Is taking on apprentices worth it

[niord1883]

Hi all

The government have introduced new incentives to take on apprentices but you have to pay 20% of the time for them to study (ie pay them for no work).

Do people reckon there's much of a business case for taking apprentices on?

 

[Newchodge]

Hi all

The government have introduced new incentives to take on apprentices but you have to pay 20% of the time for them to study (ie pay them for no work).

Do people reckon there's much of a business case for taking apprentices on?

That rather depends. If you want a cheap pair of hands (you have to pay 20% to study but the hourly rate is very low) it may be worth it although you will be cheating the apprentice.

If you want to take on a young person and help them develop into someone you would be happy to employ and who would be a credit to your business, they are very worthwhile. But don't expect the apprentice to be productive in any real way for at least 6 months. Expect to spend more time helping them than they repay in work done.

 

[Bob Morgan]

Hi all

The government have introduced new incentives to take on apprentices but you have to pay 20% of the time for them to study (ie pay them for no work).

Do people reckon there's much of a business case for taking apprentices on?

I cannot comment, but 46 years ago, that is how I started at 16! Costs were covered by various Industry Levies on employers. Most 'Apprentices' with a Mentor were productive from Day One! The loss of 1 Day per week for 'College' was more than compensated for - Strange how this system now has to be 'Reinvented!'

The 'Incentives' being offered at the present time are Financial to the EMPLOYER and not EDUCATIONALLY to the Employee!

 

[Alison Moore]

When we looked into taking on apprentices a few years back they had a 'study day' each week for which they were paid which would be 20% of their time? So I'm not sure this is anything new.

 

[Bob Morgan]

When we looked into taking on apprentices a few years back they had a 'study day' each week for which they were paid which would be 20% of their time? So I'm not sure this is anything new.

Nothing NEW at all!
As my old school motto read NON NOVA SED NOVE (New But Not New)

 

[Newchodge]

Nothing NEW at all!
As my old school motto read NON NOVA SED NOVE (New But Not New)

Isn't that 'Not New But New'?

 

[Bob Morgan]

Isn't that 'Not New But New'?

Possibly, we were not strong on Latin! - It was the Martin Bormann Comprehensive!

 

[Mr D]

Hi all

The government have introduced new incentives to take on apprentices but you have to pay 20% of the time for them to study (ie pay them for no work).

Do people reckon there's much of a business case for taking apprentices on?

Cheap pay.

Question is, will they really be apprentices? Or just a cheap pair of hands you use and throw away afterwards replacing them with a new apprentice?

There are some businesses that can and do run decent apprenticeships. People finish up qualified, able to do a wide range of tasks to a set standard and will be good workers in that field.

However in recent years its been seen as cheap staff that don't need paying much (apprentice rates are low) and don't need to be trained much. Day release doesn't teach anything and may not even exist for a year or two. Training providers of course pocket cash even if still trying to organise a 'course'.

If you can take someone on and are overall looking to keep them some years then yes it can be a good idea.
Perhaps even pay them higher than apprentice rates. Loyalty can be purchased.

 

[busowner987]

to babysit. NO

 

[paulears]

It used to drive employers mad when they trained people to be really useful and then they moved straight to a competitor - so lots made sure their contracts were very detailed. Sadly too many now use apprentice schemes to get basic jobs done cheaply. Apprenticeship can be tremendously beneficial for both side, if both side put the effort in. Many employers forget that what the scheme is, is a training scheme, with a recognised qualification that they are delivering. The byproduct is a useful member off staff. If you don't want to train, prepare proper training sessions, keep decent records and do more than you would for a normal employee - then don't take on an apprentice. In effect, you will lose one or more of your existing team who have to be diverted to training and supervision and of course assessment and collecting evidence.

 

[Mr D]

to babysit. NO

That's what we have schools for.
Once they leave school.... less babysitting needed. More wanted...

 

[RobinBHM]

It depends on the type of work you do.

Apprentices can be a pain, they need to be kept busy, but they are unskilled so they can't do much. They also need lots of supervision -If it's a school leaver, you will be teacher, telling them what to do all day.

