Get a move on!

This section summarises recent research on the financial barriers facing many apprentices and, in particular, how transport costs are a major contributory factor on this front. Access to high-quality apprenticeships is, in many circumstances, an opportunity for young people to achieve a long-term career with good job prospects. But for the many the reality is very different, and they face many barriers and challenges that have previously blighted their opportunities and achievements in their earlier experiences of education and training. 

The recent annual review by the Social Mobility Commission7 highlights some of the key research findings about the barriers that disadvantaged young people encounter when taking up an apprenticeship and how this reduces social mobility.

Apprentices and social mobility

The commission highlights that a key challenge is that many disadvantaged young people are trapped in the lower-level apprenticeship route (i.e. Level 2). It highlights research showing “that just 25 per cent of Level 2 apprentices, who are disproportionately made up of disadvantaged students, go on to complete a Level 3 apprenticeship.” While some of this may be down to “learner choice”, the commission concludes there “is also possibly a factor of institutional and cultural barriers prohibiting progression.” This includes lack of a clear route from Level 2 to Level 3, poor careers advice for disadvantaged young people, and “a general lack of support to circumvent high rates of dropouts among apprentices.” 

The commission refers to recent policy papers showing that the apprenticeship levy is fuelling a growth in higher level apprenticeships and that this is reducing the number of opportunities at Levels 2 and 3, which are important entry routes for many disadvantaged young people. At the same time the commission’s analysis shows that the “current socio-economic mix for higher level apprenticeships is approximately the same as in higher education training”.

The commission also highlights research showing that long-term wage gains for apprentices is much less for disadvantaged groups and that there are a number of possible drivers for this. Wage gains are understandably much lower for apprentices who drop out (between one third and 45 per cent of apprenticeship starts do not complete).  DfE research8   shows that “non-completion is more prevalent among those on lower levels of learning and among those who held lower level of qualification prior to starting their learning.” According to this research, other groups likely to not complete their apprenticeship include: disabled people, residents living in deprived areas, and those on lower incomes.

Other worrying trends that limit social mobility include “the clustering of disadvantaged students at lower level of apprenticeships …. as well as a clustering of disadvantaged students in certain courses”. The report refers to research showing that those apprenticeships which returned the highest wage progression – including engineering, construction and ICT - have the lowest proportions of disadvantaged students. Occupational segregation is a major problem in the apprenticeship programme. Research shows that young women, BME apprentices, disabled apprentices and other groups facing disadvantage are much less likely to access apprenticeships leading to well paid jobs over the longer term due to occupational segregation.

The commission calls on the government to “assess ways to improve progression of disadvantaged students beyond Level 2, including reviewing whether prior qualifications and other course requirements create barriers to entry and progression for disadvantaged students.”
 

• 7Social Mobility Commission (2019) State of the Nation 2018-19: social mobility in Great Britain
• 8Thornton, A. et al (2018) Learners and Apprentices Survey 2018, DfE Research Report

The wider poverty trap

A wide range of research has highlighted that cost of transport is a major financial barrier for apprentices and that in many instances this combines with low wages to create an unacceptable poverty trap. Too often this results in young people being unable to accept a position they are keen on, or they do begin their training but are then forced to drop out before they complete their apprenticeship, with financial pressures playing a key role.

The national minimum wage (NMW) rate for apprentices is currently £3.90 an hour for all those aged under 19 and those aged 19+ who are in the first year of their apprenticeship (NMW age-related rates then apply as with all other employees). The government’s official apprenticeship pay survey shows that many get paid even less than this – nearly a fifth (18 per cent) do not get paid the NMW rate that they are due. In some occupations a shockingly high proportion do not get the legal minimum, for example, 44 per cent in hairdressing.

In addition to tightening up enforcement of the apprenticeship NMW, the TUC has called on the government, as a minimum, to immediately raise it to the level of the young workers rate (currently £4.35). It has also called for a realignment of the young workers rate in order to “narrow the gap between adults and younger workers as quickly as can be sustained” and for all 21-24-year-olds to be paid the full NMW rate (including the “national living wage” supplement). Reforms along these lines would go some way to tackling the poverty trap many apprentices are caught up in.

For many, the combination of low pay rates and various working expenses makes an apprenticeship either impossible or a financial nightmare. One research study shows that 40 per cent of apprentices are spending more money on undertaking an apprenticeship programme – including outlays for extras such as work clothes, travel and childcare – than they get paid.9  There is also evidence of other poor employment practices affecting too many apprentices. For example, Ofsted inspections of apprenticeship providers has highlighted that some apprentices are not in employment (which government regulations do not allow) and that others are working on zero-hours contracts (which is allowed by the regulations but clearly open to exploitation).10  

TUC policy reform proposals for apprenticeships

The TUC has proposed a number of policy reforms to tackle the barriers to social mobility and the poverty trap highlighted above. In addition to the NMW policy measures referred to, we continue to press for reform in the following key areas:

•  This new right would entitle anyone undertaking a Level 2 apprenticeship to progress to a full Level 3 apprenticeship once they achieve the Level 2.
• The TUC is concerned about the quality and duration of much apprenticeship training. To tackle this, government needs to instigate stricter enforcement of training standards, especially the ruling that all apprentices should have 20 per cent time off for off-the-job training as the training regulations require.
• The remit of Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education should be reformed to cover equality and diversity with a requirement that it should publish an annual equality and diversity plan, which sets out the key steps that should be taken to widen access to apprenticeships for under-represented groups and to combat high levels of occupational segregation
• The TUC is calling for a range of flexibilities to the apprenticeship levy, including allowing employers to use some of their levy contributions to fund innovative pre-apprenticeship programmes to support transition to a full apprenticeship, especially for disadvantaged groups
• In line with “social partnership” arrangements in most other countries, government should give unions a strategic voice on apprenticeship standards and related matters. This should include positions for unions on the board of the Institute for Apprenticeships, which is currently dominated by employer representatives.

• 9See TES report, at www.tes.com/news/further-education/breaking-news/four-10-apprentices-pa…
• 10Ofsted (2017) The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills 2016/17