Which workers receive training

Improving the position of earning capacities of production or service workers was the least cited reason for providing training. Overall, only one respondent out of ten provided this type of training, or 30 per cent of the middle and large-sized establishments. These establishments were asked first whether they provided training to all their production or service workers or whether trainees were selected on the basis of some criteria, such as occupation, gender and age. This preference structure is examined just for the 140

establishments that indicated that they provided training/retraining for selected workers (out of the 178 respondents which provided upgrade training).

Age Workers between the ages of 25 and 34 were the most likely to be selected to participate in training activities (an age group selected by 25 per cent of the establishments). Two thirds of the respondents said they preferred to train workers between the ages of 25 and 45. This suggests two things relevant to training policy:

C

Older workers, who may still be ten to twenty years away from the normal retirement age and who may have the highest probability of finding their skills obsolete as new technologies and work methods are adopted, may be the last to benefit from any investments in training on the part of their employers.

C

Public programmes emphasizing apprenticeship-level training may find public awareness and interest lacking, possibly because such programmes have not traditionally been widely available. Twenty-five establishments indicated a preference to train workers between the ages of 20 to 24 (18 per cent of those indicating selection preferences for trainees), and another eight establishments selected the 15 to 19 year-olds as their preferred trainees (5 per cent).

Gender Half of the 140 establishments which used selection criteria to choose which employees to train preferred to train their male employees. Only 4 per cent preferred to train women and the rest indicated no preference on the basis of gender.

The variation in share of women workers included in establishments’ training activities, by size, ownership or industry, was quite modest. Women represented ten per cent of workers receiving training in the smallest establishments and 16 per cent in the largest. There was literally no difference in their training rate between state-owned and privately-owned establishments. Women working in establishments in the rural Governorate of Assuit were least likely to be included in the limited training activities there, where they accounted for only 5 per cent of trainees on average. Those industry sectors that had a higher proportion of women workers also had above-average share of women trainees: 28 per cent of trainees in clothing and textile were women, 17 per cent in food products, and 18 per cent in consumer services.

Education Workers already having some vocational education were more likely to receive further training once employed than those with secondary education or less. About 28 per cent of the respondents (out of 140) preferred to train workers with some vocational training. Secondary education was not viewed as a substitute, with only 5 per cent of the respondents preferring to train workers with a secondary education. This is most probably an indication that employers took previous vocational education as an indication of ability to learn, and that these workers were in the types of jobs (technical, production) in which training could be expected to yield the highest return.

Job-related Employers’ satisfaction with individual employees clearly affected their choice of which employees could participate in training activities: Half of the 140 respondents said job performance was a principal selection factor; 12 per cent evaluated the individual’s leadership qualities, and 8 per cent considered

employees’ years of service with the business. Another fifth of these establishments said their first criteria was the likelihood that workers would not leave the business. Only 5 per cent of these establishments placed a high priority on providing training to workers affected by technical changes in their jobs. This set of job-related preferences also has direct policy implications:

C

Employers have low motivation to provide training in general skills. If the training which an individual employer finds useful is adaptable to a large number of other establishments (either within an industry which has many establishments in the area or skills adaptable to other industries) there is a high probability that the employer that invests in training its workers will find them sought after and bid away by other employers. To the extent that the overall productivity of the Egyptian workforce would benefit from upgrading general skills (literacy, numeracy, general machine aptitude, management) it is unlikely that the private sector will provide a sufficient level of this training. Public training provision should concentrate on this type of training which would benefit not only a large number of workers, but also a large number of businesses without preferential treatment to particular industries or companies.

C

Employers do not have a commitment to retrain workers at risk of displacement due to obsolescence of their skills (whether technical or managerial). This is further corroboration that they would rather compete to hire (younger) workers with desired traits and skills than invest in training middle-aged workers. If these workers are to remain productive, and avoid long-term unemployment, access to public re-training programmes may be crucial.

In document Options for human resources development in Egypt: The labour market context (Page 50-52)