by admin | Sep 23, 2026 | Construction Site Management, Health and Safety, Mental Health, Training
Neurodiversity describes natural differences in how people process information, communicate, concentrate and learn. It can include autism, ADHD, dyslexia, dyspraxia and dyscalculia. Neurodivergence does not automatically mean that someone is disabled or unable to work safely, but some workers may face avoidable barriers created by the way information, training and supervision are delivered.
Why construction is talking more about neurodiversity
CITB’s Beyond the Build series has brought renewed attention to neurodiversity in construction and the practical ways employers can enable more people to perform at their best.
Construction is a useful environment in which to consider the issue because safety-critical information is often delivered quickly, in noisy locations and through a mixture of drawings, RAMS, verbal instructions and site-specific rules. Small changes in how that information is presented can make a substantial difference to understanding.
What does the Equality Act require?
Neurodivergence is not automatically a disability. Under Section 6 of the Equality Act 2010, a person is disabled where they have a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities.
Where that definition is met, the duty to make reasonable adjustments may apply. Employers should focus on the actual disadvantage or barrier rather than treating a formal diagnosis as the only route to practical support.
Recruitment also requires care. Section 60 of the Equality Act restricts pre-employment questions about health and disability, subject to specified exceptions. Asking all candidates whether they need an adjustment to participate in recruitment is usually a more appropriate starting point.
Health and safety duties still require individual capability to be considered
The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 require suitable and sufficient risk assessment and require employers to take account of employees’ capabilities when allocating tasks.
That does not justify blanket assumptions about neurodivergent workers. HSE’s guidance for disabled workers makes clear that health and safety legislation should not be used as an excuse for discrimination. The assessment should consider the work, the person’s actual needs and any reasonably foreseeable safety implications.
Under CDM Regulation 8, construction workers must have the necessary skills, knowledge, training and experience, or be developing them under appropriate supervision. The safety standard remains the same; the route by which someone receives and demonstrates understanding may need to vary.
Make inductions and RAMS easier to understand
A conventional induction may involve lengthy slides, dense text, unfamiliar acronyms and a written test completed under time pressure. That format can create unnecessary barriers without improving the quality of the safety message.
Practical adjustments can include:
- breaking information into shorter sections;
- using photographs, plans and site-specific examples;
- providing written instructions in numbered steps;
- explaining acronyms and technical language;
- allowing additional reading or processing time;
- using a quieter area for assessments or important conversations;
- walking the site to demonstrate routes, welfare and exclusion zones; and
- asking the worker to explain key controls in their own words.
The occupational standard does not change. The objective is to remove avoidable barriers to understanding and communication.
Consider the working environment as well as the paperwork
Noise, lighting, crowding, repeated interruptions and sudden changes may create sensory or concentration barriers for some people. Potential adjustments can include quieter briefing areas, more predictable work arrangements, written confirmation of verbal instructions or reviewing whether alternative PPE models are suitable.
Any adjustment must remain compatible with the risk assessment. For example, noise-cancelling headphones may be unsuitable in an operational area where a worker needs to hear alarms, vehicles or instructions. The correct solution is to identify the barrier and then choose an adjustment that does not introduce a different hazard.
Training and assessment can often be adjusted without lowering standards
Training providers and assessors should consider how a learner can access the process fairly while preserving assessment validity. Depending on the rules of the course or awarding body, this might involve additional reading time, verbal questioning, assistive software, smaller sections of written work or a quieter assessment environment.
Workplace-based Supervisory and Management NVQs and Health and Safety NVQs use real workplace evidence and professional assessment rather than relying solely on classroom examinations.
What should you do now?
- Review inductions for dense text, jargon and unnecessary time pressure.
- Use photographs, diagrams and practical demonstrations where they help.
- Check understanding through discussion or demonstration rather than a simple “yes”.
- Provide a confidential route for workers to request support.
- Discuss functional barriers rather than demanding a diagnosis.
- Record agreed adjustments and review whether they work.
