Improving Communications to Develop Work-Based Learning Programs in the Skilled Trades

Industries like construction and manufacturing have long looked to apprenticeships to recruit and train the next generation of tradespeople. Apprentices training for positions in construction made up nearly 70 percent of all apprentices in the U.S. Registered Apprenticeship system in 2020. Over the past several years, federal and state governments have invested heavily to expand apprenticeship to new industries and new populations of Americans, including young adults. Youth apprenticeship programs, which typically start before students have completed high school, have gained traction in many so-called “non-traditional” apprenticeship industries such as health care and information technology. But despite their history of leadership in apprenticeship, the skilled trades have been slower to embrace this emerging model.

In 2020 and 2021, New America’s Partnership to Advance Youth Apprenticeship (PAYA) led a series of structured discussions and interviews with practitioners across the skilled trades education and training ecosystem to learn why. These discussions revealed two major categories of challenges to expanding youth apprenticeship and other forms of high-quality work-based learning in the skilled trades:

1. Misaligned expectations between stakeholders; and
2. Structural challenges in education and industry that make it difficult to work across systems.

After publishing the findings from these conversations in 2022, New America launched a Work Group on Youth Apprenticeship and Work-Based Learning in the Skilled Trades (STWG) to explore the challenges with a group of experts from the education, workforce, industry, organized labor, and nonprofit sectors. The group spent a year digging into these challenges, troubleshooting common issues, and developing solutions to shared challenges. This brief synthesizes key points from these discussions and introduces the STWG’s first collaboratively developed resource, Employers’ Guide to Work-Based Learning Opportunities in the Skilled Trades, a customizable resource to support communication between educators, program leaders, and employers as they develop work-based learning programs in the skilled trades.

STWG launched in spring 2022 with 10 participants from across the PAYA Network who were operating, building, or supporting youth apprenticeship, pre-apprenticeship, or other intensive work-based learning programs in skilled trades occupations. The group included state and local education officials, industry and employer representatives, voices from organized labor, and several intermediary organizations that coordinate across partners to design and deliver programs. (A full list of group members is available below.)

Prior to the group’s initial meeting, members read the findings from New America’s 2020–2021 discussion series. While some STWG members had participated in those discussions, others had not. Group members nominated several issues identified in the report that posed obstacles in their own work. They then ranked each issue’s importance to the quality and growth of youth apprenticeship and other intensive youth work-based learning programs in the trades.

While there was considerable consensus that stigma against the trades, inequitable access to transportation, and liability and insurance concerns impede the development of youth work-based learning opportunities, the group ultimately determined that the most significant, common, and fixable barrier to the expansion of work-based learning in the skilled trades is a communication problem. The lack of a common language to describe program types, components, requirements, and benefits prevents effective cooperation between the education and industry partners that must work together to design and deliver work-based learning.

High-quality work-based learning opportunities for youth rely on successful, ongoing partnership across multiple stakeholders, including education institutions and the employers that host and hire students on work sites. These stakeholders often bring different expectations to their collaboration. The task of aligning these expectations typically falls to a school-based work-based learning coordinator or an organization that serves as an intermediary, which coordinates the priorities and needs of the partners. While intermediaries serve a wide range of functions to make work-based learning partnerships and programs successful, their role as translators across these partners’ expectations and priorities is among the most critical.

This translation is also, as STWG members shared, among the most time-consuming and difficult tasks, especially in the earliest stages of partnership. Without common vocabulary, education and industry partners often struggle to articulate their goals and needs. Adding to the challenge is the proliferation of work-based learning types and offerings, which can begin as early as elementary school. As interest and support for work-based learning has grown, the landscape—and the language used to describe it—has become more complex.

STWG members applauded efforts to expand work-based learning and to create earlier connections between students and the world of work, but were adamant about the need for clear policies, definitions, and frameworks to help spell out roles and responsibilities for partners under each program model. Some group members, especially those who work outside the education establishment, were surprised to discover that such policies and definitions already exist in most states.

