Apprenticeship: A Pill for Every Ill? Briefing Note

Following the financial crisis and the ensuing economic downturn in the past decade, apprenticeship sparked renewed interest among policy-makers both in Brussels and the EU Member States. Since, European and national crisis management strategies have advocated apprenticeship both as a short-term solution to youth unemployment and a useful response to companies' skill needs in the longer term. However, after the initial years of policy implementation and financial investment to increase apprenticeship numbers, social partners and experts have been raising grievances: not all schemes called 'apprenticeships' merited their name, not all ensured high-quality training (or any training), and not all 'apprentices' were entitled to employment or social protection rights. To help promote a common European understanding, Cedefop has identified the basic features a work-based education and training scheme should have to be called 'apprenticeship'. It suggests countries agree on a common denominator made up of the following features: (1) the scheme is backed by a legal framework; (2) it leads to a formal and portable qualification; (3) it relies on a structured alternation between work-based and school-based learning; (4) it implies a commitment for a minimum duration that makes the training alternation meaningful; (5) company and learner sign a specific type of contract; and (6) the learner receives a remuneration. Europe does not -- and should not -- have a single model of apprenticeship. Similarly, no model can simply be copied: the conditions enabling quality apprenticeships differ from country to country. Cedefop is widening and deepening its understanding of these conditions in their respective settings, to help step up transfer and adjustment of best practices in the future.