- Share personal information only where necessary.
- Train supervisors in clear, inclusive communication.
- Apply awarding-body rules when adjusting formal assessment.
- Obtain HR, occupational-health or legal input for complex cases.
Our professional view
Neuroinclusive arrangements should not depend entirely on somebody producing a diagnostic report. Clear instructions, visual information, effective supervision and respectful consultation improve safety for the whole workforce.
Reasonable adjustments change the route to understanding; they do not reduce the required standard of safe performance. A construction business that communicates more clearly is likely to benefit workers with different learning styles, levels of experience and first languages as well as those who identify as neurodivergent.
All Star Safety’s Mental Health Awareness training, IOSH courses and health and safety consultancy can support managers reviewing communication, workforce support and supervision arrangements.
by admin | Sep 21, 2026 | CITB Grants, Training
From August 2026, apprenticeship funding in England changed significantly. For many employers, eligible training and assessment costs for apprentices aged 16–24 can now be fully government funded up to the relevant funding-band maximum. That materially changes the cost of bringing younger people into construction, although employing an apprentice is still far from cost-free.
The funding position changed for younger apprentices
The 2026–27 apprenticeship funding rules apply to new apprenticeship starts from 1 August 2026.
For employers that do not pay the apprenticeship levy, government can fund 100% of eligible training and assessment costs, up to the relevant funding-band maximum, where the apprentice is aged 16–24 when their apprenticeship training starts.
Similar support can apply to levy-paying employers that have used the available money in their apprenticeship service account. The precise funding position should be confirmed against the current rules before an employer commits to recruitment.
What does “100% funded” actually cover?
The phrase can easily be misunderstood. Full funding refers to eligible apprenticeship training and assessment costs up to the funding-band maximum. It does not mean employing an apprentice becomes free.
The employer still needs to budget for normal employment costs, including wages, everyday PPE, induction, supervision, normal travel and subsistence, and the time experienced workers spend supporting the apprentice. If the agreed training price exceeds the funding-band maximum, the excess may also fall to the employer.
A realistic workforce budget should therefore separate the training cost from the wider cost of employing and developing the person.
The position is different for older apprentices
The age of the apprentice can affect the funding calculation. For apprentices aged 25 and above, employer co-investment can still apply depending on whether the business pays the levy and whether sufficient levy funds are available.
That does not make an older apprentice a poor investment. It simply means training managers should establish the funding position before comparing recruitment options.
Employers should also remember that an apprenticeship must represent genuine occupational development. It should not be selected purely because the funding is attractive.
CITB-registered employers may have separate grant support
Government apprenticeship funding and CITB apprenticeship grants are separate mechanisms. CITB-registered construction employers may be able to access additional support, subject to current eligibility rules.
Before budgeting, check the latest CITB apprenticeship grant information and confirm the position for the specific apprenticeship, employer and learner.
Do not simply add headline funding figures together and assume that every business will receive the maximum amount. Each scheme has its own rules, evidence requirements and payment triggers.
Funding only works if the apprentice is properly supported
Reducing the training cost solves only one part of the skills problem. Construction apprentices need suitable work, structured learning, supervision and enough time to develop competence safely.
Employers should identify a suitable supervisor or mentor, define which tasks can be carried out independently and which still require direct support, and increase responsibility as competence develops. Project pressures should not result in an apprentice being treated as an additional experienced operative simply because the training is funded.
Additional development may also sit outside the funded apprenticeship. For example, IOSH Working Safely can provide a useful broader introduction to workplace risk, while experienced workers already doing their job may be better suited to a workplace-based construction NVQ than an apprenticeship.
What should you do now?
- Identify genuine vacancies or skills shortages that could support an apprenticeship.
- Check the apprentice’s age at the start of training.
- Establish whether your business pays the apprenticeship levy.
- Confirm the relevant apprenticeship standard and funding-band maximum.
- Obtain a clear training price from an approved provider.
- Check current CITB grant eligibility separately where applicable.
