March 9, 2021 - Minutes of Public Meetings - Apprenticeship and Training Council
Download this document (Word)
Brian S. Cavey - Chairperson Employee Representative
Shaunta Chapple - Public Representative
Norbert R. Klusmann, Sr. - Employee Representative
Neil E. Wilford, Jr. - Employee Representative
Leon W. Bromley - Employer Representative
Michelle L. Butt - Employer Representative
Grant Shmelzer - Employer Representative
David Smarte - Employer Representative
Ronald Leonard - USDL/OA Consultant to the Council
**Public Representative Christine Banovic, Employee Representative Allen B. Clinedinst III and Employee David J. Wilson, Sr. notified Director Christopher D. MacLarion that they were unable to attend before the meeting convened. Mr. Smarte left the meeting beginning at item 10 and did not return.
James Rzepkowski - Assistant Secretary for Workforce Development and Adult Learning, Maryland Department of Labor
Erin Roth - Deputy Assistant Secretary, DWDAL
Lloyd Day - Director Office of Workforce Development, DWDAL
Leza Griffith - Maryland Department of Labor, OAG
Christopher D. MacLarion - Director, Maryland Apprenticeship and Training Program (MATP)
Jeffrey W. Smith - Program Manager, MATP
John F. Vontran - Program Manager, MATP
Kelton Addison - MATP
Ginamarie Best - MATP
Kevin L. Hunt - MATP
David A. Minges - MATP
Jennifer D. Runkles - MATP
Wayne L. Salter - MATP
Jane Sinclair - MATP
John P. Taylor - MATP
Robert J. Zimberoff - MATP
John Feaster - DWDAL
Teresa Mena - DWDAL
Rosanne Fish - DWDAL
Lauren Gilwee - DWDAL
Grace Kelly - DWDAL
Natalie Clements - DWDAL
Angela Harkness - DWDAL
Angella Moon - DWDAL
Matt McKinney - Md. Dept. of Labor
Ellen Bredt - Md. Dept. of Labor
Danielle Frisby - Unboxing
Sean Klakring - Seaside Plumbing
Becky Kemp - Maryland Manufacturing
Eastern Shore Partnership
Brett Clarence - Paquin Design/Build
Carrie Aaron - Hub Labels
Carla Milan - Frederick Community College
Steven Carter - Frederick Community College
Robert Hendricks - Lower Shore Workforce Alliance (LSWA)
Allen Slaughter - Choptank Electric Cooperative
Paula Bishop - Choptank Electric Cooperative
Alicia Dennis - Eastern Shore Division of Workforce Development & Adult Learning
Charles Wallace - Md. State Dept. of Education
Steven Mackey - Stanley Security
Dustin Henry - Stanley Security
Sarah Greenville - Fabricated Extrusion Company of Maryland
Romina Byrd - Miller & Long
Linda Daigle-Jones - Electrical Apprenticeship Program of Carroll County, Maryland
Kiera McCarthy - BACH
Karen Heyward-West - BACH
Tyler Bloom - Congressional Country Club
Venus Jordan - Congressional Country Club
Leonard Howie - Director, Baltimore County Department of Economic and Workforce Development
Yvette Clark - Mayors Office of Employment Development (MOED)
Che Evans - Baltimore City Public Schools
Andreas Genemans - Local 486 JATC
Kristin Batson - G.A. Smith Electric
Leighton McPhaull - Talent Management Coordinator Baltimore County Dept. of Economic and Workforce Development
Michele Savage - Anne Arundel Community College
Chairman Cavey called the meeting to order at 9:01 a.m.
Minutes of the July 14, 2020, September 8, 2020 and November 10, 2020 Maryland Apprenticeship and Training Council meetings.
A motion to approve the minutes was made by Mr. Bromley, seconded by Mr. Smarte and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst and Mr. Wilson absent).
II. OPENING REMARKS
Asst. Sec. Rzepkowski offered opening remarks. He thanked everyone for their service on behalf of the Lieutenant Governor and Governor. He said the Council and staff’s work is valued and is making an impact on sponsors and apprentices. He said Sec. of Labor Tiffany Robinson couldn’t attend the meeting, virtually, because she was in another meeting to address unemployment issues. He said Sec. Robinson was eager to get back to other business, but unemployment work was very important and was her primary focus.
Asst. Sec. Rzepkowski said the Relief Act passed a few weeks prior, and DWDAL was given $7 million to be distributed to the Title I Local Workforce Areas. A formula would be used to distribute funds. Local Workforce Areas were encouraged to request flexible funding by April 1.
March 4 launched the second round of the Opioid Workforce Innovation Fund which included $1 million of the total $2.1 million. Opioids remained a crisis and the State was dealing with another crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic. Nearly 200 Marylanders were placed in employment and nearly 330 received credentials.
Asst. Sec. Rzepkowski said DWDAL made workforce connections in Anne Arundel County for returning citizens.
Asst. Sec. Rzepkowski said staff was preparing for the next round of USDOL’s Apprenticeship Expansion Grant which was expected in March or early April. He said the grant partnership was a key component of apprenticeship work in the State, and funds were being sought aggressively to support programs. The State Apprenticeship Grant draft policy was released; this was related to more than $6 million received in July 2020, and public comments were due later that week. Director MacLarion was to send out grant applications soon.
Asst. Sec. Rzepkowski said Correctional Education Schools were to begin reopening March 29. All correctional educators were vaccinated, so they could return confidently in a congregated environment with COVID-19 protocols in place.
