Apprenticeship Wages

[PaulSmith]

Reading about how businesses are paying £4.58 per hour for 16 year olds whilst they are learning a trade.

Said businesses then complain when they leave and moan in the pub about how there’s no one coming through and how it’s a dying trade.

So my question is that it might be legally OK to pay that kind of money but morally is it right?

[The_Exile]

I have never ever understood, and never will understand, why a 16 year old's hour of labour is worth less than a 40 year old's hour of labour. I know there will be arguments on the other side but I'll never ever agree with it, it's disgusting and I've felt that way since I was 16 myself. It was put to me once that there should be a standard "training" wage for a year then you get put on the normal wage and I would reluctantly accept that if the gap wasn't stupid.

[hibee]

It’s definitely not morally correct, it’s impossible to live on that unless your parents are supporting you.

My son left school last summer, one of his friends is working on a building site and got a car to get there but was having to work two full days at the height of the high fuel prices just to fill the car up. When he turned 18 his boss refused to give him the pay rise he was due, not sure why but I think it was something to do with whoever funds it hadn’t increased his money.

I’ve been looking at new build houses recently and one saleswoman told us kids these days don’t like hard work so keep leaving them, instead of two full teams working on site they only have one so everything takes longer. Surely if they just paid a decent living wage they would retain staff and be rewarded with fully trained teams who may be more loyal to the company.

[StevieC]

Simply put, a company that trains an apprentice up puts a substantial amount of money and time into training them. It takes years to get them to a level that they are able to ply the trade they are being trained to do.
If you want to pay the same wage as someone time served then companies simply stop ploughing money and time into training and just hire time served. Some of the big companies already do this, as they have the financial advantage, and savings in training costs, to coax time served employees (which is why less and less properly trained tradesman are available.

In comparison, the jobs that don’t require years of training can have an employee in and working and making money in a very short space of time.

Maybe you could make a comparison to, let’s say, a student training to be a teacher. Is there an outcry that they aren’t on minimum wage whilst studying?

[Ozyhibby]

I have never ever understood, and never will understand, why a 16 year old's hour of labour is worth less than a 40 year old's hour of labour. I know there will be arguments on the other side but I'll never ever agree with it, it's disgusting and I've felt that way since I was 16 myself. It was put to me once that there should be a standard "training" wage for a year then you get put on the normal wage and I would reluctantly accept that if the gap wasn't stupid.

The value to a business of a 16 year olds apprentice is almost nil. Especially when you have to pay them while they are away at college for 20 weeks of the year. That’s why you hardly get any apprenticeships now. It’s not because there are not lots of kids wanting one. There is just a lack of companies willing to take any on. It’s expensive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bridge hibs]

Anyone remember the YOP scheme , £25 per week, £10 to my Mum for digs, £5 to my Dad as a sub I never got back which left me £10 to live on for the week, chuck in my bus fares to work and that was me skint 😵

[stu in nottingham]

When I was an apprentice compositor in the 1970s we worked on sliding scale on increased percentage of a journeyman's wage for four years. It began at 20% and I paid nearly all that to my mum for board and the rest on bus fares to work. First year was mainly at college and then the three years after, one college week a month. I was probably well into my apprenticeship term before I could equal the work of a journeyman comp.

The catch in those days was that some employers would show you the door after you'd done your time - then replace you for more cheap labour.

[PaulSmith]

The value to a business of a 16 year olds apprentice is almost nil. Especially when you have to pay them while they are away at college for 20 weeks of the year. That’s why you hardly get any apprenticeships now. It’s not because there are not lots of kids wanting one. There is just a lack of companies willing to take any on. It’s expensive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

See when you say expensive we’re talking about an extra £100 a week. I’ll sound really flippant here but for the tradesmen that I know they’ll spend that on a Friday down the pub and they’ll charge £150 for a call out without blinking an eyelid.

Right now there’s companies out there who are paying £35 a shift, take away normal working expenses and it’s more like £25 take home pay.

Sorry but that just doesn’t sit right with me.

[Northernhibee]

The world is getting to the point where opportunities are only for the well off. Unpaid internships in key jobs, jokes of apprenticeship wages, huge Uni debt whilst wages at the other side are becoming less and less worth it.

[Ozyhibby]

See when you say expensive we’re talking about an extra £100 a week. I’ll sound really flippant here but for the tradesmen that I know they’ll spend that on a Friday down the pub and they’ll charge £150 for a call out without blinking an eyelid.