- Budget for wages, PPE, induction, supervision and normal employment costs.
- Appoint a suitable mentor or supervisor before the apprentice starts.
- Define a structured route from supervised learning to independent competence.
- Review the funding rules again before signing the final agreement.
Our professional view
The improved funding makes apprenticeships worth another look for construction employers that have previously considered the training cost a barrier. But the financial incentive should support a long-term workforce plan, not replace one.
The strongest apprenticeships combine funded training with meaningful workplace experience, competent supervision and a genuine job at the end of the development pathway.
Where employers are balancing apprentices with the development of existing workers, All Star Safety’s construction NVQs, IOSH courses and other training can form separate parts of the wider competence plan.
by admin | Sep 14, 2026 | CITB Grants, NPORS, Safety Update, Training
CITB is continuing the rollout of standardised plant training, with further categories moving to defined learning outcomes, minimum durations and delivery ratios this autumn. For employers, the practical issue is no longer simply whether a recognised card is issued. If CITB grant is expected, the training also needs to meet the applicable standard and eligibility rules.
The next group of standards arrives in September
CITB has confirmed that further Phase Four plant training standards take effect from 29 September 2026, including several vacuum-excavator configurations and loader-compressor training.
The standards distinguish between equipment types and operating configurations that may previously have been described more generally. That is useful because “vacuum excavator training” can cover materially different machines and working methods.
Employers should therefore identify the exact plant category before requesting quotations rather than relying on a broad course description.
Minimum course durations are part of the standard
One of the most significant changes is the use of defined minimum durations and trainer-to-learner arrangements. The required duration varies according to the category, learner experience and group size.
For employers comparing providers, that creates a more meaningful procurement question. A course that is dramatically shorter than the published standard should be challenged before a purchase order is raised.
The objective is not simply to keep people in a classroom or on a machine for a set number of hours. The durations and ratios are intended to provide sufficient time for the required knowledge, practical training and assessment to be delivered consistently.
Experienced does not automatically mean test only
Experienced-worker routes remain important because somebody with substantial previous experience should not be treated in the same way as a complete novice. However, “experienced” should not automatically be interpreted as a test-only route.
An experienced operator may still have gaps in areas such as pre-use inspection, current manufacturer limitations, attachments, stability, exclusion zones, emergency arrangements or updated industry practice.
The provider should establish that the learner genuinely meets the entry expectations for the experienced route and then deliver the elements required by the applicable CITB standard.
This is a funding standard, not a new legal licence
The CITB changes should not be confused with a new statutory licensing system. There is no new Act or Regulation saying every operator in the affected categories must hold a particular CITB certificate from the launch date.
The underlying legal duty remains broader. Regulation 9 of PUWER 1998 requires employers to provide adequate health and safety training to people who use work equipment, including the methods of use, risks arising and precautions required.
HSE’s guidance on training and competence also distinguishes training from competence. Training contributes to competence alongside knowledge, experience and practical skill. Employers still need to decide whether the individual is ready for the actual machine and work being undertaken.
Grant support depends on the recognised route
Where a plant category is covered by a CITB training standard, employers seeking grant should check that the proposed training meets the current standard and grant conditions. Provider status, achievement reporting and the resulting card route can all affect eligibility.
Before booking, check the current CITB training standards and the latest grant and funding guidance. Do not assume that a course that previously attracted grant will continue to do so under exactly the same delivery model.
For construction card routes, also confirm that the training and testing lead to the intended recognised card rather than assuming every plant certificate has the same status.
Further lifting categories follow in October
CITB has also confirmed a later October launch for the Appointed Person standard and selected tower-crane operator standards. Training managers planning lifting-team development should therefore check the relevant launch date rather than assuming every Phase Four category changed in September.
Appointed Person training, Crane/Lift Supervisor training and workplace competence qualifications are related but are not interchangeable. An experienced person progressing to a competent operator card may also need the appropriate occupational qualification.