Asst. Sec. Rzepkowski said the vetoes of the Kirwan education and funding package bills were overridden by the Maryland General Assembly. The Dept. of Labor was forming a workgroup to address this because the massive package included career and technical education and this would impact programs.
Asst. Sec. Rzepkowski thanked Chairman Cavey and Director MacLarion.
Chairman Cavey introduced Dep. Asst. Sec. Roth and DWDAL Director Day, who both said hello.
Chairman Cavey then instructed Director MacLarion to proceed with the Director’s report.
II. DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
A. This meeting was recorded to produce minutes. This meeting was also live streamed for the public, but the public was not able to communicate through the live stream.
B. The recording of minutes for past meetings was delayed by transitioning to a virtual venue because of the pandemic. This issue was addressed and minutes would be produced in a timely fashion in the future.
C. Director MacLarion’s daughter and grandsons joined the public in attending the meeting virtually.
D. The last in-person meeting was held 12 months prior at the Washington DC Electrical JATC. He was sure no one was expecting that a year later they would have conducted an entire years’ worth of meetings virtually.
E. Apprenticeship Training Fund update:
- Total Fund Balance as of February 28th, 2021, after all obligations was $1,046,511.
- January contributions: $12,075.97
- $5,000 expenditure - Junior Achievement
- February contributions: $7,384.11
- Note: The December balance report in the January Council meeting was overstated by $30,000. The two reported expenditures of $5,000 to sponsor Junior Achievement and $10,000 to sponsor Forward: Women’s Leadership Forum and Conference were inadvertently included in the balance column instead of the expenditure column. The totals provided March 9, 2021, were correct and inclusive of all obligations.
F. Deputy Asst. Sec. Erin Roth and Navigator Gina Best presented about apprenticeship and women in apprenticeship on March 5. The forum was hosted by Colette Colclough of MPT and coordinator with the Women’s Leadership Forum which was March 18-20. This was a live conversation about Maryland Apprenticeship and how women could get involved and search opportunities, as well as debunking myths about female apprenticeship opportunities. Related data would be provided later in this report.
G. The Eligible Training Providers List (ETPL) has provisions for approved Maryland Registered Apprenticeship Sponsors to be listed on the ETPL with a simplified process. More than 50 Sponsors were on the list, and any new sponsors coming on board were asked to consider submitting the ETPL application to staff who would assist with registration. It’s a valuable resource.
H. Youth Apprenticeship, also known as the Apprenticeship Maryland Program (AMP), added additional school systems since the previous meeting bringing the total to 19 school systems. Calvert and Anne Arundel County Public Schools were approved. Registered Apprenticeship sponsors and their participating and signatory employers were encouraged to participate in AMP.
I. Md. Dept. of Health: The Maryland Department of Health recently began the process of updating their regulations to allow Registered Apprenticeship to be an approved and recognized pathway for the occupation of Community Health Worker. The work from this Council in vetting two sponsors for this occupation set a great groundwork for advancing their work and for advancing the Registered Apprenticeship Pathway for employers with this occupation. This was a great success. Thanks to this Council for helping to make this possible.
J. the Dept. of Labor recently received revised USDOL Ratio guidance. On March 5, a supplement was emailed to the council which had the minutes for July, September and November. The email also included the following three documents: Circular 2017-01, this was the original USDOL Ratio Guidance; Circular 2021-02, this was the recently revised USDOL Ratio Guidance; and MATC Ratio Guidance, this was approved by MATC in 2018.
The documents have many similarities but also contain a few items where the guidance from USDOL may differ from the MATC guidance.
High level overview of the new guidance:
- Expands ratio guidance for the 1:1 apprentice to journeyworker exemption to four industries: Construction, Transportation, Mining and Agriculture
- Occupations should have data gleaned from BLS statistics versus from the USDOL Hazardous Occupation spreadsheet in 2017-01
- Fatality and serious injury reporting requirements and corrective and other action language
- Requires an agreement with OSHA in the OSHA Alliance Program
- Verifying completion rates as a metric for approval for up to five previous years
- Right to rescind language
- Allows for more stringent requirements
The circular also contained language in Sections V and VI which are included as guidance to State Apprenticeship Agencies, such as Maryland, which indicated that states should ensure that the guidance in the new Circular is met and that should a state not meet this minimum guidance that it could impact future funding for State Apprenticeship activities.
To ensure minimum requirements were met, the Council was asked to review all documents and be prepared to discuss this as an item at the May 11th, 2021 Council meeting.
K. The last update on the Director’s Report concerned data. As part of the work in helping to tell the story or Registered Apprenticeship, and just how impactful it is for employers and apprentices, staff worked with the Maryland Longitudinal Data System, or MLDS, to supply data on the apprenticeship program. This data would help to reinforce the more personal apprentice success stories.
This data also supports this Council’s and Maryland’s work on ensuring diversity in apprenticeship programs and expanded outreach efforts.
This Data was for apprentices who graduated between 2012 and 2013, and 1,019 apprentices were in the data set. Wages were provided for five years after apprenticeship graduation (wage years 2017-2018). Quarterly median wages were $20,687. This equates to $82,748 per year.
Female graduates earned higher wages than male graduates. This was the opposite of national data. African American graduates earned more than white graduates. This was also the opposite of national data.
The average age at completion of the apprenticeship was 31 years old. This was relatively in line with what staff expected to see but also showed that increased emphasis could be placed on partnering with local schools. Apprentices who graduated at 31 were likely 25 to 27 years old, on average, by the time they began.
Nearly 4 percent of the apprenticeship graduates received or were in the process of getting an associate degree. This was higher than expected.