Using Advance CTE’s State Work-Based Learning Innovation Tracker and the American Student Assistance Foundation’s state-by-state analysis of high school work-based learning policies, the group discussed the strengths and weaknesses of existing policies, definitions, and frameworks. One point of consensus quickly emerged: state work-based learning resources, while important for the administration and oversight of work-based learning, are not especially employer-friendly. As one employer in the STWG explained, “I understand internships and apprenticeships, but if there are five different things out there, it’s too meaty. I’m not going to understand it.”

Effective program leaders understand this reality and tend to view state and district-provided manuals as tools for their work as translators. As one STWG member representing an industry intermediary explained,

Our state has a really good manual that runs like 200 pages. But bureaucracies tend to overcomplicate things. We have multiple definitions that are sort of ranked in terms of intensity or length for students. Youth apprenticeship is top tier. Then work-based learning, which has four or five sub-definitions. Then co-ops and other placements and so on. It totally confuses employers. So we just use our own terminology when we try to recruit them. It’s not an actual definition from the manual, but it’s easier for us to interface with employers that way. We figure out what they’re looking for, and then pick the right model for what they want.

One of the strengths of the Registered Apprenticeship system is its definitional clarity: there is no gray area where a program “might be” a Registered Apprenticeship. This is not currently the case for youth apprenticeship. Many youth apprenticeships are Registered Apprenticeships. Others, such as Wisconsin’s, are certified under state frameworks that define youth apprenticeship separately from registered models. Still others operate under no approval framework whatsoever.

While PAYA’s definition and principles for high-quality youth apprenticeship have been widely adopted, the lack of a common definition remains a challenge for the field. STWG members hypothesized that this lack of consistency contributes to the confusion and skepticism among employers in the trades, who are often familiar with Registered Apprenticeship and can be distrustful of efforts to modify the model to accommodate younger apprentices, even when those programs are in fact registered. Some express concerns about young adults’ safety and readiness to work; some worry programs that enroll high school students will be “watered down.’’ But other employers find the debate over these definitions frustrating. “Honestly, I don’t really know or care what the difference between an internship and an apprenticeship is,’’ one employer in the STWG explained. “I just need to know what we’re going to get out of it, and what is expected of us.”

Any employer hosting or hiring students through work-based learning programs needs to understand program basics: how many hours students will work on-site; what they should see, do, and learn at work; and whether and how they will be paid, among other details. Communicating these details clearly and concisely can be the difference between an employer signing on or walking away.

But employers in the skilled trades have additional considerations, given the nature of and risks inherent in their work, the occupational frameworks that shape their professions, and, in some occupations and regions, the acute labor shortages that have driven them to pursue work-based learning partnerships. STWG members observed that many of the details that matter most to skilled trades employers are buried deep within states’ work-based learning manuals or obscure areas of state code. They are sometimes not well understood by school-based work-based learning coordinators, who often manage programming for multiple industries without the support of external intermediaries.

STWG members acknowledged that many of these industry-specific issues can be addressed, but confusion and poor communication about them in the earliest stages of partnership can lead to delays, disappointment, and distrust. The group agreed on eight categories of information that program leaders need to convey clearly to address skilled trades employers’ needs, concerns, and priorities head on:

1. Program Goal
   Delineating the goals of each work-based learning type can help an employer quickly hone in on those that meet their needs. Is the program focused on exposing students to various aspects of the trades? Or is it designed to prepare someone for work in a particular occupation, such as plumbing or electrical wiring? Employers in the trades may use work-based learning to reach out to student groups, like women or students of color, that are underrepresented in a given occupation. Presenting this information in early-stage discussions can help employers understand the full range of options available through partnership.
   
2. Credential(s) at Completion
   Skilled trades employers must consider licensing and certification requirements, which vary by trade. Clearly articulating the credentials students can earn through various work-based learning programs, if any, can help manage employers’ expectations. Where relevant, programs should consider naming the training standards the program uses, or what options might exist for an employer to customize training. Some, like the Multi-Craft Core Curriculum (MC3), a pre-apprenticeship standard managed by the North America’s Building Trades Unions, and curricula managed by National Center for Construction Education and Research, are widely recognized and well-regarded in the field.
   