All Star Safety’s Lifting Operations NVQs include workplace-assessed routes for slinger/signallers, crane supervisors and appointed persons.
What should you do now?
- Identify the exact plant category before requesting training.
- Establish whether the learner is genuinely novice or experienced.
- Check the applicable CITB standard and minimum duration.
- Compare delegate numbers with trainer and machine ratios.
- Confirm the provider can deliver the standard in full.
- Check current grant eligibility before committing the budget.
- Confirm the intended CPCS or NPORS card route.
- Provide machine and site familiarisation after the course where required.
- Authorise operators only when they can safely perform the real work.
Our professional view
Standardising plant training is broadly positive. Plant certification has limited value if operators holding apparently equivalent cards have received substantially different levels of training.
However, duration alone does not create competence. The strongest model combines credible training, appropriate assessment, supervised workplace experience, machine familiarisation and an employer that actively verifies the person can undertake the task safely.
All Star Safety provides NPORS plant operator training and assessment for novice and experienced operators, together with workplace-based plant and lifting NVQs where occupational competence needs to be formally demonstrated.
by admin | Sep 9, 2026 | Health and Safety, NVQs, Training
When poor workmanship is discovered at snagging, the immediate response is often to repair it and move on. But repeated defects usually deserve a deeper question: did the people carrying out and supervising the work understand the required standard in the first place? A current CITB-funded training opportunity provides a timely reason for contractors to examine how they turn quality failures into competence development.
CITB’s September deadline puts workmanship back on the agenda
CITB announced on 1 September that employers have until 30 September 2026 to secure Roofing and Brickwork Masterclasses under the current fully funded arrangements.
The 90-minute sessions are delivered by NHBC building inspectors and concentrate specifically on issues those inspectors commonly encounter on completed and partially completed homes. CITB
Read CITB’s September Masterclass funding update
The Roofing Masterclass covers issues including underlay and battens, fire stopping, ventilation, flashings, tile and slate fixing, verges, valleys and ridges. Brickwork sessions include cavity construction, insulation, DPCs, cavity trays, cavity barriers, timber frame interfaces and sound insulation. CITB
Dry lining is also included in the programme, although the funding arrangement is different. CITB says those sessions cost £645 but may be funded by CITB for eligible employers, rather than being automatically provided under the same fully funded model as the current Roofing and Brickwork sessions. CITB
NHBC says Roofing and Brickwork sessions can also be delivered on or close to a live site, subject to minimum learner numbers and suitable accommodation. Roofing requires at least five roofing contractors and Brickwork at least seven, with a maximum of 12 delegates for either session. NHBC
That makes this more than a funding announcement. It is an opportunity to consider whether construction businesses are using inspection findings intelligently enough.
Snagging is often too late to start managing quality
A snagging list is useful for identifying what needs to be corrected. It is less useful if the same defect appears repeatedly across several plots, floors, projects or subcontractors.
At that point, the issue is no longer simply defective work. It is a management-system problem.
NHBC describes roofing as the build stage associated with the highest number of defects and warranty claims in new homes. Its Roofing Masterclass is specifically designed around helping trades avoid those recurring problems and reduce rework. NHBC
See the NHBC Roofing Masterclass content
Consider a recurring problem with incorrectly formed cavity trays.
Replacing or correcting the defective work addresses the immediate problem. But if six bricklayers are making the same error, simply issuing six snagging instructions misses the more important question: what caused the misunderstanding and how will we stop plot seven being built the same way?
The answer might involve training. It might also involve drawings, specifications, sequencing, product selection, supervision, setting-out information or an unclear interface between trades.
Not every defect is caused by incompetence, and training should not become the default solution to every quality issue.
But repeat defects should always trigger a competence question.
Building Regulations have changed the competence conversation
There is also now a statutory context that goes beyond client expectations and warranty standards.
Under the Building Regulations dutyholder regime in England, people undertaking building work must have the appropriate skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours for the work they carry out. Organisations must have the organisational capability needed to deliver compliant work. GOV.UK
Government guidance states that contractors must plan, manage and monitor the building work they carry out or control so that it complies with the relevant requirements.
