We need a new policy that makes companies pay apprentices a proper living wage, not just the bare minimum. The current system means young people are doing skilled work, fixing people's leaky pipes or wiring their houses, but they’re barely earning enough to get by. It’s not fair and it puts people off learning a trade.
This needs to be tied to actual productivity and the skills they're learning. If an apprentice is doing the same jobs as a qualified tradesperson and has been there a year or two, they should be paid accordingly. It’s not rocket science. We need to make sure the employers are contributing fairly for the valuable work these apprentices are doing, and not just seeing them as cheap labour. It's like when you get a new boiler fitted, you expect quality work, and that starts with training people properly.
Discussion (5)
Sign in to join the discussion. Debate and humour are both very welcome.
Mock the policy. Not the person. Community principles →
But what happens when the apprentice isn’t doing the same jobs as a qualified person? My nephew is training to be a chef, and while he’s learning a lot, he’s still mostly doing prep work and washing dishes, not running the pass. How does the pay reflect that difference in responsibility and skill?
But surely the issue isn’t just about measuring output. It’s about valuing the training itself. If a company is benefiting from the apprentice's labour, which often contributes directly to revenue, they should be compensated fairly for that contribution, regardless of how easy it is to put a number on it. It’s about recognising the immediate value they bring, not just the future potential.
I know a young apprentice plumber in Grimsby who's been fixing burst pipes for a local firm, and he's been doing it for over a year now, but he's still on the minimum apprentice wage. It's not right, love, he's bringing in revenue for that company, and he should be paid accordingly, it's only fair.