September 2024
Introduction
The Restaurant Association of New Zealand (the Restaurant Association) welcomes the opportunity to submit on the 2024 vocational education and training reforms.
The mission of the Restaurant Association of New Zealand is to be the link between good food and good business so that our Member’s restaurant or café can succeed. We’re passionate about our vibrant industry, which is full of interesting, talented and entrepreneurial people.
Since 1972, the Restaurant Association has worked to offer advice, help and assistance in every facet of the vibrant and diverse hospitality industry. Our Members cover the length and breadth of the country: we are organised into 13 regional branches and led by a national office located in Mt Eden, Auckland.
We are concerned that the consultation and proposals within are primarily concerned with financial viability of the ITP sector, instead of focusing on outcomes. This has led to ongoing structural reforms that encourage high volume, low cost delivery of training and further education, but has not met industry needs leading to a rejection of centrally developed programmes in favour of more innovative solutions developed in partnership with industry.
The Restaurant Association submits that the ITP sector must be focused fond elivering the practical skills that businesses need, by:
5.1. being responsive to industry needs
5.2. working with industry to forecast training and workforce requirements
5.3. aligning education and immigration policy settings, and
5.4. developing standards and qualifications that ensure graduates are work-ready.
The Restaurant Association submits that these actions will create greater confidence in the ITP sector and deliver the financial viability sought through reform of the sector.
Consultation questions
The Restaurant Association is concerned that the consultation document lacks sufficient information regarding the risks, benefits and detail of the proposed reforms. Where possible, we have attempted to answer below the questions posed in the consultation document.
Proposal 1: Creating a healthy ITP network that responds to regional needs
Do you agree with the consultation document’s statements on the importance of ITPs?
Why/Why not?
The Restaurant Association agrees that ITPs are an important part of our tertiary education and training system. However, we submit that their importance is directly linked to their ability to meet the needs of specific industries, regions and learners—and at present, not all central institutions have not been doing so of their own accord, instead requiring industry to lead the development of formal qualifications or private training establishments to fill the void.
This is not the fault of individual institutions—rather, the Restaurant Association submits that the central vocational education system is not set up in a way that can rapidly respond to industry needs, regional requirements and learner demand.
For New Zealand’s vocational education system to remain domestically viable, the system must be able to adapt to the real-world needs of learners. This includes recognition of the fact that a key barrier to entering further education is the need to earn a living—and that undertaking unpaid training reduces an individual’s ability to take on paid employment. It is for this reason that the Restaurant Association
supports the retention and expansion of both managed apprenticeships and work-based learning.
What do you consider to be the main benefits and risks of reconfiguring the ITP sector?
The Restaurant Association considers the primary benefit to be attained through the reconfiguring of the ITP sector should be the creation of a vocational education system that is more responsive to the needs of industries, regions and learners, recognising the unique needs of industries and regions while also identifying common areas where cross-industry needs can be collectively addressed.
However, we are concerned at the ongoing reform and redesign of the ITP sector over recent years. While well intentioned, this has significantly impacted industry confidence in our ITP sector, leading to a lack of suitable training opportunities that meet the needs of the hospitality sector.
It is important to note that there is not a unified view across industries about what the best system looks like. While there are some areas of agreement across industries, the most pressing needs for each sector are more likely to be unique, requiring boutique standards and qualifications to be developed that meet their individual needs.
Employer satisfaction with the vocational education system is critical to ensuring that our ITP sector is delivering the training required, however at present this satisfaction is not formally measured. The Restaurant Association recommends that a reconfigured ITP sector should incorporate high levels of engagement with employers and industries, to ensure the sector is providing a valuable pipeline of
skilled graduates who can enter the workforce without the need for retraining.
Do you support creating a federation model for some ITPs? Why/Why not?
The Restaurant Association supports the idea of a federation model that creates greater efficiencies within the vocational education system, however we are concerned by the apparent move to revive failing institutions that have not adapted to meet the needs of industry. In that regard, the Restaurant Association does not support the redirection of funding for work-based learning to focus on class-based, theoretical delivery of training.
Success in the hospitality industry is dependent on both ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ skills. While the soft skills required for our industry (e.g. customer service) can in theory be taught through a generic qualification, the hard skills required for specific roles (e.g. cookery and barista skills) cannot. Further, the Restaurant Association’s experience is often that where programmes are delivered across industries, the unique needs of our industry are often overlooked.
The Restaurant Association submits that, across the ITP sector, a catalogue of baseline qualifications should be available to ITPs both within and outside of the federation, who can then further develop these qualifications to meet the specific needs of industries within their regions. We submit that the creation of base training programmes that can be adapted in this way will support greater efficiency and effectiveness within the vocational education system, by reducing the need for constant review and replacement of specialised programmes, as well as enabling a more responsive ITP sector that can quickly stand up programmes for students.
What are the minimum programmes and roles that need to be delivered by the new ITP
sector for your region?
As discussed above, the minimum programmes which must be delivered by the new ITP sector cannot be defined at one point in time. The needs of industries and regions change constantly, and the system must be set up in a way that is responsive to these changes.