Organisational capability includes having appropriate policies, procedures, systems and resources, together with arrangements for actively monitoring and supervising people. GOV.UK
Read government guidance on competence and building work
This is a legal requirement. Attending an NHBC Masterclass, completing an NVQ or holding a CSCS card is not, by itself, proof that every aspect of those duties has been discharged.
Government guidance specifically identifies formal training as one possible way of demonstrating competence, alongside evidence such as previous work and relevant experience. It also stresses that people should work within the limits of their competence and seek assistance where necessary. GOV.UK
The practical implication is important.
Competence is not a certificate held by the individual. It is the ability to apply appropriate skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours to the particular work being undertaken.
Training is evidence of competence, not competence by itself
Construction sometimes treats qualifications, cards, short courses and site inductions as interchangeable evidence that somebody is “competent”.
They are not.
A 90-minute technical Masterclass can give an experienced bricklayer valuable insight into recurrent cavity defects. It cannot turn somebody with no bricklaying experience into a competent bricklayer.
Likewise, an experienced roofer may have extensive practical ability but still benefit from training on a particular system, specification or detail they have not encountered previously.
Workplace qualifications serve another purpose.
A competence-based NVQ assesses whether somebody can demonstrate the requirements of their occupation through actual work. All Star Safety’s current [trade NVQ provision] Level 2 and Level 3 Trade NVQs includes bricklaying, roofing and interior systems among the available routes, with evidence obtained through workplace observation, professional discussion and real work records. All Star Safety Ltd
That provides evidence of occupational competence. It does not remove the need for project-specific information, manufacturer guidance, supervision or additional training when the work introduces something outside the person’s previous experience.
The most effective competence system therefore combines several things:
- occupational competence;
- relevant experience;
- project-specific information;
- product and system knowledge;
- appropriate training;
- adequate supervision; and
- evidence that the required standard is actually being achieved.
Removing any one of those can create a gap.
Turn your defect data into a training plan
Quality inspections become considerably more valuable when their findings are aggregated rather than closed individually.
Instead of simply recording that a cavity barrier was corrected on Plot 12, record the type of failure.
If the same issue occurs on Plots 14, 18 and 21, management can see a trend that would otherwise be hidden among hundreds of separate snagging actions.
The same principle applies to roofing.
If verge details repeatedly fail inspection, identify whether the work is associated with a particular team, product, drawing detail, supervisor, house type or construction sequence.
That allows the response to be targeted.
Sometimes the answer will be a technical briefing. In other cases it may be supervised demonstration, manufacturer training, better drawings or a revised inspection hold point before subsequent work conceals the detail.
For higher-risk interfaces, a sensible approach is to establish a first-off inspection.
For example, inspect the first completed cavity tray, roof abutment or fire-stopping detail before allowing that team to repeat it across another twenty locations.
This turns quality assurance from retrospective snagging into active control.
It also provides much stronger evidence of organisational capability than simply producing a folder of training certificates when a client asks how competence is managed.
What should you do now?
For housebuilders, contractors and relevant subcontractors, the immediate opportunity is straightforward: check whether the current NHBC Masterclasses are relevant to work your teams are actually carrying out.
Roofing and Brickwork sessions remain available under their current fully funded arrangement until 30 September 2026. Dry Lining has a different funding model, so eligibility should be checked before assuming the employer contribution will be zero. CITB
More broadly, review how your business currently learns from defects.
Ask:
- Which defects have occurred more than once during the last six months?
- Are inspection findings analysed by trade and defect type?
- Do supervisors know the most common recurring failures?
- Are technical briefings targeted at actual site problems?
- Are manufacturer instructions available where the work is carried out?
- Do new systems or unfamiliar details trigger additional competence checks?
- Are first-off inspections used before repetitive work proceeds?
- Can you demonstrate why the people carrying out the work were considered competent?
