Volume 3 - Paper #43_43ApprenticeshipTheProspectsfor.pdf: 240 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

Briggs, Vernon M., Jr.

English

Briggs, Vernon M. Jr.

eCommons (Cornell Univ.)

Apprenticeship: The Prospects for Survival

DigitalCommons@ILR

Cornell University ILR School 
DigitalCommons@ILR 
Briggs Volume III Briggs Papers and Speeches 
May 1986 
Apprenticeship: The Prospects for Survival 
Vernon M. Briggs Jr. 
vmb2@cornell.edu 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/briggsIII 
Thank you for downloading an article from DigitalCommons@ILR. 
Support this valuable resource today! 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Briggs Papers and Speeches at 
DigitalCommons@ILR. It has been accepted for inclusion in Briggs Volume III by an authorized administrator of 
DigitalCommons@ILR. For more information, please contact catherwood-dig@cornell.edu. 
If you have a disability and are having trouble accessing information on this website or need materials in an 
alternate format, contact web-accessibility@cornell.edu for assistance. 
Apprenticeship: The Prospects for Survival 
Keywords 
Apprentice, labor, train, nation, work, skill, federal, trade, employer, job 
Comments 
Volume 3 - Paper #43 
This article is available at DigitalCommons@ILR: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/briggsIII/15 
Andrew Johnson Memorial
Forum on Apprenticeship
Raleigh, N.C.
May 8, 1986
Apprenticeship: The Prospects for Survival
Vernon M. Briggs, Jr.
Cornell University
In the field oftraining, apprenticeship has enjoyed the reputation as being the
oldest formal training system in the nation. In fact, of course, the history exceeds that of
the United States itself since its roots extend back into the medieval era of Europe. It was
a product of the guild system-a process whereby untrained youths progressed through
the training process involved in learning a trade. Ultimately these apprentices actually
became masters (or employers). For this reason, people have referred to this system as a
"management training system." Even with the coming of the industrial revolution and
the subsequent collapse of the guild system, apprenticeship survived as a training system.
Although its primary purpose is to train skilled workers, it is still the case that many
management officials in some trades are graduates of the apprentice system.
But in addition to perseverance, apprenticeship is uniformly praised by training
experts as being the ideal form of training since it combines both the classroom
instruction in theory and principles with the actual "hands-on" experience that can only
be learned on the job. In an increasingly technical era, education and training modes that
are both basic in their content yet flexible in their format are being exalted today.
Apprenticeship training offers precisely this type of skill acquisition process. Thus, it
may seem hard to imagine that anyone could even raise a question about the prospects for
apprenticeship survival. The system of training has proven its worthiness over the
centuries. It also has widespread support by training experts as being an ideal form of
training. Many people, including myself, believe it should be expanded into occupations
and industries where it does not now exist. But, these attributes of durability and praise
can breed complacency and lead to a false assumption that what has been good and what
is good can survive on the basis of logic alone. But such is not entirely the case. The
great enemy of "the best" is "the good." When people feel that something is good they
often become satisfied and do not do the things that can make the undertaking the best.
And, in today's changing times, to be good may not be enough.
It may seem at first inappropriate to even raise this question before an audience
such as this. For here assembled we have part of what Ray Marshall and myself once
favorably referred to as the "apprenticeship establishment." That is, those persons from
business, labor, and government who have the responsibility for safeguarding the existing
apprenticeship system. But this is precisely the reason to speak to this group on this
subject. For most ofthe nation takes the apprenticeship system for granted. The Reagan
Administration, in particular, regards the apprenticeship system as being an essentially
private sector undertaking. It has greatly reduced the federal government's guidance and
support for the apprenticeship. It assumes the system can take care of itself. The staffing
of the Federal Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training has been sharply reduced and has
eliminated any expenditures for critically needed apprenticeship research. Since the early
1980s, the Federal Apprenticeship Committee has essentially ceased to function as a
leadership force. Except for Japan, no government of any other major industrial power in
the free world contributes less to the training of its future skilled workers than does the
United States. Japan is the exception. Japan does not have a modem apprenticeship
2
system because it has an extensive system of firm-specific training, and firms often have
life-time employment arrangements with its workers. Accordingly, Japan has not seen
the need for a training system that promotes worker mobility within an industry. Thus,
aside from Japan, it is probably no surprise that no other such industrialized nation has a
lower percentage of its labor force in apprenticeship than does the U.S. (with less than .3
