India Inc's initiative to adopt Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs) across the country is facing problems because of low level of cooperation on the field as well as red-tapism, industry lobby groups have claimed.
The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry and the Confederation of Indian Industry, two premier industry chambers, have adopted 25 and 225 ITIs, respectively.
According to Ficci, it was able to adopt only half of what it had initially planned -- 50 ITIs. Even within this, only eight institutes have progressed according to its plans.
Administrative tussle, bureaucratic hurdles, poor infrastructure, and even apathy from the ITI staff are cited as reasons for poor implementation.
"This is a legacy problem," said Amit Mitra, secretary general of Ficci, summing up the obstacles faced by the industry body. In order to ensure that only serious players get in, Ficci mandated that interested sponsors would have to put in Rs 1 crore (Rs 10 million) for each ITI they proposed to adopt.
CII, which had no such monetary conditions for participation in the scheme, has also faced similar problems. However, it considers them as 'teething troubles' that cloud any new initiative. At present, 145 CII members have participated in the scheme and according to the lobby group, all the stakeholders consider it as a 'win-win' situation.
The scheme for adoption of ITIs through public-private partnership was first announced by the then Finance Minister P Chidambaram in his Budget speech of February 2007. About 1,396 institutes were to be developed by involving the industry, which would adopt them while the government would provide a grant of Rs 2.5 crore (Rs 25 million) for each of them. Currently, only about 3 per cent of employed people in India have any formal training and therefore this scheme was seen as a significant skill development endeavour.
According to Ficci, one of the reasons for the obstacles faced by them is that the scheme formulated by the central government does not have much involvement of the state bureaucratic structure, which is where the clearances are needed.
As a result, the ITI authorities, including the principal, cannot implement any decision taken by the Institute Management Committee, unless administrative bosses clear them. "This duality in control of ITI staff creates problems," Mitra adds.
Moreover, industry bodies believe that lack of awareness amongst the ITI staff also adds to the woes, as adoption by a company in many cases were seen as privatisation of these institutes.
Giving an example of red-tapism, Ficci cited its experience in adopting an ITI in Aurangabad, Maharashtra. It was decided to set up a new training block, with new building and machinery. According to government rules, only Public Works Department is allowed to construct the building, but no contractors were willing because the contract size was small. "This would not have happened had private contractors been allowed," said Mitra.