To do so, a successful ITP sector must be closely linked with industry, and must be flexible enough to adapt to the needs of a broad range of businesses. For regions heavily dependent on particular industries, ITP’s should be enabled to pursue specialisation, and able to deliver alongside industry where needed.
Further, while every region in New Zealand needs a pipeline of skilled hospitality workers, learner choice will always influence enrolments and therefore the viability of ITP courses. Therefore, the ability for regional providers to swiftly assess, onboard and offboard particular courses in response to demand is crucial to remaining competitive and viable both domestically and internationally.
Proposal 2: Establishing an industry-led system for standards-setting and industry training
Which option do you prefer overall? Why?
The Restaurant Association believes that industry is best placed to organize industry coverage, and it is unclear under Option B what a new organisation will look like with regard to separating the work based learning divisions, or what levers the organisations would have to support innovation in the system.
On balance, we prefer Option A as it is the most likely to ensure standard setting is industry-led. For our industry, the Restaurant Association supports the establishment of a Hospitality Industry Training Board, as we believe this will provide a unique opportunity to lead the management of our industry qualifications and apprenticeship schemes.
The Restaurant Association recognises that Option A is close to a return to the old model, and therefore submits that before any reconfiguring of the system, there must be solutions identified to address the issues experienced under the ITO model, including:
23.1. inconsistencies in levels of service delivery across industries, with smaller industries and those that are not traditionally considered as ‘apprenticeship industries’ (such as hospitality) feeling excluded from the system, and
23.2. ITO’s monopolising funding, while employers and industry were responsible for making the system work effectively.
We also recognise that under the ITO model, there was a lack of national standards and quality assurance, resulting in inconsistent levels of employability of graduates. It is important to ensure that someone trained in the far north, or the deep south, can perform to the same level as someone trained in our main cities – especially in an industry like hospitality, which is built on flexibility and the natural flow of talent between businesses.
Further, the Restaurant Association believes there is opportunity for hospitality apprenticeships to be delivered at a secondary school level, and submits that secondary school apprenticeship pathways should be further developed and deployed as part of a reconfigured system.
This is done well in Australia, in recognition of the fact that not everyone wants to go to university. Trades training in schools is a recognised and valid alternative to university entrance exams, and assists with ensuring that everyone is either earning or learning upon completion of their secondary schooling.
What are the main features and functions that Industry Training Boards (Option A) need to be successful?
The main features and functions needed to ensure Industry Training Boards are successful include:
27.1. being responsive to industry needs
27.2. working with industry to forecast training and workforce requirements
27.3. aligning education and immigration policy settings, and
27.4. developing standards and qualifications that ensure graduates are work-ready.
Under Option A, how important is it that Industry Training Boards and non-Industry Training Boards be able to arrange industry training? Why?
While it is important that Industry Training Boards and non-Industry Training Boards are able to arrange industry training, what is critical is that these boards arrange industry training in collaboration with industry to ensure training is responsive to the actual needs of businesses and employers. The only way to
achieve this is to ensure industry is represented on these boards, and that the boards are responsible for ensuring high satisfaction with the services they provide.
What are the main features and functions that industry standards-setters (Option B) need to be successful?
Industry standard setters must be closely linked to their industries. The Restaurant Association submits that, while Ringa Hora (the Services Workforce Development Council) has improved the ways in which our industry can influence the development of qualifications, the broad grouping of service industries does not enable the appropriate responsiveness to meet the needs of the hospitality industry as they become evident.
Further, the current suite of training for hospitality provided through the ITP sector has not instilled confidence in the quality of training, with employers noting that many ‘qualified’ ITP graduates require on-the-job retraining to meet the realities of the workplace.
Are there any key features of the Workforce Development Councils that need to be retained in the new system?
The voice of industry associations, who have a broad mandate as membership organisations representative of their industries, are critical to the improvement of industry settings. The ability for specific sectors within broader industry groupings (for example, the ability of the hospitality, tourism and retail sectors within the Services grouping) has been an important benefit of WDC’s that must be retained.
The ability for WDC’s to inform government investment decisions through monitoring demand should also be retained and strengthened, through the divestment of power to direct funding where necessary to the future equivalent of WDC’s.
Are there any key features of how the previous Industry Training Organisations worked that should be reintroduced in the new system?
Despite a lack of consistency across the sector, those ITOs that had a close relationship with industry and tailored their offerings to meet industry needs were the ones that were most successful under the previous model.
ITO’s also undertook a number of additional funded and unfunded activities, such as industry promotion, school transition programmes, job placements, additional tuition, literacy and numeracy support, capability building for training and business planning and pastoral care and support. These activities should be retained and funded under the new system.
What are the possible benefits and risks of having a short moratorium on new industry training providers while the new system is set up?
The Restaurant Association does not support a moratorium on industry training providers. Greater innovation is needed in the system to meet the always changing needs of industry, and the ability for employers to choose their training provider is critical to ensuring innovation in the system. Implementing a moratorium on innovation at a time where many industries, including hospitality, are facing skills shortages will inevitably stunt the progress made in addressing our skill and workforce shortages.
