Unions and employers have come together to raise concerns about another potential multi-million-dollar rort in the private vocational training sector.

Key points: Concerns trainers are ticking off on skills people may not have to reduce costs

Concerns trainers are ticking off on skills people may not have to reduce costs Trainers paid same amount as regular course for subjects completed via scheme

Trainers paid same amount as regular course for subjects completed via scheme Users have labelled the 'tick and flick' process as a rort and theft

Recognition of Prior Learning, known as RPL, is an assessment process that converts work experience into Australian qualifications.

It is used in sectors like the automotive industry, where people who have years of experience working on cars can use that work experience to count towards some, or all, of a formal qualification as a mechanic.

The number of businesses providing RPL to students has almost tripled in two years, off the back of taxpayer-funded schemes.

The ABC has found that 54 private businesses accessed Federal Education Department funding in 2014 to provide RPL.

That is up from 19 businesses in 2012.

The Federal Government alone pays out about $7.5 million a year to training companies who have passed students using RPL.

It pays the companies the same amount as a regular course for subjects completed via RPL.

State governments cover about 50 per cent of the cost of a subject completed via RPL.

Got a confidential news tip? Email ABC Investigations at investigations@abc.net.au For more sensitive information: Text message using the Signal phone app +61 436 369 072 No system is 100 per cent secure, but the Signal app uses end-to-end encryption and can protect your identity. Please read the terms and conditions.

Ian Curry from the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union said the scheme was critical for workers and employers.

But he said he had grave concerns about the quality of some providers accessing state and federal government funding.

"It's known as 'ticking and flicking'. They'll [assessors] wander around the place ticking off a check list of skills they think the worker already has, and that minimises the cost of delivery of training," Mr Curry said.

"Absolutely it's a rort, and as I say, it constitutes a theft, a theft against the Commonwealth by not delivering people with the skills the economy requires but it's [also] a theft of those workers' aspirations."

'Taxpayers money is at risk here'

Adam Wadi runs Get Qualified, a RPL brokerage in Sydney.

His business runs a fee-for-service model so he does not benefit from government incentives like the student loan VET-FEE-HELP scheme.

But he said he was concerned about unscrupulous competitors.

"I just feel, you know, taxpayers' money is at risk here," Mr Wadi said.

"Some people, they just receive their qualification without demonstrating skills, knowledge and experience for that qualification."

Lee Garrod spent years working as a cook, but has no formal qualification.

He is an example of the use of RPL working well.

"I never had a chance to go to TAFE and do a proper apprenticeship," he said.

He is now working with an accredited trainer at Mr Wadi's business to demonstrate his skills.

"It would have taken at least another two or three years for me to do to TAFE. This way it only takes me about two months," Mr Garrod said.

The Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA) is the regulator for most vocational training providers, including those that conduct RPL.

A spokesman for ASQA said: "Given that RPL is one form of assessment … there should be no variation in the competence of people being issued qualifications regardless of the way the assessment was undertaken."

ASQA encourages anyone with information or concerns about the quality of RPL to come forward.