institute for employment studies

publications by IES authors

Gender Segregation in Apprenticeships

Miller L, Pollard E, Neathey F, Hill D, Ritchie H
Working Paper 25, Equal Opportunities Commission, April 2005

a study commissioned by the Equal Opportunities Commission

In June 2003, the Equal Opportunities Commission launched a General Formal Investigation (GFI) into gender segregation in employment and training in five occupational areas in which there are skill shortages: construction, engineering, information and communication technologies (ICT) and plumbing (all male-dominated), and childcare (female-dominated). The GFI is being undertaken with funding from the European Social Fund. These five ‘GFI sectors’ remain amongst the most strongly segregated.

This research focuses on Modern Apprenticeships (MAs), which are currently the main vocational training route into work for young people in Britain. Its aim was to build on earlier research on MAs by investigating the actions that have been taken by Local Learning and Skills Councils (LLSCs) within the GFI sectors to address gender segregation in MAs. A further aim was to consider the actions taken by partner organisations that work with LLSCs such as providers, employers, the Connexions service and Business Education Partnerships (BEPs).

The research consisted of three components: interviews with representatives of the sectors, the National LSC (NLSC) and the Adult Learning Inspectorate; a survey of all 47 LLSC offices; and case studies conducted in five LLSC regions (Birmingham and Solihull; North Yorkshire; London North; London South; and Devon and Cornwall).

Key findings

At present, patterns of gender segregation in registrations for MAs mirror those seen in employment. This is the case across Britain. The five GFI sectors are both amongst the most strongly segregated and those in which substantial skills shortfalls are reported. Indeed, the majority of LLSCs surveyed reported skill shortages in these sectors.

In two of the sectors, construction and plumbing, significant proportions of LLSC respondents reported being unable to meet the demand for training from young people. There was a lack of consistency across LLSCs in terms of provision of local labour market information. Only two-thirds of LLSCs made this information available to the local community. Where training places are limited, this is likely to impact more on minority groups than on mainstream applicants, while the former are also likely to have more need of information on atypical jobs. Therefore both of these issues are likely to restrict the movement of minority groups (men in the case of childcare, women in the other four sectors) into jobs and training in these sectors.

LLSCs were also asked to provide data on the numbers of females and males starting and completing MAs in the five GFI sectors. While thirty were able to supply such data, many were unable to do so for the five sectors of interest, in particular for plumbing and ICT. At the time of the research, this was causing difficulties for some Sector Skill Councils (SSCs), as they required data for their sectors in order to be able to monitor progress towards targets.

LLSCs mainly used these data to monitor training provider performance and to evaluate the success of local initiatives. Around a sixth reported that they used the information to monitor employer performance. None reported collecting pay data for apprenticeships.

LLSCs saw employers, the Connexions service, SSCs and parents as being particularly well-placed to influence patterns of gender segregation in training and employment, but felt that they themselves were largely not able to influence these groups. They have contractual relationships with colleges, work-based learning providers and BEPs, and were able to use this means to influence these partners.

LLSCs set targets for the numbers of training places in the various sectors within their region. They are also able to prioritise various issues to take account of the local situation regarding learner profile and skill needs. Nearly two-thirds of LLSCs did see gender segregation as a priority issue. Several also identified learners with special needs or with a disability, and black and ethnic minority participation and attainment, as priorities.

At the time of the research, a majority of LLSCs had developed equality and diversity impact measures (EDIMs). These set out the targets and measures by which LLSCs monitor progress in equality and diversity in their local regions. Each region sets its own EDIMs, taking into account the local profile and priorities. Three-quarters of those with EDIMs in place had developed one or more of these measures to address gender segregation. However, many of these either related to general intentions to raise the participation and attainment of young men in education and training, or were not focused on work-based learning.

Two of the sectors (plumbing and childcare) had yet to attain their SSC licence. Nonetheless, all of the sectors’ representatives were concerned to increase the diversity of recruits. However, any actions they took in this regard were affected by the need to attain recruitment targets set for the SSCs by the LSC. For some sectors, such as engineering, this was made more difficult by falling interest in the subject at school and in further or higher education.

LLSCs also experienced some conflict in prioritising their efforts, and reported that a lack of time, resources and specialist knowledge impeded their efforts to address gender segregation. LLSCs, SSCs and providers were agreed that funding incentives need to be put in place to encourage efforts to attract atypical apprentices. There was also a view that the newer emphasis on completions, rather than starts, might make providers more cautious about recruiting atypical apprentices, since they may be perceived as less likely to complete.

Extent of actions taken to tackle segregation in MAs

A significant proportion of LLSCs reported having taken action to address gender segregation in MAs in the five GFI areas. The two sectors with the highest numbers of reports of action taken were engineering and construction. In addition, some LLSCs stated that they were involved in national projects such as JIVE and GERI. LLSCs reported working with SSCs to raise awareness amongst atypical groups of opportunities, encouraging providers to tackle segregation, facilitating development events and providing local development funding for projects aimed at addressing gender segregation.

