This section summarizes employers’ responses related to a variety of measures of the costs and benefits of apprentices. These include qualitative benefits of apprenticeship training; financial support provided for apprentices; the perceived productive value of an apprentice compared to the training costs by year of the apprenticeship; and poaching risk. The sample sizes reported in this section refer to the “valid n”; i.e., only those employers who provided a response have been included in the analysis.

4.1 Qualitative Benefits of Apprenticeship Training

The survey questionnaire included a series of questions designed to measure the importance of several qualitative benefits of apprenticeship training. These include:

4.1.1 Reasons for Investing in Apprenticeship
Employers rated the importance of a number of potential reasons for investing in an apprentice using a ten-point scale, where 1 is ‘not at all important’ and 10 is ‘very important.’ As illustrated in Exhibit 4.1, employers indicated that investing in apprenticeship is very important as it ensures that the company has skilled labour and replacement workers for an aging workforce. These results indicate that employers are not necessarily investing in apprentices because of their ability to generate short-term revenue for the organization, but rather view apprenticeship as a means to meet long-term labour supply requirements. Lower turnover rates and the perception that apprenticeship pays for itself were also cited as important benefits of apprenticeship training.

Exhibit 4.1 Employers’ Top 5 Reasons for Investing in Apprenticeship

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q30, n=403-418)

4.1.2 Benefit of Apprenticeship Training to Journeypersons
Employers identified whether there was a benefit to their journeypersons from providing training to an apprentice and also rated the importance of that benefit. The majority of employers (67.6%) indicated that their journeypersons derive a benefit from training an apprentice.¹⁶ In addition, employers rated the importance of that benefit using a ten-point scale. The average rating was 7.6, indicating that employers view the benefit derived from apprenticeship training as important.¹⁷ Frequently cited responses by employers with respect to the nature of the benefit included refinement of the journeyperson’s skills and knowledge and an increase in productivity when the apprentice assists with complex job tasks.

4.1.3 Advantages of Employing a Homegrown Journeyperson
In addition to the net economic benefit of hiring an apprentice, it appears that employers attach considerable importance to training their workers “in-house”. In particular, employers rated the benefit for the following indicators:

As indicated in Exhibit 4.2, employers rated ‘better fit with the organization’ as the most significant benefit of employing a journeyperson who was trained as an apprentice. Employers also indicated that hiring within the organization reduces the risk of skill shortages and leads to greater overall productivity.

Exhibit 4.2 Benefits of Employing a Homegrown Journeyperson

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q12, n=396-408)

Exhibit 4.3 presents the results related to employers’ assessments of the productivity of a homegrown journeyperson relative to an externally trained journeyperson. Approximately two-thirds (65.3%) of surveyed employers consider a journeyperson they trained as an apprentice to be more productive relative to an external journeyperson, with only 2.3% indicating that homegrown journeypersons are less productive. In addition, 32.5% of employers indicated that there is no difference in productivity between a homegrown and an external journeyperson. Overall, employers indicated that a homegrown journeyperson is 26.5% more productive on average.

The majority of employers across all business sizes and regions viewed a homegrown journeyperson as more productive than an externally trained journeyperson. For example, 65.6% of employers who operate a business with less than 20 employees indicated that a homegrown journeyperson is more productive. Only a small percentage (2.4%) of these employers indicated that homegrown journeypersons are less productive relative to external journeypersons.

TOP

Exhibit 4.3 Perceived Productivity of a Homegrown Journeyperson Relative to an Externally Trained Journeyperson by Employer Size and Region

1. These figures are based on employers’ assessments.

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q40 & Q41)

4.2 Financial Support for Apprentices
To determine the extent to which employers provide financial support to apprentices, employers estimated annual per apprentice cash disbursements for tuition and related fees, tools, etc. The results presented in this section include only those employers who indicated a value greater than zero. Therefore, employers who did not respond (since they do not incur these costs) have been excluded.

As shown in Exhibit 4.4, wages paid during in-school training is the highest cost item for employers with an average annual cost of $4,338 per apprentice, followed by equipment that is lent or donated to training bodies ($1,368); top-up of EI benefits during in-school training ($1,283); scholarships ($957); and continuing education training ($875). Overall, the average per apprentice cash disbursement is $13,252 per year.

Exhibit 4.4 Average Annual Per Apprentice Cash Disbursements and Percentage of Employers Providing

1. Includes only those employers who indicated a value greater than zero.
   
2. Represents the percentage of the total sample (n=433). Percentages do not add to 100% due to multiple responses.

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q20, n=7-98)

In addition, just over one-half (53.6%) of surveyed employers provide some form of cash disbursement to their apprentices.

