Skill development is a very ‘in’ topic for the industry today, especially as most centres face shortage of
labour… Understanding the critical need, an integrated skill development scheme was initiated by the
Textile Ministry in 2010 under the National Skill Development Policy (NSDP) with the intent to skill 30
lakh persons in 5 years with much fanfare.
Sadly, the scheme failed in its objective of 100% placement. According to official data, out of 2,47,812 persons enrolled under the scheme, only 2,33,848 completed their perspective training of which only 35,859 have been placed, while another 1,97,989 people are still to be placed and the rest are not seeking employment at all... A very poor record! Perhaps this was a reason for the scheme to be put on hold in 2012, just two years after its launch and is since then pending clearance. I feel it is imperative that placements should be made mandatory in the skill development program before funds are released to ensure optimal utilization of the scheme.
While the first priority should be to restart the skill development scheme, there is need for clarity on which ministry shall be responsible for the scheme. Earlier the industry was getting funds through the Textile Ministry scheme (ISDS) and the scheme under the Ministry of Rural Development (SGSY), but now with the appointment of Sarbananda Sonowal, as Union Minister of State with Independent Charge for Skill Development, besides other portfolios like Entrepreneurship, Sports & Youth Affairs, it would seem that all skill development related initiative will now be clubbed together under one ministry… but is this the reality, no one seems to know!
When, and if the scheme is restarted, there is requirement for few more appropriate changes to be made, as on the surface many discrepancies are apparent in the scheme. For one, most of the training centres have been setup in regions that do not even have a garment manufacturing industry defeating the whole purpose of skill development as energy is wasted in convincing people to take the training! Another major flaw of the current skill development efforts is that training is primarily for operators, with little or no emphasis on other important areas of garment manufacturing like supervisor, pattern making, checking, cutting, etc. Even the methodology for training is traditional with no thought of upgrading to meet fresh needs of automation and use of attachments and folders. Industry oriented or industry supported training should be evolved – Why not extend the “Apprenticeship” culture, to say 2 to 3 years, whereby the worker is benefited by learning the skill and the industry gets a worker with less than minimum wages. This will be beneficial to both the industry and employees.
Even as we debate skill development at the operator level, which was discussed in detail in our StitchWorld May 2014 issue, it is also important to optimize role and responsibilities of IE personnel. In this issue of StitchWorld, we present a recap of articles on many of the activities of Industrial Engineering and how it can improve the process carried by us over the last decade, along with views from the industry on the conflict of responsibilities between the IE and Quality Production team, in our Tech Byte section.
A detailed review of Texprocess Americas is another interesting read… it is very obvious that the much hyped ‘Made in USA’ trend is still not a real threat, but is good for technology providers with high-end automated solutions.
Sadly, the scheme failed in its objective of 100% placement. According to official data, out of 2,47,812 persons enrolled under the scheme, only 2,33,848 completed their perspective training of which only 35,859 have been placed, while another 1,97,989 people are still to be placed and the rest are not seeking employment at all... A very poor record! Perhaps this was a reason for the scheme to be put on hold in 2012, just two years after its launch and is since then pending clearance. I feel it is imperative that placements should be made mandatory in the skill development program before funds are released to ensure optimal utilization of the scheme.
While the first priority should be to restart the skill development scheme, there is need for clarity on which ministry shall be responsible for the scheme. Earlier the industry was getting funds through the Textile Ministry scheme (ISDS) and the scheme under the Ministry of Rural Development (SGSY), but now with the appointment of Sarbananda Sonowal, as Union Minister of State with Independent Charge for Skill Development, besides other portfolios like Entrepreneurship, Sports & Youth Affairs, it would seem that all skill development related initiative will now be clubbed together under one ministry… but is this the reality, no one seems to know!
When, and if the scheme is restarted, there is requirement for few more appropriate changes to be made, as on the surface many discrepancies are apparent in the scheme. For one, most of the training centres have been setup in regions that do not even have a garment manufacturing industry defeating the whole purpose of skill development as energy is wasted in convincing people to take the training! Another major flaw of the current skill development efforts is that training is primarily for operators, with little or no emphasis on other important areas of garment manufacturing like supervisor, pattern making, checking, cutting, etc. Even the methodology for training is traditional with no thought of upgrading to meet fresh needs of automation and use of attachments and folders. Industry oriented or industry supported training should be evolved – Why not extend the “Apprenticeship” culture, to say 2 to 3 years, whereby the worker is benefited by learning the skill and the industry gets a worker with less than minimum wages. This will be beneficial to both the industry and employees.
Even as we debate skill development at the operator level, which was discussed in detail in our StitchWorld May 2014 issue, it is also important to optimize role and responsibilities of IE personnel. In this issue of StitchWorld, we present a recap of articles on many of the activities of Industrial Engineering and how it can improve the process carried by us over the last decade, along with views from the industry on the conflict of responsibilities between the IE and Quality Production team, in our Tech Byte section.
A detailed review of Texprocess Americas is another interesting read… it is very obvious that the much hyped ‘Made in USA’ trend is still not a real threat, but is good for technology providers with high-end automated solutions.
