The vast majority of apprenticeships are for those under age 25 as a result of the funding policies (at least here in Scotland anyway). While politicians say the right things the figures speak for themselves, there are relatively small % over age 25 and it falls away even further for the over 50s who need a new direction.

Yes apprenticeships should be more widely available but at present they don’t appear to be, at least in my part of the UK. We hear a lot about skills shortages, perhaps it will happen in time?

In reply to Julie:

Julie is absolutely correct that it’s the funding rules that determine the low numbers of older apprenticeships: in theory, apprentices of any age are encouraged but in practice if one has a lot of apprentices to train and is reliant on Government funding the employer contributions needed to train over 25s can be prohibitive, so employers tend not to want them.

Absolutely right too that politicisns tend to crow about massive expansions of apprentice numbers and people of any age being eligible but most of the increased numbers relate to ‘apprenticeships’ that involve low level non-scientific and technical skills such as Level 2s in Business Admin which are hardly anywhere near the cutting edges of technology or higher vocational learning, which is the impression their pronouncements like to convey.

The reality is that the UK as an economy, society and culture still has an archaic system of vocational learning provision, compared with eg European neighbour countries, notably Germany and bordering countries. There are honourable exceptions, such as construction, electrical and engineering occupations, but these have succeeded more as a result of employer backing and tradition than from any actions of Government. Lip service only tends to be paid by (successive) Governments , with constant reviews, ‘ initiatives ‘ , funding and regulatory regimes, inspection regimes etc etc that never seem in reality to get this nation very far in really reforming vocational learning.

Employers ought to be wary about turning away applicants for apprenticeships overtly on account of their age, as this might amount to unlawful age discrimination. Although they might defend this charge by pointing to the age-related funding and affordability concerns.

Most larger recruiters of apprentices will take the odd over 25 if they look like promising material and for fear of getting accused of unlawful discrimination if they don’t.

The best thing an applicant over 25 can do is be aware of the tightrope the employer has to be walking here and to make it clear albeit politely and subtly during recruitment that they’re aware of the potential for unlawful discrimination. And if they think they’ve been refused solely or mainly because of their age they can kick up a fuss about it. Most prividers are subject to rigorous OFSTED inspections and the last thing most will want on their records are formal complaints about age-discriminatory recruitment.

In reply to David:

PS

I point the finger above at Government, but this is essentially a cultural phenomenon. For example, most employers don’t embrace apprenticeships as the best way of avoiding skill shortages etc and maintaining a competent workforce into the future and won’t invest in them. The Apprenticeship Levy tried to force them to do so, but this is just another of the tinkering with the system referred to above and as many colleagues will doubtless be aware is a seriously flawed and very blunt instrument that does little to address the fundamental problem.