Director MacLarion and Chairman Cavey asked if there were any questions.
Deputy Asst. Sec. Roth said the women’s leadership forum was a wonderful opportunity and there were more upcoming events. She said she hoped this forum and related events would make a difference in terms of people listening and paying attention. She expected about 600 people at the related conference coming the week after the meeting, and she hoped this would help spread the word on apprenticeship opportunities for women.
Grant Shmelzer asked for an update on inputting RAPIDS data. Director MacLarion said it was in test phase and he hoped it was near the end of this phase, but he had not received a recent update from the RAPIDS committee. Director MacLarion said he hoped to report back on this the week after the meeting.
Mr. Wilford asked about ratios. He asked if it was time to re-evaluate policies, standards, and other related items cohesively at the Council level. Director MacLarion said this was a timely question. Related matters were being addressed with USDOL and within the State. It was time to align the Council with these movements. Also, the National Apprenticeship Act Reauthorization was moving through U.S. Congress. The act’s approval would likely result in the State having to change its regulations. Director MacLarion said it was time that the Council consider aligning with these movements. Mr. Wilford said the Council should get moving on this to keep up.
Director MacLarion predicted that the impact of the National Apprenticeship Act Reauthorization would be known by May, and asked for Mr. Leonard’s guidance. Mr. Leonard said he couldn’t offer a solid timeframe for passage of the act.
Chairman Cavey asked if there were any more questions.
A motion to approve the director’s report was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Smarte and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst and Mr. Wilson absent).
III. NEW BUSINESS:
A. NEW PROGRAMS:
1. Congressional Country Club (Ginamarie Best) - Occupation of Greenskeeper II. Related instruction to be provided by the University of Georgia, in-house and web-based and live class sessions. Request for registration of an Afffirmative Action Plan with apprentice selection procedures and goals and timetables for minority and female apprentices. (item 1)
Mr. Shmelzer requested two clarifications. He asked what the training schedule is. Ms. Best said the program sponsor is in the process of holding a number of meetings including discussions to address the training schedule. Mr. Shmelzer said this is a concern.
Mr. Shmelzer asked about age qualifications. He saw the program allows for youth apprenticeship and school-to-apprenticeship programs. He asked if the program would accept individuals who are no longer in high school who don’t have a high school diploma or GED. Mr. Bloom elaborated. Mr. Bloom said someone who is older than high school age would be required to work toward obtaining a high school diploma or GED.
A motion to approve this request for registration of Standards, and the Affirmative Action Plan with apprentice selection procedures and goals and timetables for minority and female apprentices was made by Mr. Smarte, seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst and Mr. Wilson absent).
2. Stanley Security (Christopher D. MacLarion) - Occupation of Security and Alarm Systems Installer. Related instruction to be provided in Stanley Security facilities or online. (item 2)
MacLarion cited Mr. Mackey’s 40-plus years of experience including managing the USDOL apprenticeship program, as well as previous experience managing apprenticeship programs. Mr. Mackey was tasked with coordinating the USDOL apprenticeship program along with various state programs including Maryland. The Maryland Stanley location is in Towson.
Chairman Cavey asked for questions.
Mr. Wilford asked if Stanley is providing training as well as employment. If work slows down, the apprentice might be laid off and will have nowhere to go. Is this correct?
Director MacLarion explained that this is a common model for a single employer and compared it to other models.
Mr. Wilford said, in the single-employer model, “… if the apprentice gets laid off, he’s screwed.”
Director MacLarion said this is a harsh way of looking at it, but this is a single employer, and employers generally don’t hire with the intent to lay people off. This would be the case for any employee working for a single employer.
Mr. Wilford said he sees a lot of “hows” in Stanley’s instruction but it doesn’t include the “whys.” Mr. Wilford cited other standards, generally, that also explain the “whys.” He didn’t see much theory in the instruction.
Director MacLarion then mentioned the USDOL programs, and the related national standards. He said Stanley could work solely with USDOL, or also work with state apprenticeship programs. Stanley was exerting extra effort to work with program staff in Maryland in order to work more closely with the State He said many programs prefer to work more closely with the states by seeking to dually register standards. Maryland’s standards are “tighter” than USDOL, including the minimum requirement of 144 hours of related instruction.
Director MacLarion said he previously spoke to Mr. Mackey and more documents on curriculum, including the theory, were available.
Mr. Mackey said the theory and curriculum is much like other apprenticeship programs he worked with. The “how” is implied, and the journeyworker/mentor will explain the “why.” They have a selection process for identifying journeyworkers/mentors to do the training. Mr. Mackey asked for Mr. Henry’s input, but Director MacLarion said there were technical problems with Mr. Henry’s audio.
Mr. Mackey said he would be happy to provide documents if the Council could clarify its request.
Mr. Wilford said he was just looking for clarification. He said Director MacLarion’s explanation was valid and he thinks Stanley would be a welcome member to the apprenticeship community. Mr. Wilford said he is concerned about low voltage electrical work. He doesn’t want to lower standards for the electrical group which have been followed for many, many years.
Mr. Mackey said the sole focus of Stanley is security and fire alarm systems, their maintenance and installation. Stanley Security has no outside interest beyond these areas.
Mr. Shmelzer. said he is concerned about the related instruction outline. It’s 314 hours. How is it divided up from year one to year two?
Director MacLarion said a supplemental breakdown of the order of classes as they occur is available. He said he could split it out and send it to Council directly or include it in the package. Mr. Shmelzer said he would like to see the flow.