In addition, LLSCs reported taking action to address gender segregation in non-GFI sectors. Several noted that the recently-introduced entry to employment programme (E2E) was helping provide young people with the opportunity to experience a wide range of employment opportunities. LLSCs also identified projects initiated in their regions by partners such as SSCs and providers. Case study visits provided examples of providers’ recruitment activities that were designed to recruit atypical groups. Providers had also designed new ‘feeder’ programmes to encourage women to take courses that could provide entry routes to MAs or NVQs.

The survey and case studies revealed a range of practice amongst Connexions services. While the best were actively seeking to challenge gender stereotyped views amongst the young people with whom they worked, some did not believe it was appropriate either to do this or to suggest that young people consider atypical areas of training or employment. As part of the survey, LLSCs were asked about various government programmes that were being piloted or had recently been introduced: the employer training pilots (ETPs), the adult learning grant (ALG) and the E2E programme. In particular, they were asked whether these various programmes would contribute towards challenging gender segregation in apprenticeships.

There was no evidence that the ETPs were providing an entry route into apprenticeships for atypical groups. Given that this programme is focused on older workers, it is unlikely to provide an entry route to apprenticeships in general until the age cap on apprenticeships has been removed. However, there is some evidence that individuals gaining awards through the ETP programme were inclined to consider further training afterwards and so might subsequently register for higher level NVQs.

While the ALG could be focused towards the needs of priority groups, only one LLSC had used the funding to encourage women to consider an atypical area, and so it was not possible to determine whether the programme would have any longer term impact on the recruitment of atypical groups. The surveyed LLSCs were cautious about the extent to which the E2E programme would result in more atypical recruits to apprenticeship programmes. However, the case studies revealed enthusiasm amongst providers and evidence that this initiative is proving successful in encouraging young people to try out atypical areas of work. In some cases, young people were gaining NVQ units while on the E2E programme, and there were examples of them subsequently moving into apprenticeships.

Wider barriers to progress

Across the interviews, surveys and case study interviews, interviewees and respondents agreed that there are four major barriers confronting organisations seeking to challenge gender segregation: traditional attitudes regarding the proper jobs for women and men, social stereotypes, the poor image of some of the GFI sectors and the attitudes of employers.

When asked about the difficulties confronting those seeking to challenge gender segregation in apprenticeships, a similar set of issues was identified: attitudes, social stereotypes and the image of some of the jobs (and the lack of interest in jobs in these sectors from the atypical group). However, two other factors were also identified as barriers: a lack of apprenticeship places; and the fact that providers typically only become involved with apprentices after they have been recruited by employers. This restricts their ability to influence the diversity of apprentices recruited.

Challenging stereotypical views

The case study research revealed a range of activities being undertaken by LLSCs, providers, BEPs, employers and the Connexions service. These actions included developing publicity materials, commissioning drama productions to raise the profile of the sectors and encourage applications from under-represented groups, and providing hands-on experience of these sectors to young people at school. Difficulties encountered by organisations in undertaking this work included a shortage of funding for the development of publicity materials (and a lack of knowledge regarding where to seek such funding), and a shortage of role models to feature in publicity materials.

Barriers to the recruitment and employment of apprentices

Since 2003, apprentices have in general needed to be in employment in order to commence an apprenticeship. This was seen by almost all partners as a primary barrier to increasing the diversity of the apprentice population. A shortage of starter jobs limited the number of apprenticeship places available, and any such shortage of places is likely to impact more heavily on minority groups. Since it may also be difficult to persuade small employers of the business case for taking on apprentices, the large proportion of small employers in construction and plumbing therefore further restricts the availability of apprenticeship places. Providers and SSCs were nonetheless keen to retain employed status for apprentices, despite these problems.

There was evidence from those surveyed and interviewed that some employers continue to discriminate against minority groups. Organisations such as Connexions will advise employers that they are not able to advertise for ‘a lad’, but were aware that discrimination could take place in more subtle ways too. The research also identified clear discrimination experienced by one female apprentice from a potential employer. On the other hand, some providers were offering training and support to employers in equal opportunities and diversity, while one LLSC had engaged an equality officer to liaise with employers.

Many of the apprentices interviewed reported that they had seen no information relating to apprenticeships until they applied for their job, which turned out to be an apprenticeship. Many of them called for better information on vocational options to be made available. Their concerns were echoed by providers and by a representative of a BEP. The former reported that they had difficulty gaining access to young people in schools to tell them about vocational options, while the latter noted that both the local LSC and Connexions offices had failed to provide a young woman with information.