Exhibit 4.5 provides a breakdown of the average annual per apprentice cash disbursements by employer size. Large organizations with 500 or more employees contribute a higher level of financial support to apprentices relative to smaller organizations, especially for wages during in-school training ($7,780) and continuing education training ($3,383). This does not imply that larger organizations are more generous but likely reflects the amount of financial resources available for apprenticeship training. Regardless of employer size, wages during in-school training represent the largest cash disbursement related to the training and development of apprentices.

Exhibit 4.5 Average Annual Per Apprentice Cash Disbursements by Employer Size

1. Includes only those employers who indicated a value greater than zero.

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q20)

TOP

As illustrated in Exhibit 4.6, a higher proportion of mid-sized businesses (62.2%) contribute some form of cash disbursements to their apprentices relative to businesses with less than 20 employees (48.3%). Larger organizations are more likely to provide wages during in-school training; funding for tuition and related fees; and tools to an apprentice.

Employers estimated the distribution of these cash disbursements over the apprenticeship period. As illustrated in Exhibit 4.7, a significant proportion of cash disbursements (37.5%) is allocated to first year apprentices. This is not a surprising result, as there are one-time fees that are incurred by the employer when an apprentice is initially hired. Apprentices who have reached the fifth year of the apprenticeship receive only 2.7% of the total cash disbursements provided by employers.

Exhibit 4.6 Percentage of Employers Providing Cash Disbursements to Apprentices by Employer Size

1. Represents the percentage of the total sample for each group. Percentages do not add to 100% due to multiple responses.

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q20)

Exhibit 4.7 Distribution of Cash Disbursements by Year of Apprenticeship

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q21, n=207)

4.3 Perceived Productive Value vs. Training Costs
Employers estimated when an apprentice’s productive value to their organization begins to exceed the training costs. As illustrated in Exhibit 4.8, more than one-quarter (28.1%) of surveyed employers indicated that the benefit of training the apprentice exceeds the costs by the end of the second year of the apprenticeship. In other words, the employer perceives a net benefit of apprenticeship training at the mid-point of the apprenticeship period, which averages four years. In addition, more than one-third (38.0%) of

Exhibit 4.8 Estimated Time for Benefit of Apprenticeship Training to Exceed Costs

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q27, n=392)

Similarly, Exhibit 4.9 illustrates employers’ assessments of the difference between the productive value of an apprentice and the training costs by each stage of the apprenticeship. For example, 14.5% of employers indicated that they receive a net benefit from training before the end of the first year of the apprenticeship. In other words, the apprentice’s productive value exceeds the training costs. Conversely, the costs of training exceed the productive value of the apprentice for 85.5% of employers during this stage of the apprenticeship. By the end of the second year, the majority of employers (66.1%) indicate that the productive value of the apprentice exceeds the cost of training (i.e., a net benefit). However, over one-third (33.9%) of employers continue to incur a net cost during this period of the apprenticeship. By the end of the third year, only a small proportion of employers (10.5%) perceive that the cost of training exceeds the productive value of the apprentice.

TOP

Exhibit 4.9 Percentage of Employers Indicating a Perceived Net Cost (Negative) or Net Benefit (Positive) of Apprenticeship Training by Year of Apprenticeship

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q27, n=392)

4.4 Poaching Risk

As shown in Exhibit 4.10, it appears that employers do not perceive poaching risk from competitors or other industries to be a very serious issue given the average ratings of 5.1 and 4.8, respectively. However, these results indicate that there is some concern with respect to poaching. In addition, employers included in the study are more susceptible to poaching relative to those who do not hire apprentices. On the other hand, it is also possible that some employers are unaware of the extent to which poaching occurs.

Exhibit 4.10 Employers’ Perceived Seriousness of Poaching Risk

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q33 & Q34, n=407)

Exhibit 4.11 presents employers’ perceived seriousness of poaching risk by employer size. Although the results indicate that large employers view poaching risk from other industries as a more serious issue relative to small and mid-sized employers, it should be noted that these results are based on a small sample of respondents (33). The perceived seriousness of poaching risk from competitors was similar across the different business sizes.

Exhibit 4.11 Employers’ Perceived Seriousness of Poaching Risk by Employer Size

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q33 & Q34, n=33-221)

There are regional differences with respect to the perceived seriousness of poaching risk. As illustrated in Exhibit 4.12, employers in Quebec are the least concerned with poaching risk from both competitors and other industries. On the other hand, employers from the Atlantic region perceive poaching risk as a more serious concern relative to the other regions.

Exhibit 4.12 Employers’ Perceived Seriousness of Poaching Risk by Region

Note: Caution should be exercised in the interpretation of these results given the small sample sizes on a regional basis.

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q33 & Q34, n=19-182)

16. Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q10, n=413)
    
17. Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q11a, n=276)

TOP