Director MacLarion said he sent more details about related instruction by email to the Council and they should have it within a few minutes.
Mr. Klusmann said he didn’t see any information about safety. Mr. Mackey said the standards address safety at the bottom.
Chairman Cavey asked for questions, comments or a motion.
Mr. Smarte made a motion to approve, seconded by Mr. Bromley.
Chairman Cavey asked for questions on the motion.
Mr. Shmelzer said he was still reviewing the documents Director MacLarion sent by email and he would abstain if needed.
Director MacLarion said staff always considers if a trade is apprenticeable. He said Security and Fire Alarm Installers have their own codes and data sets, and for these and other reasons, this is a distinct and apprenticeable occupation.
Director MacLarion asked for guidance on how to proceed. Mr. Shmelzer said he needs to see a better flow of related instruction. Mr. Shmelzer said he would vote against it.
Mr. Wilford asked if this item could be tabled. Chairman Cavey instructed Mr. Wilford that he could make the motion and a motion to table was in order.
Mr. Wilford made a motion to table approval of this program until the May Council meeting. This motion was seconded by Mr. Shmelzer and unanimously approved.
Director MacLarion requested clarification that the Council was requesting a reassembled packet with more clarity on educational flow of courses. The Chairman said this was correct.
3. Fabricated Extrusion Company of Maryland (Jennifer D. Runkles). Occupation of Tool and Die Maker. Related instruction to be provided on-line by the Maryland Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Tooling U. (item 3)
Ms. Runkles said the headquarters is in Hagerstown and the company was founded in December 2017. It’s a small, family-owned company. They design and develop tooling in-house for customers. This is an 8,000-hour, four-year program.
Mr. Shmelzer said it’s awesome to see manufacturing getting back on board with apprenticeship. He asked why this program isn’t being run through the Maryland Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP). “Why are we getting all these individual programs,” Mr. Shmelzer asked. Ms. Runkles said the sponsor chose to create an individual program, “rather than be under the MEP umbrella.”
Mr. Shmelzer asked Director MacLarion to have a conversation with MEP to discuss bolstering group non-joint programs. Mr. Shmelzer said he is concerned about the increasing number of new sponsors of individual programs. Mr. Shmelzer said he doesn’t have a problem with the Fabricated Extrusion program in particular and he is asking philosophically. Director MacLarion said staff sees a host of reasons for businesses forming individual programs, and listed simple and complex examples. Mr. Shmelzer thanked Director MacLarion and Ms. Runkles.
Mr. Wilford asked if the related instruction was strictly online. Ms. Runkles said the nearest training facility is in Catonsville which is more than a two-hour drive. There is no training for tool and die makers nearby. Mr. Wilford expressed concern about removing face-to-face instruction. Mr. Wilford said he disapproves of online instruction.
Mr. MacLarion said that remote instruction has been available for many years, including correspondence courses.
Mr. Klusmann said he is concerned with portions of the qualifications including ability to show self control, composure and professional language. He asked if they were stuffers. Director MacLarion answered no; competencies are often included based on the necessity of the trades. Director MacLarion said more employers and programs are including similar language. It points to cognizance and responsibility. Mr. Klusmann said he sees it as another form of gatekeeping, and this language does not benefit the apprentice. Mr. Klusmann said sometimes he thinks “it’s a little overkill.”
A motion to approve this request for registration of Standards was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Smarte and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst and Mr. Wilson absent).
4. Hub Labels, Inc. (Jennifer D. Runkles) - Occupation of Additive Postscript Printing Technician. Related instruction to be provided by MEP Tooling U and the Flexographic Technical Association. (item 4)
This sponsor is a youth apprenticeship sponsor (AMP) and was part of a pilot in Washington County. The business grew quickly after it was founded and it continues to grow.
A motion to approve this request for registration of Standards was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Ms. Butt and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst and Mr. Wilson absent).
B. PROGRAM REVISIONS:
1. Baltimore Alliance for Careers in Healthcare (Christopher D. MacLarion) - Revision to the Affirmative Action Plan and apprentice selection procedures for the occupation of Licensed Practical Nurse. (item 5)
Director MacLarion noted that a portion of this revision requires all candidates to successfully take and pass the Test of Essential Academic Skills (TEAS). The second change requires the successful obtainment of a CNA or GNA license. These changes should work to increase the completion rates for LPN apprentices.
Mr. Shmelzer asked if there is a competency test available that would enable advanced placement. “Are they absolutely, unequivocally required to take these courses,” Mr. Shmelzer asked.
Director Maclarion answered, “LPN has very specific requirements for the occupation and for the education, and for the certifications and for the process of going through it. They have to meet those minimum requirements. …”
Mr. Shmelzer said he’s very concerned about this. In other programs, apprentices can “skip out” and advance through programs more quickly.
Director MacLarion asked Ms. McCarthy, of BACH, to address Mr. Shmelzer’s questions.
Ms. McCarthy said the three prerequisite classes are the fastest track available. They are prerequisites.
Mr. Shmelzer asked if students could get credit for classes taken in high school such as AP courses. Ms. McCarthy said she was unsure and she could check with the college. Mr. Shmelzer said it’s hard to believe that there’s no pathway besides the one presented. He said another ½ year to a year is potentially being added to the term of the apprenticeship. Ms. McCarthy said it’s an academically rigorous program.
The Chairman said he has similar concerns to Mr. Shmelzer. He asked if there were any other pathways to advancement. Ms. McCarthy said BACH is interested in creating a GNA apprenticeship, as well. The Chairman asked if apprentices could take nursing CTE courses in high school. The Chairman asked Mr. Wallace for his thoughts.
