Scottish Government

CHAPTER SEVEN SULF IN THE FUTURE

SUSTAINABILITY

Significant Others

7.1 The overwhelming view of these respondents was that learning activities within unions were not self-sustaining at this point. Some criticisms were raised that insufficient thought had been given in project design, and in the initiative as a whole, to sustainability beyond the individual projects. Central to future sustainability was the need to embed effective ULR activity both within workplaces and within union structures and processes. While there was no suggestion that, in the absence of any funding, ULRs would cease their activities, there was a strongly held view that these activities would lack sufficient support.

"If we were to pull a project worker out tomorrow … I'd be concerned it could fall over quite quickly though because it's still quite young and it's still fragile and the infrastructure does need building."

7.2 There was, however, a clear awareness among unions that SULF funding would not continue to be available indefinitely. There was also some evidence of changes in the direction of greater sustainability:

• The profile of learning has been raised among key union officials
• Greater awareness amongst members will generate greater demands on unions to sustain a commitment to learning
• There is a clear commitment across unions to mainstreaming learning
• Unions are investing their own resources in learning
• Specific responsibility for learning activities is being given to union officers
• Unions are beginning to draw upon alternative sources of funding to support learning

7.3 What can be achieved in terms of developing sustainability is illustrated in the FBU case study below.

Case Study 7: FBU and Sustainability

The Fire Service was perceived by many when they joined as 'a career job'. Many of its fire-fighters are non-traditional learners, almost exclusively male and ex-services: 'very macho,' said one ULR, 'very chest beating and very working class'. The workforce composition is changing but many are also part-time, working additionally in shops, factories or for the local council. As the UPO explained 'most will have been out of education for quite some time'. And even at school, many were not enthused. Education was less of a priority, more something to be avoided: 'You were almost a traitor to your class if you decided you wanted to study, as ridiculous as that seems. But at the time that's how it was. Watching football [was] perceived as being more important than studying,' explained one ULR.

Not that many opportunities for learning existed prior to SULF. Available learning for fire-fighters centred on initial and then promotion-related training and 'if you weren't interested in that, [management] didn't want to know you,' stated one ULR. Any other learning opportunities were perceived to be reserved for management or for staff at headquarters.

The FBU's aim with SULF is 'to encourage our members to better themselves and educate', explained the UPO. Management have provided support services and financial subsidies for this learning. Fire-fighters can even learn at work, priorities allowing. Various rounds of SULF funding have enabled the FBU to incrementally develop lifelong learning across the service by building infrastructure and interest. A pilot in 2 brigades has been rolled out to all 8, a network of ULRs has been established across Scotland, learners have undertaken 'taster' learning sessions and then progressed to participate in full accredited courses. IT and foreign languages have been particularly popular. Moreover the brigades' senior management are now discussing how the initiative can be made sustainable nationally. Some of the structures necessary for that sustainability are already being put in place through newly introduced brigade-based learning agreements between the union and management, and union and management sit together now in cross-union brigade learning forums that make lifelong learning an institutionalised feature of employee relations.

The change in learning culture is dramatic and the aim now is to ensure it continues. Even during the difficult strike, lifelong learning was deliberately kept as an issue separate from other negotiations. Realising that better qualified fire-fighters help the service modernise and that with SULF, the 'workforce is better and happier', management support was maintained. 'It's been a very positive thing in a period of negativity,' said the UPO; a training manager agreeing that SULF 'has probably been the type of project where we can learn to trust each other again'. As a consequence, 'In the 3 years we've been doing this we've not had one argument, we've never left the room where we're not smiling, there's never been a point where we've not realised that we're pulling in the same direction,' said the UPO, 'No matter what else is going on, we want a working partnership on this.'

7.4 A range of estimates (from 2-5 years) was given as to when union-led learning activities would be sustainable without SULF funding, and union respondents were at pains to stress that these timescales reflected the nature of the challenges in both instituting a learning culture within unions and workplaces and embedding ULR roles.

"What the Executive need to do is to think how long it took to move from a situation where a hazard in the workplace was seen as an opportunity to negotiate some danger money … that is what the union role was when it came to health and safety - to a situation where everybody understands that the union's role is to help remove hazards at work. Now when you are thinking about learning in unions you're thinking about the same order of cultural change and there is little reason for thinking it should happen any quicker."

"When we talk about creating learning cultures and learning environments, those things don't happen overnight and they don't happen certainly within the lifetime of a SULF project."

SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE CHANGE

Significant Others

7.5 The most commonly cited change required of SULF in the future related to the need to develop and support ULRs more effectively, and to provide opportunities for them to network more effectively, share good practice and learn from each other.

" ULRs are a secret army of people who if they were really activated … there's nowhere near the potential reached with this. They need the blessing of unions and employers to be stretching their wings as a secret army."

[A model ULR is a] "… a champion of learning within the organisation, a champion of proactivity, someone who is out there actually physically going to the members, knocking on doors, possibility the benefits and helping with the follow through. A ULR shouldn't be somebody who prints a sheet of paper saying 'do you know that the union is saying you should have an entitlement to learning, here's what you should do'. They have to be proactive, they have to actually take on the role of almost an evangelist for the value of learning, they have to be trained, someone needs to take responsibility for ensuring they have the right skills and competencies and attitudes to do the job and continue to develop them".

7.6 The next most frequently cited area for improvement focused on the need for effective links to other relevant organisations. Involvement in SULF, directly or indirectly, had shown that there is considerable room for significant collaboration between unions and a range of organisations concerned with the expansion of learning and with the broader business community, for example in the promotion of ILAs or in the work of Sector Skills Councils. Some criticism was aimed at the differences in levels and forms of engagement with SULF across the enterprise network:

"At the moment it's patchy, it's sporadic, it's not consistent and it's not helpful - as a consequence members get different services across the country."

7.7 Other suggested improvements included the need for more innovation in project design, the targeting of rural areas, and greater collaboration on bids relating to processes that could be replicated across unions.

7.8 Lastly, a number of respondents raised questions about the future relationship between SULF and the Scottish Union Learning Academy. In the main this concern focused on the continued relevance of SULF with the establishment of the Academy and the configuration of its remit.

Survey Findings

7.9 Union project officers were asked how future SULF projects could be made more effective. The responses are outlined in Table 7.1

Table 7.1: Making projects more effective (No., %)

7.10 The largest single change to future effectiveness concerned changes in funding regulations to make SULF more compatible with the ULF in the England and Wales (18%) and where funding timescales are longer and there is provision for capital expenditure. There were also those who wanted tighter monitoring, more encouragement for employers to take part and more emphasis on the sustainability of projects (12% respectively).

7.11 For employers, most thought that more employers could be encouraged to get involved with SULF through improved marketing (N = 14) and promotion of the organisational benefits from involvement (N = 8). Other improvements concerned:

• More support for ULRs by unions
• Better 'buy-in' of operational management
• Improved evaluation