- Do trade qualifications actually match the activities those workers perform?
- Is corrective training checked afterwards to establish whether the problem has stopped?
That last question is particularly important.
Training attendance is an input. Fewer defects are an outcome.
Businesses should measure both.
Our professional view
Construction has historically been much better at recording safety incidents than quality failures.
A near miss may trigger an investigation, toolbox talk and management review. Ten badly formed construction details can sometimes generate ten separate snagging sheets without anybody stepping back to identify the common cause.
That distinction is increasingly difficult to justify.
Quality, safety and compliance frequently intersect. Poorly installed cavity barriers are a quality defect with potential fire-safety consequences. Incorrect roof ventilation can lead to building-performance problems. Poorly installed structural components can move rapidly from workmanship into safety-critical territory.
The management disciplines are also very similar: clear information, competent people, suitable supervision, inspection, feedback and correction before the problem is repeated.
CITB’s current funding announcement is therefore useful even for contractors that never book one of these particular Masterclasses.
It is a reminder that training should respond to what is actually going wrong on site.
The best training matrix is not merely a list of expiry dates. It connects qualifications, experience, project requirements, observed performance and recurring defects so that competence development is directed where it will make a measurable difference.
For employers formalising the occupational competence of experienced tradespeople, All Star Safety’s Level 2 and Level 3 Trade NVQs provide workplace-based assessment across bricklaying, roofing, interior systems, carpentry, cladding and other construction occupations.
by admin | Aug 17, 2026 | Safety Update
New CITB research suggests the construction workforce is becoming increasingly local. Fewer workers are travelling long distances for employment, while the industry still needs tens of thousands of additional people each year. For contractors, that means recruitment strategies built around bringing labour in from elsewhere may become less reliable — and developing skills closer to where projects are being delivered will matter more.
CITB’s latest data points to a more local labour market
The CITB Workforce Mobility and Skills research, published on 12 August, found that 34% of construction workers had worked no more than 20 miles from home during the previous 12 months.
At the other end of the scale, 28% had worked more than 50 miles from home, down from 32% in 2022. The longer-term change is even clearer: only 10% had worked more than 100 miles from home, compared with 21% in 2015.
CITB attributes the trend partly to family, lifestyle and personal circumstances becoming more influential when people decide where they are prepared to work. Its conclusion is that skills strategies increasingly need to be place-based, linking employers, training provision and workforce development more closely to regional demand.
This is labour-market research rather than a new legal requirement, but it raises an important practical question for contractors: where will your next generation of skilled workers actually come from?
Why relying on a travelling workforce may become harder
Construction has always depended heavily on mobility. Major infrastructure schemes, commercial developments and housing programmes create temporary peaks in demand, and skilled workers have traditionally followed the work.
That flexibility is unlikely to disappear, but CITB’s figures suggest employers should not assume it will continue at the same level.
This comes at a time when the underlying workforce requirement remains substantial. CITB’s Construction Workforce Outlook 2026–2030 estimates that construction needs an average of around 41,200 additional workers each year between 2026 and 2030 — approximately 206,000 people over five years.
The issue is therefore not simply attracting people into construction nationally. Employers increasingly need to consider whether the right trades, plant operators, supervisors and managers will be available within realistic travelling distance of their projects.
For a business tendering for work several years ahead, workforce availability should therefore sit alongside plant, materials, subcontractor capacity and programme risk when assessing whether the job can genuinely be resourced.
Local training becomes part of project resilience
One response is to recruit locally. Another is to develop more capability within the workforce already available.
That might include bringing apprentices and new entrants into the industry, but it should also include existing employees who can progress into skilled, supervisory or management roles.
An experienced operative may already be carrying out work competently but need an occupational qualification to demonstrate that competence formally. A supervisor may be capable of progressing into site management but require structured development before taking on the wider responsibility.