Mr. Wallace said students could concurrently enroll. He said his daughter received an LPN and she enrolled concurrently. Director MacLarion said that there are CTE CNA pathways in some school systems in the State, including Prince George’s County; linking employers to this pathway is also important. This is an example of a need to scale an entire system by chipping away at it in the health care community at large. These are the core courses required at the college and it’s important to start small and think big. Mr. Wallace generally agreed.
Mr. Shmelzer said he was confused. Mr. Shmelzer said, “So the sponsor is coming to us and requesting this, however, was this dictated by the community college?” Director MacLarion said this was correct. Mr. Shmelzer asked if this is something the sponsor actually wants or if this is something “the college is telling you you have to do.”
Ms. McCarthy said she really wants to see participants be successful, LPNs struggle to complete courses because of the academic rigor, TEAS is a requirement for all students, and the school uses it to assure students are prepared for LPN courses.
Mr. Shmelzer questioned the need for specific classes such as English. He said he was struggling to understand why there wasn’t an opportunity to accelerate apprenticeships.
Director MacLarion cited other requirements for other trades including plumbing that are rigorous.
Mr. Shmelzer said he is concerned the college is pushing this. He is concerned about a precedent being set.
Director MacLarion said he doesn’t view this as a college setting precedent. He said this is not just one college. This is the requirement across the system.
Ms. Chapple said many nursing schools require TEAS tests. People need to be competent and take the TEAS exam to be successful in obtaining an associate degree. She said she thinks English as a course is essential as well.
Ms. Chapple made a motion to approve that was seconded by Ms. Butt.
Chairman Cavey asked for questions. Mr. Wilford asked for clarification on licensing and programming. Ms. McCarthy said the program prepares apprentices to take the LPN exam and receive national licenses.
The motion to approve revision to the Affirmative Action Plan, and apprenticeship selection procedures was unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst and Mr. Wilson absent).
2. Frederick Community College (Jennifer D. Runkles) - Revision to the related instruction curriculum for the occupation of Emergency Management Specialist. (item 6)
Ms. Runkles said this is Track 2 curriculum which leads to an associate degree.
Mr. Shmelzer asked if an individual can receive an apprenticeship certificate without having to take basic classes, much like his concerns and related discussion in item 5 of the minutes, including English 101 and math in year one. He asked if this system is moving toward allowing colleges to mandate basic classes. Ms. Runkles said the curriculum is designed to offer the best related instruction for apprentices to do their jobs.
Mr. Shmelzer then addressed the Council. He said community colleges are starting to “add on layers of courses.” Mr. Shmelzer said from the perspective of the Independent Electrical Contractors (IEC), he sees course content being less and less. It is of great concern. He said he thinks it’s time for the Council to decide where it’s going. He sees less occupational content and more basic college courses.
Mr. Klusmann said, “And I agree 100 percent with Grant (Shmelzer). This is starting to be a community college council instead of an apprenticeship council.”
Ms. Runkles said these classes are a part of the industry standard and there is a benefit to receiving an associate degree. Mr. Klussman said he thinks the community college is now directing the industry. Ms. Runkles said college staff meets with community partners and follows the guidance of their partners in the community. Mr. Klusmann said, “I hear what you’re saying, but I believe it’s the other way around.”
Chairman Cavey said he thinks the Council would agree that the related instruction, “… is what we say it is as industry. … The college shouldn’t be telling us what courses we need to take in order to get a completion certificate from the State. It should be us telling the community college … I need this class in related instruction … Maybe it’s semantics, but it’s what is happening here today. …” Chairman Cavey said it sounds like the colleges are dictating courses to the sponsors, he asked Councilmembers if they agreed. Mr. Smarte and Mr. Klusmann, agreed.
Mr. Shmelzer said he thinks there needs to be an opportunity for individuals to show aptitude in lieu of mandated courses. Mr. Shmelzer predicted that as more nontraditional apprenticeship sponsors join the program, the more colleges will mandate coursework. He thinks the Council needs to address this “bigger philosophical issue.”
Mr. Klusmann agreed with Mr. Shmelzer, and said individuals choose apprenticeship as an alternate career pathway to college, but now individuals, “… can’t tell the difference.”
Mr. MacLarion said he agrees that colleges should not dictate to the Council what an occupation does or does not require in terms of electives. However, he hopes the Council will consider looking at the broader system, including the college relationship with nontraditional sponsors. He emphasized there’s a benefit to the apprentice should the apprentice receive an associate degree without having to pay for instruction. “That is a win for the apprenticeship community. It’s a win for the apprentice and in the end … it’s a win for the college,” he said. He then said he hopes the Council will keep the ability for program growth in mind. He said he understands that not every occupation will be approved by the Council.
Mr. Shmelzer then addressed Director MacLarion and Dep. Asst. Sec. Roth. He said there are a lot of long-term programs, both union and non-union, that still don’t get credit for their apprenticeship programs. He said colleges are pushing new occupations instead of coming back to long-term programs and giving them credit. He questioned if community colleges want to be a true partner in the apprenticeship community. He encouraged future dialogue between colleges and the apprenticeship program.