Funding problems had led to shortages in the numbers of college places available in some vocational areas. In one of the case study areas, a new feeder route programme had been designed to encourage women to move into construction trades, only for the intended destination NVQ programmes to close at the college.

The pay and benefits available to apprentices may deter some young people from considering these awards. This is particularly the case in childcare, and may be a deterrent to young men. In addition, the different rules that apply to various benefits for those classified as being in education or in employment may serve as a further disincentive to individuals pursuing the work-based learning route, particularly for those in low-paid positions.

Several young female apprentices had experienced bullying from other apprentices. One described how this had driven her from her apprenticeship. The social isolation experienced by atypical apprentices was noted by, and of concern to, providers and to LLSCs. They were trying to find ways to address this. Actions taken have included the appointment of full-time mentors by training providers and colleges, while one LLSC had appointed a set of work-based learning personal advisors to visit apprentices. The CITB has attempted to overcome social isolation by bringing together apprentices within project-based learning centres.

The way forward

Key role for employers

The researchers recognise that employers are the gatekeepers to MAs. It is essential to have them ‘on side’ if progress is to be made in increasing the numbers of starter jobs and in recruiting a more diverse group of apprentices. The researchers suggest that LLSCs work with employers to encourage them to state a commitment to giving an interview to atypical applicants who meet selection criteria. Following on from the CITB’s lead in establishing ‘project-based’ apprenticeships, we suggest LLSCs investigate the possibility of bringing together small employers to share the costs and benefits of an apprentice. Were this to be feasible, LLSCs could take a co-ordinating role in bringing together employers.

Sound data collection

As noted above, many of the LLSCs had difficulty supplying the data we requested relating to female and male starts and completions in the GFI sectors. We were told by the LSC that, in many cases, these derived from inheriting systems from the older TECs, and that these various systems were not fully compatible. Some LLSCs also cited their difficulties with generating data as a reason for having been unable to take action to address gender segregation.

We understand from the NLSC that the system for collating and reporting statistics is being considered and it is intended that these data should be made available. If plans are not already under way to upgrade the LLSC systems, the researchers therefore suggest that LLSC management information systems are upgraded as a priority; that staff development is provided for LLSC staff to ensure that they are fully able to utilise existing systems and, subsequently, any new system introduced; and that LLSC monitoring data systems are upgraded to provide data that are clearly mapped against SSC delineations and MA frameworks, and reported by gender, ethnicity and disability. Given that the ability to monitor data is a key aspect of the work of the LLSCs, we suggest that this and the associated staff development be centrally funded with ring-fenced funding.

Challenging gender segregation

In keeping with previous research, we found a less than proactive approach amongst many of the guidance personnel involved in advising young people. We suggest that induction, training and continuing development programmes for those in careers advisory roles need to be reviewed to ensure that a proactive approach is taken to promoting young people's options.

Information on vocational options

Several of the apprentices complained about the lack of information about MAs and the majority had not heard of MAs until they applied for a job or course. The case studies showed a real failure to provide information to young people about the options available to them. We suggest that further research is needed with young people to determine the extent to which they currently obtain information on vocational options, the routes they used to do so and the ways in which access to information may be improved.

Funding issues

All parties believed that funding should reflect priorities and barriers. We therefore suggest, in line with the arguments made by the LLSCs themselves, that specific, ring-fenced, targeted, premium funding be provided centrally to enable LLSCs to take action to address gender segregation in apprenticeships.

Pay data

The LLSCs were unable to provide any data on pay rates for apprentices. Neither is it possible to extract this information from the LFS. The researchers suggest the NLSC considers the best way in which to collect and report data on pay rates for apprentices. It may be possible that slight changes to the LFS might facilitate such data collection. Alternatively, it might be more readily obtained directly from employers as part of the apprentice registration process. Whichever approach is selected, we would wish to see such data reported by gender, ethnicity and disability. Where SSCs have set standard pay rates for apprentices, there may be some latitude to exempt sectors for which there are publicly-available pay rates for inspection. This might serve to encourage other SSCs to follow their good example.

Good practice dissemination

Many of the LLSCs said that access to examples of good practice and accounts of actions that had been found to work would help them to move forward on challenging gender segregation. Therefore our last suggestion is for the NLSC to take the lead in facilitating wider national dissemination of local successes. For example, it could establish a web-page at which LLSCs, providers, BEPs and SSCs can post details of actions that are being tried out around the country, details of how they are being monitored, and, in due course, the extent of their success. Ideas for sources of funding for actions might also be placed on the web-page.

Gender Segregation in Apprenticeships, Miller L, Pollard E, Neathey F, Hill D, Ritchie H. Working Paper 25, Equal Opportunities Commission, 2005.
ISBN: 978-1-84206-140-4. £free

• How to obtain this publication