3. Program Duration
   Skilled tradespeople can work on projects that last days or years, and they often work at multiple job sites simultaneously. Workforces often grow and shrink as demand for their work fluctuates. Skilled trades employers must understand the length of the commitment they’re making to work-based learning students so they can be reasonably sure they can hold up their end of the bargain. Program length can be a helpful indication of a program’s intensity and purpose. For example, a month-long internship offers very different opportunities for skill development—and requires a different type of training and supervision from an employer—than a youth apprenticeship that spans multiple years.
   
4. Working Hours per Week
   The number of hours a work-based learning student will spend at a work site each week can help skilled trades employers ensure a work-based learning program meets their needs and expectations. Because many tradespeople work in shifts, this information can also be critical for creating schedules that pair students with consistent workplace mentors and supervisors.
   
5. Supervisory Requirements
   Registered Apprenticeship programs in the trades require apprentices be supervised by journeypeople and impose supervisor-to-apprentice ratios to ensure safety and adequate opportunities for learning and support. In places or industries where journeypeople are in short supply, such requirements can affect employers’ ability to hire youth apprentices. States may impose similar requirements for employers participating in pre-apprenticeship, internships, or other work-based learning experiences. Communicating this information early can protect students’ interests by ensuring there are no surprises or gaps in supervision as the program gets underway.
   
6. Compensation
   Not all work-based learning opportunities are paid, but it is important for employers to understand expectations for compensation for those that are. Skilled trades employers are interested in understanding whether they need to hire work-based learning students as employees or if they are considered volunteers. This matters because state workers compensation insurance applies only to employees and can reduce businesses’ liability for work-related injuries and illnesses. Youth apprentices, who are hired when their apprenticeship begins, are employees; most interns or job-shadow students are not.
   
7. Liability
   Concerns about liability insurance are a frequently cited barrier to employers’ participation in work-based learning programs like internships and apprenticeships. Youth apprentices, who are hired when their apprenticeship begins, are employees; most interns or job-shadow students are not. This matters because state workers compensation insurance applies only to employees and can reduce businesses’ liability for work-related injuries and illnesses. While many states have adopted measures to ensure that work-based learning students are covered by school districts’ policies or to minimize increases in employers’ insurance costs, employers are often unaware of these measures. As with the information about hazardous occupations, it is important to anticipate questions about liability, and to be prepared with information and resources to address employers’ concerns.
   
8. Hazardous Occupations (HO) Restrictions
   Many states prohibit minors from working in occupations that have been deemed high-risk, including many jobs in construction and manufacturing. Others allow older teens to work in these occupations or to train for them via sanctioned work-based learning placements but impose restrictions on the types of tasks minors can perform at work until they turn 18. These rules, while important to protect the safety and interests of students, can be difficult for employers to decipher and navigate. In most cases, employers can offer safe work-based learning opportunities that are mutually beneficial to themselves and their students, but they need help understanding their responsibilities and how to mitigate risks. Providing this information up front can address concerns that sometimes deter otherwise interested employers.

With these categories in mind, the STWG developed a simple tool that can help program leaders and intermediaries translate program offerings and requirements in a format that acknowledges the concerns of skilled trades employers. While not an exhaustive list of the information employers need to know or consider when developing work-based learning opportunities, the tool aims to improve communication between work-based learning stakeholders.  Program leaders can download a fillable version of the tool and customize it with different program types and names. A sample version has been created below as a guide.

New America will continue to convene this work group in 2023 to explore and address challenges that exist to expanding high-quality work-based learning opportunities in the skilled trades. Work group members have nominated a number of potential topics for further consideration, including state policy efforts to address employers’ concerns about insurance and liability for work-based learning students and effective strategies to promote more inclusive workplaces so they serve as effective places of learning for youth. A brief summarizing the proceedings of STWG’s second year will be published in early 2024.

We would like to thank Harbor Freight Tools for Schools for its generous support of the National Work Group on Youth Apprenticeship & Work-Based Learning in the Skilled Trades and the Partnership to Advance Youth Apprenticeship. We are also grateful to the members of the skilled trades work group for their participation, expertise, and input in the development of this brief and tool. Finally, we would like to acknowledge the invaluable work of many colleagues on New America's communications and production staff, in particular Fabio Murgia, Joe Wilkes, Sabrina Detlef, Amanda Dean, and Kim Akker.