Issue link: https://nebusinessmedia.uberflip.com/i/805635
10 Hartford Business Journal • April 3, 2017 www.HartfordBusiness.com OPINION & COMMENTARY EDITORIAL Public-private partnerships key to workforce development A mid Connecticut's budget woes, the state received a nice gift last week from manufacturer and electronics maker Siemens. The German conglomerate announced it is donating $315 million worth of manufacturing and product design software to the state's community colleges to help better prepare students for advanced-manufacturing careers. According to Siemens, the software is used by many innovative companies in the state, giving students real-world experience that will better prepare them for the workforce. This is the type of private-public partnership Connecticut must promote and do more of if it wants to remain competitive in building its future workforce. As state gov- ernment struggles with its fiscal crisis and takes the necessary steps to rein in spending, there will be less money available to invest in certain areas, including higher education and workforce development, as crucial as they are. The timing, of course, couldn't be worse as Connecticut faces a graying workforce and higher demand for skilled workers at some of our largest companies. Electric Boat, for example, intends to grow its 11,000-employee workforce to 18,000 by 2030, requiring it to hire 14,000 workers in the years ahead, according to a recently released report by the Connecticut Institute for the 21st Century (CT21), a policy think tank. East Hartford jet engine maker Pratt & Whitney needs to hire 8,000 new workers over the next decade to keep up with demand for its military and commercial engines. At the same time, the challenges we face in training the next generation of workers in Con- necticut are immense. According to the CT21 report, not only is Connecticut's manufacturing workforce graying and heading into retirement, but we also have training programs with lim- ited capacity and jobs-skills requirements that are evolving faster than training curriculums. All these factors have left us with an inadequate supply of qualified, skilled work- ers, which is a major threat to our economy. At a time when Connecticut's job growth remains in neutral, some of our state's manufacturers are looking to hire, but can't find bodies to fill their shop floors. We've highlighted some of these issues in the past. HBJ News Editor Gregory Seay recent- ly reported that the state's vocational-technical high school system lacks enough instructors to teach advanced manufacturing courses, lengthening the time it takes to train students. There is a bill in the legislature (Senate Bill 950) that would try to remedy that prob- lem by trimming the minimum experience level required, from eight to five years, to become a certified vo-tech instructor. We urge lawmakers to adopt it. The only way this state will fill these well-paying, career-oriented jobs is if policy- makers work with private industry to develop new, innovative ways to train and recruit workers. The alternative is that more companies will relocate operations to states that can fill their employment needs. We've already seen plenty of examples of this. Don't forget General Electric moved its headquarters to Boston to be closer to technology talent; United Technologies Corp. just announced that it's building a $300 million digital technology center in Brooklyn, N.Y. for the same reason. To be fair, plenty of public-private partnerships already exist in Connecticut. Pratt & Whitney, for example, has an additive manufacturing innovation center at UConn and groups like the Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology are providing training and education opportunities to those old and young. Meantime, there are companies that have established their own apprenticeship and training programs as well. But we need more of these collaborations. As part of its report, CT21 offered some commonsense recommendations, including expanding the number of available vo-tech instructors and allowing for more industry input into program and curriculum design. We agree with those ideas, but the private sector must take a leading, proactive role in this area to get what it needs. n OTHER VOICES Tesla direct-sale proposal unfair to auto manufacturers By Amy Brink D ecades ago, states across America passed a series of laws requiring the sale of motor vehicles through inde- pendent franchised car dealers, thereby mak- ing direct sale by manufacturers illegal. As a result, today automakers are virtual- ly the sole consumer product manufacturers in the nation forbidden from selling the very products they conceive, design and produce to their own customers. Sound fair? It is not. Nonetheless, automakers built and invest- ed in this mandated sales system that regu- lates every single aspect of the manu- facturer-dealer rela- tionship, right down to how much input a manufacturer can have over where and how its own prod- ucts are marketed, displayed and sold. There are aspects of the law governing the franchise rela- tionship that add costs and inefficiencies; certainly pro-consumer systemic reforms are needed. But since all manufacturers are required to play by this same set of rules, no one automaker has a competitive advan- tage over any other. Until now. Last month, the Connecticut Gen- eral Assembly's Joint Committee on Transportation approved controver- sial company-specific legislation granting a lifetime exemption from franchised vehi- cle sales to a single manufacturer. That company is Tesla Motors. Now that is definitely not fair. It is not fair when you consider that nothing in law precludes Tesla or anyone else from competing in the Connecticut market today like any other auto manufacturer com- petitor. Tesla simply does not want to play by the same distribution rules that everyone else is required by law to follow. Luxury Teslas delivered to Connecticut customers start at $68,000, and Tesla sales prices can easily tally six figures. Tesla is a niche brand out of reach for most consumers in Connecticut, where the average new car manu- facturer's suggested retail price is $31,770. But Connecticut consumers who want to own a Tesla are able to buy them. Currently 1,133 Teslas are registered on Connecticut roads. Despite its arguments to the contrary, Tesla is not unique. Of the 12 automaker members of the Auto Alliance, most sell pre- mium models. Many offer electric or fuel cell powertrains at a variety of price points. And, every single one is incorporating astounding technological innovations into vehicles avail- able to consumers today. Good Connecticut neighbors, employers and corporate citizens would be harmed if the General Assembly were to approve this single company exemption. Our members include such iconic brands as Ford, General Motors and Toyota — all of whom have an employment presence in Connecticut. West Coast's Tesla? Not so much. Alliance member companies greatly sup- port the Connecticut economy, contribut- ing millions of dollars in annual payroll and taxes. Manufacturers and their partners directly employ almost 6,500 Connecticut workers; dealers another 28,000-plus Con- necticut residents. And, economic activity associated with our products accounts for $1.49 billion in tax revenue to the state of Connecticut each year. This is not the first time this plea from Tesla has been presented to Connecticut leg- islators. And it has been rejected every single year prior. Now passed out of committee in this 2017 session, the bill moves to both the Connecticut House and Senate floors for their sepa- rate consideration. Our hope is that legislators will con- tinue to value our commitment to our customers and to the Connecticut communities we call home by voting for fair competition. Our position is simple: All motor vehicle manufac- turers should be required to follow the same set of prod- uct distribution rules as mandated by state law regardless of vehicle attributes, compilation and size of vehicle fleet, or timing of market entrance. While many provisions of state franchise laws can be onerous to manufacturers, all market participants should have to compete equally on a level playing field under a single set of rules. n Amy Brink is vice president of state affairs for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, the leading advocacy group for the auto industry. HARTFORDBUSINESS.COM POLL Has the CTfastrak busway been a smart investment for CT? ● Yes ● No To vote, go online to HartfordBusiness.com. Last week's poll results: Should CT legalize recreational use of marijuana? 63.6% Yes 36.4% No Amy Brink ▶ ▶ Today automakers are virtually the sole consumer product manufacturers in the nation forbidden from selling the very products they conceive, design and produce to their own customers. Sound fair? It is not. Send Us Your Letters The Hartford Business Journal welcomes letters to the editor and guest commentaries for our opinion pages. Electronic submissions are preferred and welcome at: editor@HartfordBusiness.com.