percent of a percent of its civilian labor force participating in apprenticeship compared to,
for example Germany, Austria, and Switzerland with about 5.0 percent; Great Britain
close to 2 percent, Italy close to 4.0 percent). To put it another way, if apprenticeship in
the U.S. was at the same scale as Austria, Germany, or Switzerland, there would be about
7 million apprentices. Thus, unless groups such as this one speak out on what is needed
to expand apprenticeship training, it is the nation itself that is going to bear the cost of
real shortages in its skilled labor force ranks in the future. Our nation has real problems
dealing with slowly emerging problems. It is much more responsive to claps of thunder
than it is to falling barometric readings. But most claps of thunder are harmless; a falling
barometer can be a sign of a disaster. Such it is with the supply of skilled workers in the
U.S. Their ranks are not increasing fast enough.
Let's look at the system itself. As of fiscal year 1985, there were 222,591
registered apprentices plus about 50,000 military apprentices in all four armed services.
In total about 320,000 persons participated in apprenticeship training during the year.
While that figure may seem impressive, as late as 1979 there were 380,000 persons who
participated in apprenticeship training. Since 1979 the civilian labor force of the U.S. has
increased from 102.9 million to 115.7 million (or by 13.2 million workers) but the
absolute number of apprentices has fallen considerably over this period. Last year (1985)
3
the Secretary of Labor William Brock said, "I am deeply concerned about the production
quality in all fields of production...I look to the revitalized apprenticeship system to help
the United States achieve that quality." But words without actions are meaningless. To
date, there have been no federal initiatives.
The apprenticeship system is designed to produce the elite of the skilled labor
force. It is intended to produce workers who can command top wages. But, more
importantly for the nation, it seeks to provide standards for high quality work in each of
the respective trades and crafts it represents. By every labor market indicator, the jobs
that are increasing are those that require high training skills and extensive levels of
education. Unemployment for these types of workers-while it does have some cyclical
variation-remains the lowest of the labor force. Yet, training-especially in the
apprenticeship trades-is not increasing. Indeed it is falling in proportion to the size of
the labor force. Thus, if the nation is going to provide more quality jobs for its workers
and more quality production of the goods and services it provides, an increased role for
apprenticeship has to be part of the future, or some alternative measure must be
developed in its place.
Six years ago, Secretary of Labor Ray Marshall addressed the last national
conference held in 1980 on apprenticeship research in the United States. I think he
captured the dilemma facing the apprenticeship system when he said:
"I think that one of the problems we have with apprenticeship is that, while those
people who are part of that system understand it very well, it tends to be isolated from the
public opinions; not enough people know about apprenticeship and the values it has."
Thus it is time for the apprenticeship establishment to spread its message. I also believe
it is time for the federal government in particular but state governments as well if they are
4
willing to initiate steps to expand the number of apprenticeship trades as well as to
expand the number of apprentices who complete their trades each year.
To meet the skill needs of the nation it is essential that the Federal Committee on
Apprenticeship be revitalized. This committee has had an erratic history. When it has
had strong leadership and been active, apprenticeship has flourished (as was the case in
the late 1970s; when it has been inactive and neglected, the system has tended to flounder
(as has been the case in the 1980s). This Committee should set the cadence for the
development ofthe system. It should be the public advocate for articulating the
collective needs of the system. It has also proven to be an effective platform for the
reform when the system has needed changes to keep in step with the changing character
ofthe labor force (e.g., efforts to open up apprenticeship to qualified minorities and
women in particular and to non-relatives of journeymen in general who were often
arbitrarily excluded).
At the federal level there is a need to encourage the expansion of apprenticeship
by more than reliance solely upon promotional activities. It is time to put "bucks where
our mouths are." There should be federal financial support to state apprenticeship
agencies. Assuring a growing supply of apprentices for the skilled trades is more than of
mere local and regional importance. Grants should be available to state agencies that
seek to carry out the objectives of the National Apprenticeship Act in cooperation with
the Secretary of Labor. The grants should be contingent on submission of acceptable
state plans.
5
Federal grants should be made available to assist local apprenticeship committees
to cover their administrative costs and to assist multi-trade committees in communities
where the trades are numerically too small to support separate committees.
There should be federal financial support for the expansion or creation of