In my experience, I've only had a small percentage of apprentices that come good. It's painful having to weed out those that always pull sickies on Mondays, or suffer anxiety, or don't clear away their tools, or always have Doctors appointments on Friday afternoon, or run out of energy by lunchtime.........I could go on and on.


If you or your other employees don't have the time to supervise and train, you are better employing an improver -they will be able to perform a range of basic tasks unaided.

 

[RobinBHM]

Once they leave school.... less babysitting needed

Yes, less babysitting should be required....in theory.

 

[Chris Ashdown]

The large companies who offer apprenticeships are looking long term and generally offer a great package

The small tradesmen tend to also offer apprenticeships for the long term

The rest including shops and small companies are more to use them as cheap cannon fodder and not worth a shit

Apprentices should be taught the job and also the education that goes with the job, a welder for instance needs to understand the material as well as the skills required to turn out quality welds

 

[Deleted member 59730]

I cannot comment, but 46 years ago, that is how I started at 16! Costs were covered by various Industry Levies on employers. Most 'Apprentices' with a Mentor were productive from Day One!

In my field, photography, it was fairly common for studios to take on assistants after they had left college. These were students who knew about photography but had to be taught how to use a broom. This enabled young photographers to gain real life experience in exchange for low wages. I worked 4 years as an assistant before going freelance and later setting up my own studio. The assistants I employed were all fairly ambitious.

I thought of my role as a mentor to new talent and have a real sense of pride in those who went on to better things. My first assistant went on to be MD of Pinewood Studios, another became a partner in an ad agency and another was the highest paid advertising photographer in London for many years.

 

[busowner987]

I tried youngsters - NEVER AGAIN! - I guess it depends on where you are in business.

Small < 1mil then I can see why.
Larger over 10mil with staff to babysit I can see why.

I for one don't have the patience or the time to waste. I would rather pay 3x the amount and get results from day 1. Horses for courses.

 

[Mr D]

I tried youngsters - NEVER AGAIN! - I guess it depends on where you are in business.

Small < 1mil then I can see why.
Larger over 10mil with staff to babysit I can see why.

I for one don't have the patience or the time to waste. I would rather pay 3x the amount and get results from day 1. Horses for courses.

Many of the best young people you could employ would instead be steered by government employed educators to instead go to uni. Possibly even go for postgrad.
What pool instead you would draw from would be those unable to go to uni, those not academically inclined, those who want to do more than get the degree their grades allow.
Not everyone knows at 17 what degree to go for. Nor what they want to do in life.

Seriously, the pool you would draw from also includes those who have no intention of working, those who don't want to be there, those who prefer playing computer games till 5am and those who cannot see the point in being punished all day by being imprisoned by you.

There will be a few youngsters that are good. Finding them and taking a chance... yeah.

 

[Andy Harris]

Having done this twice, I experienced:

1. People who weren't strong enough (skills or attitude/mindset) to have achieved anything else, so 'apprenticeship' was the only answer for them.

2. Wasted time babysitting people who never had enough drive.

There are some types of apprentice that are better of course, and the odd gem amongst those who haven't already achieved something else, but for a small business, it can be a time-sink.

 

[SillyBill]

Being realistic about what my business offers to anyone means that apprenticeships are probably out. We can and do take young people on albeit effectively mandatory they have at least some working history (rules out those who can't get out of bed in the morning). They can have a good job if they knuckle down, "career" might be pushing it though. Apprenticeships are for large companies IMO. Small companies doing them are all too often poorly managed businesses looking for slave labour with zero development opportunity. NMW job at the end of it. I worked for one where they were basically just given a broom and told to sweep and that was the sum of their development. Highly immoral.

We have considered getting uni students in between terms though (not progressed beyond consideration). Somebody like a marketing/graphic design undergrad, bring them in, chuck them a few k for a summer of work and let them run wild on a few projects. That would be a cost I'd happily write off if they produced nothing of value but a chance they could produce something and I think we'd be doing our bit to help them with some real work experience of what they are studying.

 

[RobinBHM]

IME apprentices are not suitable for most small businesses. Because they have no skills, there are few tasks they can do without constant supervision, so it can be draining trying to find jobs to keep them busy

It needs time invested in having a training programme in place so both employer and employee benefit, however all too often apprentices get left with the sweeping up tasks because nobody has the time or patience to spend time training.