Director MacLarion said he has an outsized interest in getting apprentices more college credits. He said he believes apprentices are learning more, and said articulation of credits varies from sponsor to sponsor and program to program. Program staff has met with the Maryland Higher Education Commission and the Maryland State Department of Education. They are all parts of the system and each college makes its own agreements. Director MacLarion said he knows some Councilmembers may disagree, but he would like apprentices to be able to take extra credit courses to obtain an associate degree in addition to an apprenticeship certificate. Director MacLarion said that increased interaction with Mr. Wallace and MHEC would add value to the program. Mr. Shmelzer said Mr. Wallace brings “a lot of value to the table.” Mr. Shmelzer said he simply wants to better understand the perspective of the colleges.
Dep. Asst. Sec. Roth said she thought this was a healthy conversation. She said she appreciated the healthy dialogue of an active Council. She said she thinks there’s an opportunity to discuss issues with the colleges more globally. She said she meets with college groups often and committed to bringing this issue to future discussions in hopes of getting community colleges more involved with the Council and program staff.
Chairman Cavey asked the Council to turn its attention back to this item (item 6) and requested a motion.
Mr. Wilford asked if apprentices would receive an associate degree upon successful completion of the apprenticeship. Ms. Runkles confirmed an associate degree would be obtained. Mr. Wilford suggested the EMS journeyperson’s wage was low and a higher wage should be considered. Ms. Runkles said that’s an average wage. Mr. Wilford said he’s concerned about the people that are bringing that average down. Ms. Runkles said she is working with others to diversify the employer base.
A motion to approve this revision was made by Mr. Smarte and seconded by Ms. Butt. Mr. Klusmann and Mr. Wilford opposed, Mr. Shmelzer abstained, all others approved – four yeas, two nays, one abstention, motion carried.
3. Choptank Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Jane Sinclair) - Revision to add an Affirmative Action Plan with apprentice selection procedures and goals and timetables for minority and female apprentices. (item 7)
Chairman Cavey asked how Choptank Electric got up to 12 apprentices before staff noticed and created an Affirmative Action Plan. Director MacLarion said usually this type of issue is caught early through the system as apprentices are registered. This is a rare case, but it’s an example of a cause for staff to review programs regularly. This is only the second time Director MacLarion has seen an incident such as this, he said.
Mr. Klusmann asked if there were any minorities registered. Ms. Sinclair said there are no minority apprentices, but there is a minority journeyperson. Mr. Klusmann asked if this is being addressed. Ms. Sinclair said staff is working to address this and that there is a new apprenticeship navigator on the Eastern Shore who will be able to assist. Mr. Klusmann suggested sending a letter if this is not addressed.
Mr. Wilford asked if anyone has graduated since the program started in 2015. Director MacLarion said two apprentices graduated out of the first cohort.
Mr. Klusmann made a motion to review the results of the Affirmative Action Plan in a year. Mr. Wilford seconded, but Chairman Cavey stated that the Affirmative Action Plan was not yet approved. Mr. Smarte amended the motion to include approval of the Affirmative Action Plan. Mr. Klussman then motioned to approve the Affirmative Action Plan and request this review in a year, Mr. Wilford seconded and the motion was unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst and Mr. Wilson absent).
Chairman Cavey announced a 10-minute comfort break and called the meeting back to order at 11:10 a.m.
4. G.A. Smith Electric, Inc. (Jane Sinclair) – Revision to add the College of Southern Maryland as a related instruction provider for the occupation of Electrician. (item 8)
Mr. Shmelzer said Anne Arundel Community College doesn’t have an electrical apprenticeship program and asked that the documents be modified to correct this error. Ms. Sinclair said the documents would be modified for the record.
Mr. Shmelzer asked how the sponsor maintains attendance records. Mr. Shmelzer asked what happens when a student misses classes since it is a time-based program. He asked if the sponsor receives daily reports or weekly reports. He asked how the sponsor handles missed related instruction hours.
Ms. Batson said she obtains the attendance schedule from the related instruction providers, and the apprentices know they can only miss two classes.
Mr. Klusmann said he sees a lot of tuition and fees. He asked if an apprentice or the sponsor is responsible for paying the fees. Ms. Sinclair said the sponsor is responsible.
A motion to approve this revision was made by Mr. Wilford, seconded by Mr. Klusmann and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst and Mr. Wilson absent).
5. Wingard and Company, Inc. (Jane Sinclair) Revision to the term of apprenticeship for the occupations of Tool and Die Maker and Tool and Die Designer with adjustments to work processes, apprentice wage progression schedules and related instruction curriculums. (item 9)
A motion to approve this revision was made by Mr. Bromley, seconded by Mr. Klusmann and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst and Mr. Wilson absent).
Ms. Sinclair noted that the sponsor has recognized the value of offering accessibility to related instruction with a physical location for related instruction, classes at CCBC, and Tooling U. Mr. Wilford said he hopes the sponsor communicates this to community colleges in western Maryland.
6. Electrical Apprenticeship Program of Carroll County, Maryland (John P. Taylor) - Revision to apply the percentages of the apprentice wage progression schedule to both wages and fringe benefits. (item 10)
There was significant feedback in the sound during Mr. Taylor’s presentation. Mr. Feaster and Asst. Sec. Rzepkowski communicated with Mr. Taylor to address the issue. He was logged in multiple times. The issue was addressed, and Mr. Taylor continued with his presentation.
Mr. Klusmann asked if the program was paying full fringe benefits but now only wants to pay a portion of these benefits. Mr. Taylor answered yes. Chairman Cavey said this change would be operating within Maryland regulations.
Mr. Klusmann made a motion to disapprove this revision. Chairman Cavey asked if there was a second. The motion received no second and did not carry.
Chairman Cavey asked for questions. Chairman Cavey announced that Mr. Smarte was no longer present.