Right now there’s companies out there who are paying £35 a shift, take away normal working expenses and it’s more like £25 take home pay.

Sorry but that just doesn’t sit right with me.

It’s not in individual tradesmens interest to train more people to do his job.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PaulSmith]

It’s not in individual tradesmens interest to train more people to do his job.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

One then wonders how they became tradesmen themselves…

I actually disagree with the statement as well, most people I know in the trade feel a sense of immense pride in passing on their craft to the next generation.

[Ozyhibby]

The world is getting to the point where opportunities are only for the well off. Unpaid internships in key jobs, jokes of apprenticeship wages, huge Uni debt whilst wages at the other side are becoming less and less worth it.

This isn’t a new thing. When I started my apprenticeship in 1985 my first year was on YTS of £27.30 a week. I could have got a job working along the road in the Royal Scot Hotel (as it was then) at £2.50 per hour.
The reason I did the apprenticeship was that I was learning a trade. In three years I would have the ability to earn more than the hotel job. I considered it worth it to get the skills.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PaulSmith]

This isn’t a new thing. When I started my apprenticeship in 1985 my first year was on YTS of £27.30 a week. I could have got a job working along the road in the Royal Scot Hotel (as it was then) at £2.50 per hour.
The reason I did the apprenticeship was that I was learning a trade. In three years I would have the ability to earn more than the hotel job. I considered it worth it to get the skills.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The worlds moved on immensely in 40 years. Whether we like it or not it’s a more materialistic generation and we benchmark our lives against people from all over the globe.

In 1985 you were happy with your £27.50 as at the time it was accepted as the norm and you were probably happy with being able to live a fairly basic life. Times, economies and the marketplace has moved on.. if anyone told in 1985 what it was like in 1945 would you accept the relevance?

[Stairway 2 7]

Are most apprentices not at college about half the time and hence the half wages spread over the full time?

[Ozyhibby]

Are most apprentices not at college about half the time and hence the half wages spread over the full time?

Pretty sure they do 20 weeks a year at college.

I coach an u17’s footy team and we have two lads in that team who are only still at school because they can’t find apprenticeships. As far as they are concerned the small wage they would be getting is still more than they would be getting at school.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

I have never ever understood, and never will understand, why a 16 year old's hour of labour is worth less than a 40 year old's hour of labour. I know there will be arguments on the other side but I'll never ever agree with it, it's disgusting and I've felt that way since I was 16 myself. It was put to me once that there should be a standard "training" wage for a year then you get put on the normal wage and I would reluctantly accept that if the gap wasn't stupid.

If i've got 20 or 30 years experience, you need to pay for it. If you don't the firm next door will.

No chance a 16 year old straight out of school should be earning anywhere near the same.

[Ozyhibby]

If i've got 20 or 30 years experience, you need to pay for it. If you don't the firm next door will.

No chance a 16 year old straight out of school should be earning anywhere near the same.

Not to mention the extensive tool kit a tradesman has to carry these days. Thousands of pounds worth of kit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Santa Cruz]

If i've got 20 or 30 years experience, you need to pay for it. If you don't the firm next door will.

No chance a 16 year old straight out of school should be earning anywhere near the same.

That's presuming with your 20-30 years experience you have progressed through gaining promotion with all your experience?

If the point the OP you replied to was the 16 year old and 40 year old are doing the exact same job, with the same job description, then they should both be paid the same wage. There's nothing to separate them in wage terms in the workplace imo.

[WhileTheChief..]

That's presuming with your 20-30 years experience you have progressed through gaining promotion with all your experience?

If the point the OP you replied to was the 16 year old and 40 year old are doing the exact same job, with the same job description, then they should both be paid the same wage. There's nothing to separate them in wage terms in the workplace imo.

Pretty rare for the circumstances you describe to happen I'd have thought, but yeah, if they were going for a low / unskilled role on minimum wage there would be more of an argument for parity.

But then it wouldn't be an apprentice's wage, it would be the minimum wage which is much higher.

An apprentice is learning and gaining that valuable experience to give them a solid career. That costs a lot and shouldn't be sniffed at. It's not just about take home pay.

[Stairway 2 7]

That's presuming with your 20-30 years experience you have progressed through gaining promotion with all your experience?

If the point the OP you replied to was the 16 year old and 40 year old are doing the exact same job, with the same job description, then they should both be paid the same wage. There's nothing to separate them in wage terms in the workplace imo.

