The roles to which this applies include serving customers in a delicatessen or coffee shop, working on a hotel reception desk and serving food and drink in a restaurant.
Taking into account all the industries covered, the most obvious examples of this relabelling were found in leadership and management skills, where apprenticeship standards include becoming a ‘team leader’, ‘supervisor’ or ‘manager’.
The report states that almost 40 per cent of the ‘apprenticeship standards’ approved by the government since 2012 fail to reach the international or historical definition of an apprenticeship. These mislabelled courses are consuming over 20 per cent of the funding available for newly-designed apprenticeships.
The apprenticeship levy has completed its first full year of operation.
Alison Gilbert, group human resources director, CH&Co Group, who is also route panel chair for Catering and Hospitality for Institute of Apprenticeships, said: “The apprentice levy is new and, of course, there will be areas for improvement as people learn the mechanics.
“The term ‘apprentice’ has also changed. People need to forget the historical meaning of the word and embrace modern apprenticeships with fresh eyes and an open mind.
“Yes, year one has been a learning curve but working in partnership with the right learning provider and tackling the challenges is worthwhile. The work done by the trailblazers has given opportunity to develop great apprentice qualifications that are fit for purpose and employer led.
“I believe apprentices benefit the industry by delivering qualifications that focus on the skills needed and there is no reason why apprenticeships couldn’t be offered at every entry level role. After all, we need to attract people to the hospitality sector.”
The report reviews the available evidence to determine whether the levy will, as the government hopes, “incentivise more employers to provide quality apprenticeships” and “transform the lives of young people who secure them”.
In the six months after the levy was introduced (April to October 2017), the number of people starting an apprenticeship fell by 40 per cent compared to the same period in the previous year.
The introduction of the levy has diminished the quality of apprenticeships, according to the report, which says the list of roles now officially counted as an ‘apprenticeship’ includes many low-skill and often very short training courses.
Such training courses do not meet the historical or international definition of an apprenticeship because they typically offer minimal training, represent low-wage jobs and do not constitute skilled occupations.
The report claims employers have become increasingly critical towards the levy, primarily due to the burdens associated with accessing the levy funds as well as identifying and selecting training and assessment providers. It says at present, the levy is too complicated for employers, focused on too many inappropriate forms of training and as a result is unlikely to deliver value-for-money.
The report advises changes to the system, such as making it more simple and accessible, encouraging employers to offer apprenticeships without asking for greater investment overall. It argues the government should: focus on apprenticeship quality, introduce a new internationally-benchmarked definition of an ‘apprenticeship’ and remove the requirement for 10 per cent employer co-investment towards the cost of training apprentices.
The government should replace the existing HMRC digital payment system with a simpler ‘apprenticeship voucher’ model, according to the report.