A motion to approve this revision was made by Mr. Shmelzer and seconded by Mr. Bromley. Mr. Klusmann and Mr. Wilford voted nay. All other councilmembers voted yea. Motion carried. (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
7. Paquin Design/Build (Robert J. Zimberoff) – Revision to the related instruction curriculum for the occupation of Architectural Drafter/Estimator. (item 11)
Mr. Zimberoff said, in response to the conversation about colleges in previous items, that this revision was intended to add flexibility to the sponsor’s standards. This was not a case of the college dictating curriculum to the sponsor.
Chairman Cavey welcomed Mr. Zimberoff as did Mr. Shmelzer.
Mr. Shmelzer said he didn’t see details about the total amount of related instruction hours per year. Mr. Zimberoff said those details are in the original standards, and there is roughly 200 hours of related instruction per year.
Mr. Shmelzer asked how the sponsor is tracking related instruction hours. Mr. Zimberoff asked Mr. Clarence to answer. Mr. Clarence said he was not receiving attendance records but he was receiving reports on grades and performance. Mr. Shmelzer said this was a problem. He said an apprentice might pass a class but not achieve the necessary classroom hours. He recommended that the sponsor devise a system in order to receive a daily attendance report. Mr. Clarence said the sponsor would resolve this.
Chairman Cavey explained the minimum requirement of 144 hours per year.
Mr. Shmelzer suggested that Mr. Zimberoff work with the sponsor to get a system in place.
Mr. Shmelzer made a motion to table and suggested opening this up for discussion. Mr. Klusmann seconded. Chairman Cavey opened for discussion. Chairman Cavey then requested clarification of the motion which was to table until the next Council meeting.
Mr. Wilford said on a positive note he was glad to see a community college working with the
Director MacLarion disagreed with the motion to table and the second. Director MacLarion said that this is an “under 5” sponsor that is coming due for a provisional review within 45 days. He said the sponsor voluntarily worked with program staff rather than waiting for a review. He said the related instruction far exceeds the necessary 144 hours per year. Director MacLarion suggested relying on the review process to address potential issues with this sponsor. He also said the sponsor has only one apprentice.
Mr. Shmelzer asked Director MacLarion if a conditional approval pending the validation of attendance logs was acceptable. Director MacLarion said from a staff perspective he would be amenable to conditional approval with the caveat that if attendance logs didn’t suffice this would be included in the review along with a provision on how staff would work with the sponsor to correct the process.
Mr. Shmelzer withdrew his original motion. Mr. Klusmann withdrew the original second.
Mr. Shmelzer made a motion to conditionally approve this revision pending results of the provisional review. The conditional motion carried unanimously (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
8. Seaside Plumbing, Inc. (Robert J. Zimberoff) - Revision to related instruction to allow for the use of NexTech and in-house instruction versus the Delaware College System. (item 12)
Mr. Wilford asked if this was removing face-to-face instruction and moving strictly to online instruction. Mr. Zimberoff said face-to-face instruction would be paired with online curriculum. Mr. Wilford asked why three different college systems would be removed. Mr. Zimberoff asked Mr. Klakring to answer Mr. Wilford’s question. Mr. Klakring’s audio was bad.
Director MacLarion said the sponsor did its best to work with three community colleges. The sponsor’s location limited access to related instruction at these insititutions. The colleges in Delaware have struggled to offer classes because of the pandemic. He said the new instruction will increase the number of hours and amount of education the apprentice will receive. He said the sponsor has experienced ongoing struggles with access to schools in Delaware.
Mr. Shmelzer asked for a better definition of in-house technical training. Director MacLarion said this reinforces the online curriculum and teaches the practical purposes of the theory. Mr. Shmelzer said he was unable to find details on the fourth year of instruction. Director MacLarion listed the details of the fourth year of instruction.
Mr. Shmelzer made a motion to approve this revision that was seconded by Mr. Bromley.
Mr. Wilford asked how long the instructional provider was approved by the apprenticeship program. Director MacLarion said he didn’t know. Mr. Wilford asked if the instructional provider was ever used before. Director MacLarion deferred to Mr. Taylor. Mr. Taylor said the provider had never been used before, to the best of his knowledge, and further explained that a motion to approve would enable the provider’s instruction to be used by other apprenticeship programs going forward.
Mr. Wilford voted nay. All other councilmembers voted yea. Motion carried (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
C. PROGRAM REVIEWS [Five (5) or More Apprentices]:
1. Baltimore Bricklayers JATC for the Masonry Industry (Ginamarie Best). (item 13)
A motion to accept this review, with staff findings and recommendations, was made by Mr. Klusmann, seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
2. International Union of Elevator Constructors Local No. 10 Joint Apprenticeship Committee (Ginamarie Best). (item 14)
A motion to accept this review, with staff findings and recommendations, was made by Mr. Klusmann, seconded by Mr. Wilford and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
3. Mid-Atlantic Carpenters' Training Center - Washington, D.C. (Ginamarie Best). (item 15)
A motion to accept this review, with staff findings and recommendations, was made by Mr. Klusmann, seconded by Mr. Shmelzer and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
4. United Union of Roofers, Water-Proofers and Allied Workers Local Union No. 34 JATC (Jennifer D. Runkles). (item 16)
Mr. Klusmann said he’s glad to see the program moving in the right direction.
A motion to accept this review, with staff findings and recommendations, was made by Mr. Klusmann, seconded by Mr. Shmelzer and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
5. Choptank Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Jane Sinclair). (item 17)
Mr. Klusmann said it appears that the sponsor had female and minority applicants but none were hired. Ms. Sinclair responded that an Affirmative Action Plan to address these matters was put in place earlier in the meeting (item 7). Mr. Klusmann suggested that staff follow up in a year. Chairman Cavey said this suggestion was already approved in the motion in item 7.
