but not yet. I'm on holiday in a weeks time so maybe before I go.............

 

[HTB]

An interesting post/thread.

I queried the "law degree" bit as, when considering a career change some years ago, I attended university (part time,,2 evenings per week over a 4 year period)) and succeeeded in acheiving my qualifying Law Degree (LLB Hons), and was priveliged enough to be offered 2 separate opportunities of training contracts with Law Firms in Cardiff, through personal recommendations from my lecturers. But I declined to pursue it.

Regarding qualifications being a measure of "something", I consistantly find that those people who are the most vociferous and least positive on this subject tend not to have many of them.

Rest assured, there are plenty of people in the world, often in positions of responsibility, who know how to value another persons educational qualifications, work experience, life skills and personal qualities.

In case you're wondering, I did a stint of (voluntary) work experience in the summer holidays in my local Citizen's Advice Bureaux in order to gain, just that, legal work experience.

It proved very useful, and helped me to form the opinion that an office based, purely procedural, bureaucratic job was not for me, so I decided to retrain as a plumber instead, and became self employed at such.

The legal knowledge I gained at Uni, has proved most useful in business, had a young recently qualified Solicitor once start to get a bit heavy concerning the details of our contract, (he was being a *wat) and the look on his face when I started pointing out the "weaknesses" in his case (even citing relevant case law) was priceless.

Told him if he didn't pay up I'd report him to the Law Society, who would not approve of his underhandedness, and he coughed up on the spot!!