apprenticeship opportunities in fields with critical shortages of trained workers. These
fields would be identified by the Secretary of a Labor and certified as being essential to
the nation's continued well-being.
There needs to be some system developed to support apprenticeship participants
during the economic downturns. Dropouts from apprenticeship programs are already a
serious problem but it tends to be worsened during cyclical downturns. Many apprentices
do not return to the trade when the industry rebounds. The building trades in particular
are subject to extensive swings in employment. Perhaps it would be possible during such
periods for the Secretary of Labor to authorize and to fund local apprenticeship
committees to undertake public service projects and off-site training as a means of
maintaining the continuity of training.
There is a desperate need to expand national promotion of apprenticeship. Such
activities could best be done at the national level through promotion and registration of
apprenticeship programs among multi-plants and multi-state firms; sponsoring national
information programs; and funding promotion and development contacts with trade
associations and unions to extend apprenticeship into growth industries.
There should be mandatory apprenticeship provisions in federal and state
government contracts in excess of some minimum amount. The provisions should
require training of apprentices in crafts related to carrying-out the contracts.
6
The possibility oftax credits for apprenticeship programs should be explored.
This would provide an incentive to employers to hire apprentices who, because of their
inexperience would necessarily be less productive than skilled workers. Indeed, the
entire subject of financial incentives designed to entice more employers to sponsor
apprenticeship programs needs to be explored. The topic is controversial but the public
does benefit from apprenticeship training. Hence, the public should shoulder some of the
financial burden if the cost of training is an obstacle to expansion of apprenticeship
opportunities. As long as the public does not do so, the price it seems is that there are
suboptimal expenditures on the amount of skill training done by the private sector.
Governmental support of apprenticeship is widespread in other nations and it is no doubt
part of the explanation as to why these other nations do so much better that we do in
providing apprenticeship opportunities.
There is a desperate need to re-establish the apprenticeship research programs that
the U.S. Department of Labor funded prior to the advent of the Reagan Administration.
Not only is research needed to keep abreast with what is happening in this vital training
area but it can also provide demonstration projects to improve the quality of training.
Too often, apprenticeship committees and various state apprenticeship and federal
apprenticeship bodies are unable to keep up with what is happening elsewhere in the
nation and in the world concerning apprenticeship training. Regular conferences and
sponsored publications can bridge this information gap. There needs to be better ways to
collect data and to evaluate the performance of the apprenticeships system. Such
information is simply too important to the nation to be left uncollected and unassessed.
7
At all levels there needs to be away to tie apprenticeship into the nation's human
resource development strategies. Currently the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA)
which replaced the Comprehensive Employment Act has no ties to apprenticeship. There
is a tragic lack of linkages between the various training systems in the United States -
these include not only JTPA activities but also vocational education programs, and the
undertakings of community colleges and other educational bodies.
There is much more that would be said but I hope the message is clear.
Apprenticeship contributes markedly to the general economic welfare of the nation but it
could and must do more. Next year is the 50thAnniversary of the passage of the
Fitzgerald Act (i.e. the National Apprenticeship Act of 1937). While the apprenticeship
establishment can be proud of its past accomplishments, it does need to be aware that it
needs to do much more if it is to meet the future needs of a nation whose economy is
becoming more complex and more complicated. The supply of skilled workers and the
mechanism for providing them is the Achilles heel of the transformation of the American
economy that is now in progress. Apprenticeship will be of no value if the nation itself is
not equipped to provide the quality wok force that will be required for this nation to
remain industrially competitive in the world. The survival of a viable U.S. economy
depends on many things. One of them is unquestionably the availability and quality of its
skilled labor force. The question is not whether we need an expanded commitment to
apprenticeship training but, rather, when are we going to begin the task of making it
happen. Other nations are way ahead of us and if the U.S. apprenticeship establishment
does not begin the urgent task of expanding its numerical base, a shortage of qualified
8
workers could mean a shortage of jobs that will be lost to the nation. If that happens, we
are all going to suffer the consequences.
9


https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&amp;context=briggsIII

Apprenticeship: The Prospects for Survival

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

eCommons (Cornell Univ.)

DigitalCommons@ILR