I don't think he means the same job, I think he's talking about trades apprentices? I can understand them being paid less as they are at college half the time and the rest are learning a skilled job. A bit like being at uni but being paid. They have the knowledge that at the end, they will have a trade for life and the money that comes with that.

If its about two people doing the same job as in a call centre or retail ect, then I agree it should be the same

[WhileTheChief..]

If you were getting your home decorated, would you pay a 16 year old the same as someone who has been doing it for 40 years?!

[Ozyhibby]

That's presuming with your 20-30 years experience you have progressed through gaining promotion with all your experience?

If the point the OP you replied to was the 16 year old and 40 year old are doing the exact same job, with the same job description, then they should both be paid the same wage. There's nothing to separate them in wage terms in the workplace imo.

A 16 year old just out of school apprentice joiner should get the same wage as a 40 year old joiner?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Santa Cruz]

Pretty rare for the circumstances you describe to happen I'd have thought, but yeah, if they were going for a low / unskilled role on minimum wage there would be more of an argument for parity.

But then it wouldn't be an apprentice's wage, it would be the minimum wage which is much higher.

An apprentice is learning and gaining that valuable experience to give them a solid career. That costs a lot and shouldn't be sniffed at. It's not just about take home pay.

It's not that rare in retail and hospitality, because most are recruited to do the same job and promotion opportunities are few and far between. A 16 year old min wage is around £4.80, over 25's is about £10 (I think).

Realise the main post is about trades apprenticeship wages, but exploitation of younger workers happens in other sectors. It's morally wrong and the law should be changed. It's not consistently applied. My daughter had an interview for a weekend job and was offered £4.80 and hour from one employer, went for another interview elsewhere in a similar job and was offered £10.

[WhileTheChief..]

It's not that rare in retail and hospitality, because most are recruited to do the same job and promotion opportunities are few and far between. A 16 year old min wage is around £4.80, over 25's is about £10 (I think).

Realise the main post is about trades apprenticeship wages, but exploitation of younger workers happens in other sectors. It's morally wrong and the law should be changed. It's not consistently applied. My daughter had an interview for a weekend job and was offered £4.80 and hour from one employer, went for another interview elsewhere in a similar job and was offered £10.

Hopefully she'll get or got offered the job paying £10!!

That's the market at work. I'd imagine the firm paying the higher wage will attract more applicants and get better staff than the one paying £4.80.

Or, maybe the one paying less offers better training or other perks.

Either way, if your daughter gets offered both, it's up to her. If not, I guess it's because the owners feel they found somebody more suited to the role.

I wish her the best of luck.

[Santa Cruz]

Hopefully she'll get or got offered the job paying £10!!

That's the market at work. I'd imagine the firm paying the higher wage will attract more applicants and get better staff than the one paying £4.80.

Or, maybe the one paying less offers better training or other perks.

Either way, if your daughter gets offered both, it's up to her. If not, I guess it's because the owners feel they found somebody more suited to the role.

I wish her the best of luck.

She took the £10 p/h job. Both big well established businesses. She hadn't heard back from the lower paid job after the interview, when offered the higher paid job. She had the decency to phone the lower paid employer to explain she had accepted another job so as to not waste their time. They said we weren't going to give you it anyway. I told her she dodged one, she's probably earning not far short of the supervisor/asst manager who was rude to her. :greengrin

[silverhibee]

Anyone remember the YOP scheme , £25 per week, £10 to my Mum for digs, £5 to my Dad as a sub I never got back which left me £10 to live on for the week, chuck in my bus fares to work and that was me skint 😵

I remember when it was £23.50 , slave labour.

[Bridge hibs]

I remember when it was £23.50 , slave labour.£23.50 😵 I got in at the right time then 🫣

[Scouse Hibee]

I started my apprenticeship on £25 a week, I could earn an extra £12 if I did the regular 8 hours overtime available in the workshop. I done the overtime every week and walked away “loaded” with £37 every week. There was no way I was worth the same as the time served tradesman I was to become.

[PaulSmith]

If you were getting your home decorated, would you pay a 16 year old the same as someone who has been doing it for 40 years?!

Of course you wouldn’t and the point seems to be getting lost between paying a 16/17 £30 a shift and what a skilled tradesman can earn, which is ball park £25/£30 per hour.

If you think that £30 a day is morally right in 2022 then that’s fine. I personally think it’s taking the piss.

[Ozyhibby]

Of course you wouldn’t and the point seems to be getting lost between paying a 16/17 £30 a shift and what a skilled tradesman can earn, which is ball park £25/£30 per hour.