Workplace-based construction NVQs can be particularly useful in this situation because experienced workers can demonstrate competence through their normal work rather than being removed from productive employment for lengthy classroom programmes. All Star Safety’s current NVQ provision ranges from trade and plant operations through to supervisory, management, lifting and occupational health and safety qualifications.
That does not mean qualifications should be used simply to fill vacancies quickly. The aim should be to identify people with the right experience and potential, then give them the development required for the role they are moving into.
Local recruitment does not lower the competence standard
A shortage of available workers does not change the employer’s health and safety responsibilities.
Under CDM 2015, contractors must have the necessary skills, knowledge, experience and, where relevant, organisational capability to undertake construction work safely. Contractors must also check that workers they employ or appoint have the skills, knowledge, training and experience necessary for their work, or are receiving appropriate training and supervision while developing them.
The HSE guidance for contractors makes the important point that the required level should be proportionate to the complexity of the work and the risks involved.
That creates an important distinction between developing someone and putting someone into a position before they are ready.
For example, promoting an experienced tradesperson into a supervisory role can be an excellent way to retain knowledge locally. But the individual may now need development in planning work, communicating controls, monitoring subcontractors, managing changing conditions and challenging unsafe behaviour.
Similarly, a competent plant operator does not automatically become a competent lift supervisor simply because the project cannot recruit one locally.
A successful local skills strategy must therefore develop competence rather than simply change job titles.
Employers may be able to obtain help with the cost
CITB is increasingly organising training support around local employer demand.
Its Employer Networks bring employers together within local areas to identify skills needs and influence how training support is prioritised. From April 2026, eligible micro, small and medium employers employing up to 249 people can access support through the networks, subject to the current funding rules and available budgets.
Current arrangements include 50% match funding for eligible training, or fixed contributions for certain health and safety courses. Annual caps vary according to employer size, and some areas such as plant, scaffolding and first aid are treated differently, so businesses should check eligibility before committing expenditure.
CITB’s East of England team also highlights local support including Employer Networks, apprenticeship assistance and Norfolk and Suffolk Skills Bootcamps.
The wider point is important: training budgets should not automatically be planned on the assumption that the employer must pay the full commercial cost of every development activity.
What does this mean for Suffolk and East Anglia?
For employers in Suffolk, this is more than a national workforce statistic.
Major projects such as Sizewell C are creating long-term demand alongside existing construction, civil engineering, utilities, housing, maintenance and infrastructure work throughout the region. All Star Safety already supports contractors and workers around Leiston and the wider East Suffolk area through local construction training and assessment.
Where several projects compete for the same occupations, waiting until mobilisation to recruit can leave employers competing for a relatively small pool of qualified people.
A stronger approach is to work backwards from the programme.
If a project will need additional supervisors in 12 months, identify potential supervisors now. If additional plant categories will be required, assess the existing workforce. If managers need stronger health and safety knowledge, programmes such as IOSH Managing Safely can form part of that development before the responsibility arrives.
The training plan then becomes part of workforce planning rather than an exercise carried out only when a card expires or a client refuses site access.
What should you do now?
Contractors planning work over the next 12–36 months should consider adding a simple workforce capability review to their normal business planning:
- Identify the occupations and supervisory roles required by confirmed and likely projects.
- Record where shortages already exist.
- Consider how far workers currently travel and whether that model is sustainable.
- Identify existing employees capable of progression.
- Check which roles require additional training, occupational qualifications or supervised experience.
- Review apprenticeship and new-entrant opportunities where genuine long-term roles exist.
- Check available CITB grants, Employer Network support and other local funding before booking training.
- Speak to training providers early enough for courses and assessments to be completed before project mobilisation.
- Keep competence requirements separate from simple labour availability — particularly for safety-critical roles.
The change highlighted by CITB is gradual rather than dramatic, but the direction is significant. Employers that develop people locally, retain experienced workers and plan competence ahead of project demand are likely to be less exposed when the next major project starts competing for the same workforce.
For contractors reviewing their future skills requirements, All Star Safety can help develop a structured construction training plan covering the qualifications and development required by the people already within the business.