Proposal 3: A funding system that supports stronger vocational education
To what extent do you support the proposed funding shifts for 2026?
The Restaurant Association is concerned that the current proposal prioritizes class-based learning and the revival of brick-and-mortar institutions over adaptability and delivery of training that meets industry needs.
Work-based learning has increased in profitability for a reason—it works. The significant increase in work-based learning has not been driven only by Government investment and skills programmes, it has also been a response to the severe skill shortages driven by a lack of coordinated policy across government.
Successive governments have failed to align immigration and education policy settings to recognise the lack of domestic workers with the skills to fill vacant roles, and the need to attract overseas talent that supports domestic upskilling.
Subsequently, work-based learning was adopted by many to both fill those skills gaps and upskill domestic workers at the same time.
As noted in the consultation paper, ITP’s have experienced a trend of declining enrolments for a number of years. While Te Pūkenga may have failed to realise the possible cost-savings and efficiencies of a centralised model, basing further funding decisions on attempts to balance the sectors profitability rather than ensuring institutions are successful because they are delivering education products and services that business and learners value, will drive a work programme based on incorrect fundamental assumptions.
The Restaurant Association submits that the continuing decline of ITP enrollments is evidence of the systems inability to respond to demand, rather than an indication of the need for increased funding to support an unsustainable and clunky system.
How should standards-setting be funded to ensure a viable and high-quality system?
The Restaurant Association agrees that standard-setting should be funded, however we are concerned by the lack of detail regarding estimated costs of doing so and are therefore unable to give a more fulsome response to this question.
In principle, the Restaurant Association believes that the focus of funding in our ITP sector should be on the delivery of training to grow the skill base and workforce of New Zealanders.
Industry Training Boards (ITB’s) should be given the power to incorporate industry endorsed training as well as formal qualifications, and a comprehensive review of regulations should be undertaken to ensure the existing confusion over responsibilities and powers within the system are clarified and streamlined.
The Restaurant Association supports BusinessNZ’s suggestion that standard setting functions are funded from the removal of the strategic component rather than work-based learning rates.
How should the funding system recognise and incentivise the role that ITPs play in engaging with industry, supporting regional development, and/or attracting more international students to regions?
The Restaurant Association does not believe that additional funding incentives are necessary for ITP’s to engage with industry and support regional development. The mandate of ITP’s should be entirely focused on delivering effective training that is responsive to the needs of industry with clear accountability to users of the system.
An ITP sector that is built on these principles will deliver a successful vocational education system that is focused on employment outcomes for graduates, and will deliver incentives in the form of a viable, sustainable and thriving vocational education system.
When it comes to attracting international students to regions, the Restaurant Association is concerned that for hospitality, there is a current lack of understanding in the way international qualifications and experience are recognised within our vocational education system, as well as within government as a whole.
Immigration and education policies are regularly treated as separate topics, however a common issue in our industry is the inability for the government to determine a visa applicant’s level of skill and often making incorrect assumptions based on formal qualifications. This strict interpretation of the rules without any knowledge of the context of our industry has led to both a shortage of appropriately skilled staff, and a bottleneck in visa processing, which must be addressed.
A priority for the Restaurant Association is the development of frameworks against which overseas registrations, certifications and training can be measured against domestic qualifications and standards. This would support the growth of our domestic workforce, as well as the level of training that can be provided domestically – our hospitality industry is already renowned around the world, and there is no reason that this reputation cannot extend to our educational offerings.
Concluding questions
Could there be benefits or drawbacks from these proposals for particular industries or types of businesses?
Despite being closely linked, the hospitality, tourism and retail sectors have distinct needs when it comes to training and qualifications, and we submit that any removal of the requirement to consult with industries such as ours on the development of both standards and training programmes will be detrimental to the development of our workforce.
The Restaurant Association submits that the requirement to consult with industry on these issues should be retained, to ensure that the standards and programmes developed by industry standards setters meet the real-world needs of our industry.
The new system must recognise and consider the different types of roles in hospitality and their needs. Under the previous system, and frankly also under the current system, students were ‘graduating’ with a certification but were not job ready – businesses were hiring ‘qualified’ cooks who had never stepped foot in a commercial kitchen, so while they had the theoretical knowledge of the job, their training on the practicalities of their role was virtually non-existent.
Are there any other ideas, models, or decisions for redesigning the vocational education system that the Government should consider?
The Restaurant Association’s cookery traineeship programme, Te Tupu Tahi, is an example of hybrid learning that delivers training in an efficient way, ensuring graduates who complete their qualification are actually equipped with the necessary skills and experience required to go straight into work.
Te Tupu Tahi was developed by the Restaurant Association in partnership with NorthTec, in recognition of the specific need for chefs in the Northland region. Recognising the distances that some students would have to travel across the region to participate in this programme, Te Tupu Tahi is run as a part class-based, part work-based and part online programme that gives students the opportunity to learn locally while also earning money – a significant benefit as we recognise that for many, the choice to study means being unable to work, resulting in a decision not to upskill with formal training.