If you think that £30 a day is morally right in 2022 then that’s fine. I personally think it’s taking the piss.

What is a company paying a 16 year old apprentice joiner for? They don’t contribute productively at that age. If anything they slow a tradesman down while they teach them. And then they go to college for 20 weeks a year and you are paying them there.
If it was such a good deal for employers, why is there a shortage of apprenticeships available for kids? Surely companies should be all over that cheap Labour?

When I started out in the building trade in 1985, everyone was PAYE. Every company had to have 1 apprentice for every 8 tradesmen. I don’t know if that was a law or a union thing or whatever but it was generally accepted as a rule. And most companies did it. By the time I completed my apprenticeship the whole trade had went into an SE60 ticket which was a form of self-employment. Your hourly rate went up but all the holiday, sick pay etc was gone. And with it went any commitment to take on apprentices. Suddenly companies just became employment agencies supplying labour.
It never really recovered but by the time real shortages started to appear we had freedom of movement and an abundance of labour from the EU.

Anyway, if anyone knows of apprenticeships (in real trades, not these Gordon Brown modern apprenticeships in hotels etc) going even for £30 a day, give me a shout because I know a couple of 16 year olds who jump at the chance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

She took the £10 p/h job. Both big well established businesses. She hadn't heard back from the lower paid job after the interview, when offered the higher paid job. She had the decency to phone the lower paid employer to explain she had accepted another job so as to not waste their time. They said we weren't going to give you it anyway. I told her she dodged one, she's probably earning not far short of the supervisor/asst manager who was rude to her. :greengrin

Fantastic.

Sounds like the firm paying the lower wage get a lower standard of employee going by the behaviour you describe.

Hope she enjoys it and gains invaluable experience for later in life.

I worked in fast food as a 16 yo. Taught me so much that I’ll always have fond memories of my time there.

£1.56 p/hr was my starting wage in 1989.

[Scouse Hibee]

What is a company paying a 16 year old apprentice joiner for? They don’t contribute productively at that age. If anything they slow a tradesman down while they teach them. And then they go to college for 20 weeks a year and you are paying them there.
If it was such a good deal for employers, why is there a shortage of apprenticeships available for kids? Surely companies should be all over that cheap Labour?

When I started out in the building trade in 1985, everyone was PAYE. Every company had to have 1 apprentice for every 8 tradesmen. I don’t know if that was a law or a union thing or whatever but it was generally accepted as a rule. And most companies did it. By the time I completed my apprenticeship the whole trade had went into an SE60 ticket which was a form of self-employment. Your hourly rate went up but all the holiday, sick pay etc was gone. And with it went any commitment to take on apprentices. Suddenly companies just became employment agencies supplying labour.
It never really recovered but by the time real shortages started to appear we had freedom of movement and an abundance of labour from the EU.

Anyway, if anyone knows of apprenticeships (in real trades, not these Gordon Brown modern apprenticeships in hotels etc) going even for £30 a day, give me a shout because I know a couple of 16 year olds who jump at the chance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You seem to have started not long after me, your quote about the whole trade going into SE 60 ticket doesn’t seem right as I was never in SE60 and was PAYE until I left the trade in 95.

[Allant1981]

What is a company paying a 16 year old apprentice joiner for? They don’t contribute productively at that age. If anything they slow a tradesman down while they teach them. And then they go to college for 20 weeks a year and you are paying them there.
If it was such a good deal for employers, why is there a shortage of apprenticeships available for kids? Surely companies should be all over that cheap Labour?

When I started out in the building trade in 1985, everyone was PAYE. Every company had to have 1 apprentice for every 8 tradesmen. I don’t know if that was a law or a union thing or whatever but it was generally accepted as a rule. And most companies did it. By the time I completed my apprenticeship the whole trade had went into an SE60 ticket which was a form of self-employment. Your hourly rate went up but all the holiday, sick pay etc was gone. And with it went any commitment to take on apprentices. Suddenly companies just became employment agencies supplying labour.
It never really recovered but by the time real shortages started to appear we had freedom of movement and an abundance of labour from the EU.

Anyway, if anyone knows of apprenticeships (in real trades, not these Gordon Brown modern apprenticeships in hotels etc) going even for £30 a day, give me a shout because I know a couple of 16 year olds who jump at the chance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Babcock International are looking for an apprentice in Rosyth just now, can't mind what my mate said the salary is but its a modern apprenticeship so might not be interested