MINUTES OF SUBCOMMITTEE: SKILLS DEVELOPMENT,

SECONDARY INDUSTRY MEETING HELD ON WEDNESDAY 2 OCTOBER 2013 STARTED AT 10:00 AT THE SAMPRO OFFICES IN FAERIE GLEN, PRETORIA

Present

Members:

Blignaut, C (Prof)

Du Preez, J

Hutton, R

Jonker, D

Kraamwinkel, A Chairman

Pheiffer, H (Ms)

Prinsloo, W

Rathogwa, G

Schutte, D

Venter, G

Theron, C (Ms)

De Kock, E

Others:

Fouché, N

Mngadi, J (Ms) Milk SA (Minuting secretary)

Teichmann, N

Apologies:

Burger, J

Durham, D

Absent

1. WELCOME

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting.

1.1  Apologies

Noted above.

1.2  Personalia

None.

2. FINALISING THE AGENDA

Agenda was finalized.

3. PREVIOUS MINUTES

3.1 Minutes of Subcommittee: Skills Development, Secondary Industry 26.04.2013

The minutes of the previous meeting were approved.

4. ISSUES EMANATING FROM THE PREVIOUS MINUTES

Covered in the report attached under item 6.

5. QUARTERLY REPORT (April to June 2013)

Mr Venter elaborated on his submitted quarterly report and apologized for the faded printing of the financial statements. Ms Pheiffer congratulated Mr Venter on his project presentation saying that this was an inspiration to her because she knew how much works went into these projects. Mr Jonker said that based on what had been presented the budget would probably be short in terms of what was expected, if all activities are conducted.

Resolved:

5.1 / That the quarterly report (July – September 2013) be accepted.

6. REPORT ON RESOLUTONS TAKEN ON 26 APRIL 2013

The Chairman said that the report on the resolutions was taken at the meeting on the 26 April 2013.

The Chairman said that Appendix A dealt with the costing of attendance by the participants in the Dairyman theory workshops and the meeting concluded that this Appendix represented the view of the costs of the workshops. Mr Venter said that different costs applied to different workshops and their different days depending on the content to be covered in those workshops. Mr Venter said that SAMPRO could not ask for any more funding from Milk SA as Milk SA was already meeting them half way with the workshops. The Chairman said that it could be discussed with Milk SA that they cover the funding of the tutor for the workshop including learning material and venue costs. Mr Hutton and Mr du Preez mentioned that the costs that were indicated on Appendix A were perhaps conservative as they were aware how costly these training and workshop sessions really were. Mr Hutton said that in-house managers and/or consultants that drive and manage these trainings sessions and who would act as mentors, provide support and help with questions so that the expected progress is met and that they normally costs quite a sum. He said that it was important that these sessions be driven from inside and that the momentum is kept up.

Professor Blignaut requested Mr Venter to present the importance of deploying the theory workshops in the grand scheme (as well as the other building blocks) and also questioned when Mr Venter would approach Milk SA for funding.

The Chairman responded that there was no need for assistance in 2013 but funding assistance would be needed for training in 2014.

The Chairman requested that Mr Venter investigate the following issues:

1.  What is the contribution which can be expected from SETA?

2.  Does it have any impact on BEE status?

3.  Where in terms of the existing legislation, does it qualify for tax enquiries?

The Chairman said that it was noted that the existing qualifications would be phased out and that the full development and implementation of the Dairyman qualification is of extreme importance for the development of the dairy industry. It was noted that it would cost R35000 per participant for these theory training sessions.

Resolved:

6.1 / That the Subcommittee was of the opinion that for 2014, as far as possible, the tutor was to be supplied by Milk SA at Milk SA costs, including learning material.
6.2 / That Milk SA could assist in the funds of training, should other foreseen expenditures exist (such as the need for larger venues).
6.3 / That in-company managers and/or consultants should be identified and held accountable for driving these projects in order for them to be successful and so that there could be an accountable individual for the smooth flowing of these workshops. / Mr Venter
6.4 / That Mr Venter would investigate the following questions in order to have an informative format for the training budget:
·  What is the contribution which can be expected from SETA?
·  Does it have any impact on BEE status?
·  Where in terms of the existing legislation, does it qualify for tax enquiries? / Mr Venter

7. INTERNAL REVIEW OF TRAINING ACTIVITIES

Prof Blignaut congratulated the Project Management Team on the fact that they reviewed their plans and activities conducted over the last term of the scheme, to determine whether or not the strategic direction indicated by two strategic industry workshops was actually implemented. The Chairman, reflecting on an idea for a post-graduate internship that was being developed for some time, said it was important to formulate the profile of what the committee had in mind for such internships and the methodology of measuring the outcomes of these internships. The Chairman said Mr Venter should draft an outline of the key characteristics of the internship sufficient enough that it could be submitted as a project proposal to the SETA. Professor Blignaut said that Ms Pheiffer and Mr Venter should look at discussing on whether bullet (e - Training should provide for a technical, dairy technology related career path) could be used as a guiding format for their training project proposals.

The Chairman said that needs of the different participants needed to be distinguished in order for the trainers to know what was expected of them. Nonetheless, a generic and minimalistic approach to this design ought to be followed.

Mr Prinsloo added that it was important to understand what the function of the Dairy Chamber was and what kind of assistance could be expected from the Dairy Chamber in order not to have issues mixed up and to also remember that the Dairy Chamber was a different forum altogether, even though some of the people serving in this committee also serves on the Dairy Chamber. Mr du Preez highlighted that it was also important to invite labour representation representatives to the Chamber meetings.

In respect of the Matriculant Project, Mr Venter said that there was a current existing contract between the service provider and the enterprises. He said it was decided that the service provider would be paid out in tranches to minimize financial losses should recruits for the project in future withdraw or be disengaged.

Mr Hutton said that he was in favour for the matriculant project because as a person who was also using it he found it to be most effective.

Resolved:

7.1 / That Mr Venter would look into what assistance the Dairy Chamber could offer in respect of the design and implementation of the envisaged internship. / Mr Venter

8. APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR 2014

The Chairman said that there were a few things to be looked at for planning purposes for 2014. He said the Project Manager should provide a plan that allocates bursary funds and how they will be utilized. The Chairman concluded that Mr Venter should do a survey on the needs for 2014 and in light of those needs refer back to the committee. The Chairman said that Milk SA should advise Mr Venter on what kind of commitment they can make financially towards the desired projects for 2014.

9. ADDITIONAL ITEMS

9.1 Harmonisation

It was decided that success stories should be identified in the Secondary Industry and be published in order for the dairy sector to see that there was progress in the workshops provided and training in general.

10. CLOSING

The Chairman thanked everyone for their contributions and closed the meeting at 13:25.

NOTTSB013

4