A motion to accept this review, with staff findings and recommendations, was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
D. PROGRAM REVIEWS [Fewer Than Five (5) Apprentices]:
1. The following program reviews were performed and the programs were found to be conducted in a satisfactory manner. (No Council Action Required):
a. G.A. Smith, Inc. - Occupation of Electrician (Jane Sinclair). (item 18)
E. PROVISIONAL REVIEWS:
1. Anne Arundel Community College (Jane Sinclair). (item 19)
Mr. Shmelzer noted what he viewed as an error on the related form – a salary of only $5.50 per hour. Ms. Sinclair clarified that this was a tipped occupation.
Mr. Shmelzer said he finds it very odd that everyone who applied got in, but they are not hitting Affirmative Action numbers. Ms. Sinclair said COVID-19 has significantly impacted the sponsor’s ability to recruit.
Mr. Shmelzer asked Director MacLarion for clarification of the timing of the next review. Director MacLarion said a full review would be conducted in the second year of the program.
Mr. Shmelzer suggested the sponsor put more effort into recruitment.
A motion to accept this provisional review, with staff findings and recommendations, was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved. (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
2. National Association of Landscape Professionals (Jane Sinclair). (item 20)
A motion to accept this provisional review, with staff findings and recommendations, was made by Mr. Bromley, seconded by Mr. Wilford and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
F. VOLUNTARY REQUEST FOR CANCELLATION OF STANDARDS OF APPRENTICESHIP:
1. Goel Services, Inc. effective March 10, 2021. (item 21)
A motion to accept this voluntary cancellation was made by Mr. Bromley, seconded by Mr. Wilford and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
G. OTHER BUSINESS:
1. Maryland Environmental Service (Jane Sinclair) - Request for after-the-fact registration and completion of an apprentice Environmental Systems Operator. (item 22)
Director MacLarion presented since Ms. Sinclair was experiencing technical difficulties.
A motion to approve this after-the-fact registration was made by Mr. Klusmann, seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
2. Wingard and Company, Inc. (Jane Sinclair) – Request for registration of an apprentice Tool and Die Maker with credit beyond the fifty percent (50%) level for related instruction only. (item 23)
Mr. Shmelzer asked why there was a need for this action. Ms. Sinclair said the candidate was hired and had taken courses. Once this person showed aptitude for the job, this person was encouraged to become an apprentice.
A motion to approve this credit was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Klusmann and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
3. Request for the approval of Bel Air Hyundai to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jeffrey W. Smith). (item 24)
4. Request for the approval of GOT Electric, LLC to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jeffrey W. ·Smith). (item 25)
5. Request for the approval of Innovative Machine Corporation to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jeffrey W. Smith). (item 26)
6. Request for the approval of Old Line Barbers, LLC to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jeffrey W. Smith). (item 27)
Shmelzer – are we comfortable with related instruction. Smith said the school system already had barber curriculum in place.
7. Request for the approval of Westmor Industries to be an eligible employer for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (Jeffrey W. Smith). (item 28)
A motion to approve five eligible employers for Apprenticeship Maryland (Youth) (items 24 to 28) was made by Mr. Shmelzer, seconded by Mr. Bromley and unanimously approved (Ms. Banovic, Mr. Clinedinst, Mr. Smarte and Mr. Wilson absent).
Chairman Cavey called for any further business. Hearing none, he opened the meeting for closing remarks.
Mr. Leonard said he would provide more information about the National Apprenticeship Act of 2021 including a link to a related website.
Director MacLarion suggested that Councilmembers read the reauthorization act. He said staff is in the process of hiring four new staff members. He welcomed back John Vontran as program manager. Director MacLarion said staff has seen a generally positive response to requests that sponsors conform to Affirmative Action Plans. Director MacLarion thanked the Council for its diligence.
Mr. Taylor asked for the voting outcome of item 20. Chairman Cavey said it was approved unanimously.
Mr. Wilford asked if minutes needed to be approved. Chairman Cavey clarified that the minutes were approved. Mr. Wilford was experiencing technical difficulties when the minutes were approved.
Mr. Shmelzer motioned to adjourn. Chairman Cavey adjourned the meeting at 12:35 p.m.
Christopher D. MacLarion
Maryland Apprenticeship and Training Council
Select the minutes from the list below
- May 16, 2023
- March 14, 2023
- January 10, 2023
- November 15, 2022
- September 20, 2022
- July 12, 2022
- May 10, 2022
- March 8, 2022
- January 11, 2022
- November 16, 2021
- September 14, 2021
- May 11, 2021
- March 9, 2021
- January 12, 2021
- November 10, 2020
- September 8, 2020
- July 14, 2020
- May 12, 2020
- March 10, 2020
- January 14, 2020
- November 12, 2019
- September 10, 2019
- July 9, 2019
- May 14, 2019
- March 12, 2019
- January 8, 2019
- November 13, 2018
- September 18, 2018
- July 10, 2018
- May 8, 2018
- March 13, 2018
- January 9, 2018
- November 14, 2017
- September 12, 2017
- July 11, 2017
- May 9, 2017
- January 10, 2017
- November 15, 2016
- September 13, 2016
- July 14, 2016
- May 26, 2016 Special Called Council Meeting
- May 10, 2016
- March 8, 2016
- January 12, 2016
- November 10, 2015