|
A Technical Guide for Wine Producers
|
|
RECENT ARTICLES | WYNBOER HOME
Time to rethink training in the wine industry
Prof Joachim Ewert
As useful as they may be in other respects, none of the strategy papers on the wine industry that have seen the light over the last few years (e.g. 'Vision2020', 'Wine Industry Plan') have much to say on firstly, how training of workers actually occurs at the farm level; secondly, what the shortcomings are of the existing training regime; and thirdly how training should be organised to meet the challenges of our time.
In 2004 and 2005 a University of Stellenbosch research team, in collaboration with French colleagues from Montpellier, researched these questions at farm and cellar level in two wine regions, i.e. Paarl and Robertson. The results and conclusions are summarised below.
Both the scientific study of work (i.e. ergonomy) and our empirical research highlight the need for a new kind of worker training. In particular workers need 'deeper' viticultural knowledge in order to work more independently and exercise their own judgement in vineyards focused on quality production.
We are also convinced that the building of new skills has a better chance through collective action, rather than farms and cellars going it alone. In South Africa solutions to the skill challenges will not be found through trial-and-error at each and every farm, principally because the general level of farm worker education is very low and because on many farms a paternalist culture still discourages initiative and worker autonomy. The building of new skills will proceed more effectively if knowledge is shared in a collective project. Last but not least, training costs are lower if carried by a community of growers and cellars.
At this stage the reality looks very different. Our research shows that most farmers and managers do not trust the majority of their workers to execute vineyard practices correctly. As a result, intensive, time consuming supervision is part and parcel of the dominant management paradigm.
When citing reasons for strict supervision, a lack of dedication as a result of insufficient 'life skills' and a lack of cognitive skills are mentioned in the same breath.
Most of the training at farm level is done by the farmer or farm manager himself. Repeated demonstrations at the beginning of the pruning phase, for instance, are regarded as important as subsequent supervision.
Only a very small percentage of producers in our study make use of outside, accredited training providers. A lack of awareness of training providers (e.g. the Vineyard Academy), is one of the reasons.
Similarly, only a small minority have tabled 'skills development plans' with the AgriSETA. Low awareness, little time or patience to do the necessary 'paperwork' and/or a reluctance to interact with the Seta bureaucracy are the main reasons behind this non-engagement with the state's training and qualification regime.
This is the situation despite the fact that both short courses and learnerships can practically be had for free, given the generous offers available from the AgriSETA.
In this on-farm training regime, co-operative cellar management, including the viticulturist, only play a minor, ad hoc role. At the co-operative cellars researched over the last two years, 'labour' and skills training does not feature on the agenda, let alone being treated as a strategic issue.
Most of the training that is done at farm level does not convey 'deep' knowledge about the vine plant or viticulture. Workers are given instructions in the form of 'rules', 'recipes' or formulae which presumably are easy to understand (e.g. '12-15 cm between spurs'). This is done on the assumption that this is as much as workers can grasp. Akin to Henry Ford's conveyor belt workers, the average vineyard worker is neither expected, nor trusted to exercise discretion and judgement when confronted with an 'abnormal' situation in the vineyard for which the 'recipe' does not provide a solution. He/she is then expected to call the 'boss'.
Nevertheless, a majority of farmers and managers are positively disposed towards training as such. The result of our Robertson survey shows that a significant number of workers have received training in the past. Likewise, many producers intend to send their workers for further training.
In this regard almost all producers in our Robertson survey were positively disposed towards the idea of a 'regional training facility'.
When asked about the skills shortages of their workers, farmers and managers highlighted 'life skills', 'upliftment' and related socio-psychological needs. However, when asked what kind of services they would like to have from such a training facility, they prioritised technical skills.
When analysing the labour force in Robertson, the most noticeable feature is the low standard of education and the high degree of illiteracy. Almost 25% of all workers interviewed cannot read or write and 75% only have some level of primary education. This presents a considerable challenge for any new, 'deep' approach to skills training. In the South African situation, literacy training acquires the same importance as technical training.
At the same time, a fair number of workers have benefited from agricultural and vineyard specific training (e.g. spraying courses). However, most of it goes unrecognised, given that 'unit standards' have only been developed recently or because of the reluctance of employers to utilise the Seta system.
The analysis of workers' training needs in Robertson shows that their priorities are different from those of their employers. 'Irrigation' heads the workers' list, with 'winemaking' and 'general vineyard practices' amongst the top four. In the employer list 'irrigation' comes in at number four, with 'tractor driving' and 'farm management' at number one and two respectively.
Details aside, there is an overlap of interests. Approximately half the employers in the Robertson survey feel that their workers need more training and skills. Over 80% of workers want more training.
The fact that approximately 260 workers from the RWV completed short training courses presented by the Vineyard Academy last year, is proof of both workers' desire for training and a growing willingness on the part of employers to provide the opportunity and to up-skill their employees.
The challenge now is to channel this groundswell into an efficient, unbureaucratic training facilitation system. A small unwieldy management team that can take the 'paperwork' off farmers' shoulders, utilise the Seta system to maximum effect, and can demonstrate that it can arrange training quickly and efficiently on the door step, could bring about a mind shift amongst farmers from seeing training as a cost to an investment with guaranteed returns. The envisaged 'Skills Centre' for the Robertson region could be the ideal physical vehicle for such a paradigm shift.
However, for this to occur, two things are necessary: firstly, all those who want to benefit from such a training 'hub', need to make a contribution. 'Free riders' will undermine the project.
Secondly, workers' newly acquired skills need to be recognised by employers. If farmers and cellars keep on treating all workers as an undifferentiated category of 'general worker', regardless of newly acquired skills or higher productivity, it will make a serious dent into ambition and enthusiasm for training. On the other hand, by rewarding employees for showing effort and ambition, employers will create a workplace climate of dedication, pride and loyalty.
Today, more than ever before, the bottom line is this: it is very difficult to produce 'world class' wines with a 'third world' workforce. If anything, the industry will become more, not less, knowledge and technology intensive. If the industry wants to have a future, it needs to invest in people.
|
|
Wynboer is incorporated in WineLand, magazine of the SA wine producers.
Visit our sister sites:
|
| UP |
COPYRIGHT (C) 2000 WineLand |