9th May 2011 at 10:53 am #39144Marianna BibbeyParticipant
We would like to know what are the issues that you struggle with in the current submission window
There is many of us in this group that might be able to support each other – but also to know which areas present problems that could maybe be ironed out in future…
for example some complaints I have on my list:
1- the new OFO version 10 confusion – who struggles with this also?
2 – The completion of 10 different sets of WSp forms in terms of the differences between various seta – the easier end the more difficult ones – can these forms not be standarised to some format?
3 – the incomplete data from employers in terms of personelle files and then the demographic profile of the wsp NEED soooo MUCH INFORMATION!
4 – NOW you ADD – WHAT DO YOU EXPERIENCE –
iF YOU HAVE SOLUTIONS FOR SOME OF THESE PROBLEMS PLEASE DO INFORM US…
The compatibility of the VIP Payroll import export function and the WSP data file import export functions – Your struuggles?….
PLEASE let us know!
9th May 2011 at 12:46 pm #39151
13th May 2011 at 7:18 am #39150sylvia hammondKeymaster
19th May 2011 at 8:45 pm #39149
I don’t really have solutions, but can so relate to your complaint list, Marianna! Most of my clients set up their VIP systems for payroll, not reporting, so personnel information is frequently incomplete e.g. educational qualifications, or even incorrect in terms of identifying people’s occupational categories and levels.
The issue of varying Mandaory Grant formats has long been an issue of frustration that the SETAs choose to ignore. Same legislation, multiple interpretations and reporting formats! At least more SETAs are using the Deloitte on line system, which provides some consistency, but others … don’t get me started!
And of course, this year, the challenge of trying to correlate the OFO version 9 and 10.
I too am feeling very frustrated!!
24th May 2011 at 7:15 am #39148
14th Jun 2011 at 12:54 pm #39147
Possibly because I am still new to this and due to me being new at my company I am having a huge problem when it comes to learnerships. I am stuggling to find accredited providers who can assist with a small amount of learners at this time of the year…
As well as many providers are not able to help with “full” learnerships.
22nd Aug 2011 at 11:40 am #39146Marianna BibbeyParticipant
we survived WSP submissions but the problems remain! which means that next year will just have the exact sam eissues –
unless we try and do something?! I belong to hte ASDFSA – a professional body for SDFs – I think we should all via email circulate a PROPOSAL document – that address all these issues we struggle with – to submit them to all the SETAs concerned – in order to get some ANSWERS!
1- OFO – the data for ATR this year spoke to the OFO 9 version as submitted last year however – next year is going to be a train smash! since two sets were used – ver 9 and ver 10 – which we all know is a mess!
2- many job descriptions are difficult to match to these generic guidelines since the SECTOR did not participate in the career pathways to be established and expanded upon – some sectors however did finetune their Sic codes to career pathways and more choices and defined siccodes were present – it is all about Seta/Sector participation!
3. CHIETA??? websiet info is what I have?
CHIETA Main Office
CHIETA CALL CENTRE: 0860 244 382
CHIETA ANTI-FRAUD HOTLINE:0800 204 489
Office: 2 Clamart Road, Richmond, 2092, Johannesburg
Postal Address: PO Box 961, Auckland Park, 2006
Tel: +27 11 628 7000
Fax (CEO): +27 11 726 7777
Fax (SKILLS): +27 11 726 7777
Fax (ETDQA): +27 11 726 7777
Map: map_to_Head Office.pdf map_to_Head Office.doc
4. Training Providers and small quantities – will always be a challenge – it is not COST EFFECTIVE to deliver training at the learnership fee rates for such small quantities… the learnership rates ASSUME a minimum qty of 10-12 learners – then you can afford facilitator costs ect… below that you dont make any profit – below 5 you even start working at a loss! so – very difficult – One should have a “PORTAL” for individual requests and see if one cannot accumulate them together to fill up a program? dont have answers sorry!
Thaks for your responses – sorry i only reply now…
22nd Aug 2011 at 11:56 am #39145sylvia hammondKeymaster
We have a Group called Seta issues. If you put all your issues into that group, we could collate them and send them either to the individual Seta or to DHET. I have the impression that the Setas have less autonomy than they used to have and so approaching DHET directly may well be a better approach. Being pro-active, I’m happy to also create a QCTO & Accreditation Issues group, as that is also a major issue.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.