Skills Development Providers (SDPs) & Training Providers


DMA requirements for re-opening providers of OQSF programmes

Viewing 4 posts - 6 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #75408
    Lynel Farrell
    Keymaster

    This Gazette needs some serious discussions! I have gone through it a couple of times and have the following questions, perhaps someone can explain or clarify this (I might not understand it correctly). The following points are:

    1. Page 8, 5.5 reads: ALL institutions and workplaces MUST identify isolation quarantine facilities, develop, and publicise protocols for any staff or learner who present symptoms or test positive.
    2. Page 8, 5.8 reads: ALL institutions MUST have a COVID-19 RESPONSE TASK TEAM in place in line with regulations, to ensure responsiveness to ongoing issues.
    3. Page 10, 9.1 reads: Unless otherwise directed by the CIRCUMSTANCES or as the SECTOR PERMITS, a maximum of 33%, of the learner population will be allowed to return to the institution on condition that they comply with the applicable specific regulations.
    4. Page 10, 9.3 reads: Institutions WILL issue PERMITS and CERTIFICATES to their staff and identified learners in accordance with the Disaster Management Regulations.

    The above 4 points are not clear, and I would appreciate some clarity, if anyone could simplify or explain this in EASY terms.

    #75414
    Nigel Shipston
    Participant

    Yes Des, after all the far too belated concern, this crowning glory document is just further evidence of the gap between our operations and the understanding of the “authorities”. The content still relates to the other sectors with which they do have experience, but lacks any appreciation of workplace education and training processes. Clearly we are pretty much left to our own devices while the much vaunted a highly anticipated white knights battling fierce dragons have turned into a bunch of misguided Don Quixote’s tilting at windmills.

    Still, I have no doubt that most SDP’s are mature enough to implement operational activities suitable to the current environment. I see no justifiable reason to rely on any of our “authorities” for any intervention in this instance. When somebody realises that windmills aren’t dragons, perhaps we will get somewhere.

    #75415
    Des Squire
    Participant

    Hi Lynel, Hope the responses below assist. (My personal opinion as the rules are in double dutch).

    Page 8, 5.5 reads: ALL institutions and workplaces MUST identify isolation quarantine facilities, develop, and publicise protocols for any staff or learner who present symptoms or test positive.
    Response; Company covid policy must be explained to all employees and should one become infected they would immediately be place into quarantine area and then sent home for self isolation or further medical checks.
    2. Page 8, 5.8 reads: ALL institutions MUST have a COVID-19 RESPONSE TASK TEAM in place in line with regulations, to ensure responsiveness to ongoing issues.
    Response: same as for the health and safety committee, companies should have a Covid Committee to monitor the workplace activities.
    3. Page 10, 9.1 reads: Unless otherwise directed by the CIRCUMSTANCES or as the SECTOR PERMITS, a maximum of 33%, of the learner population will be allowed to return to the institution on condition that they comply with the applicable specific regulations.
    Response: only appplies to learning institutions – same as what is happening in our schools, gradual re-opening
    4. Page 10, 9.3 reads: Institutions WILL issue PERMITS and CERTIFICATES to their staff and identified learners in accordance with the Disaster Management Regulations.
    Response: for those attending training at institutions the certificate is to give them the right to travel for classes.

    #75416
    Lynel Farrell
    Keymaster

    Hi Des, thank you so much for this.

    I might have understood 5.5 incorrectly. When they say we must IDENTIFY isolation quarantine facilities – my immediate thought was the state quarantine facilities, and I started to search for a list per province, which was not available (only testing stations per province was). I have in the interim requested guidance from the NIOH, and I will gladly share their response once I receive it.

    On 5.8, I was thinking about the Sole Proprietors and SMEs (very small providers). So if you only have 2 permanent employees (two directors/owners as example) then the COVID Task Team will be these two employees, and one of them will be the appointed Covid Compliance Officer? These small providers wont have a SHE Rep or a OHS committee. For much larger providers it is an easy process. Also my thinking here, is when the provider is offering training off site (not their premises), all requirements for both OHS and Covid must be met by the Client/Employer/Conference Centre. Perhaps the provider will then have a checklist that is sent to where ever the training will happen to ensure that these are in place, and the provider is covered accordingly.

    Now, for 9.1 …………. the words CIRCUMSTANCES and SECTOR, directs me to each SETA, as they will implement requirements according to various industry and sector specific regulations. Some industries have more serious regulations than others, so therefore the indication of circumstances and sector? I know that SETAs are pushing for online/eLearning at this stage, but not all learning can happen online especially when it comes to the practical components (some practicals are easy to do online, whereby others are absolutely not). I am following each SETA (all 21 of them) on a daily basis to see how they interpret and implement going forward. The 33% I believe is for providers that have large groups of learners – for them, they would for instance need to start a phased in approach (for example, if they have 1000 learners, they can only take in 33% during lockdown level 3, and increase the attendance to 66% once lockdown level 2 comes into effect. This does not count for onine/eLearning – there the provider can run a 100% attendance (but need to have approval for eLearning/online learning, blended learning)

    With 9.3, during lockdown level 3, my assumption is that this is for staff and/or learners travelling between provinces. It would be great if we could find a template of such permit/certificate to share with providers that might need to travel between provinces. I don’t think that such permits and certificates are required if you are training or attending training in your own province?

    Thank you so much for giving me your views. I truly believe that with discussions and other view points, it gets easier, and we learn. I appreciate your interpretation, truly appreciate it!

Viewing 4 posts - 6 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Share on Social Media