Meeting of the Parliament 19 November 2025
The Economy and Fair Work Committee has heard over and over again about the advantages of workplace learning, not only for traditional vocational careers but also for secondary school pupils and post-secondary students. I am still reasonably shocked by the relatively limited joint working between industry in Scotland and Scotland’s universities and colleges, compared with course delivery in North America. When I graduated in engineering way back in 2000, I did so with more than two years of work experience in industry through my university’s co-op programme. That involved paid work—at well above the minimum wage—in chunks of four, eight or 12 months.
In the United States and Canada, it is normal process for engineering companies to take on engineering students to undertake discrete projects, and to attract potential talent for long-term recruitment. That helps students to cover the costs of learning and it helps them to gain invaluable skills. When I arrived in the UK, I was offered two jobs in my first two weeks here on the basis that I had practical experience, even as a fresh graduate, which gave me a significant advantage over my UK peers.
There is a great deal of scope for improved connections between post-secondary education and industry in Scotland to support success in key industries and to make our graduates employable. There is also scope to find alternative funding streams to support the delivery of post-secondary education, perhaps by getting industry to fund either key placements of students or equipment that students might need to use. The Scottish Government should show leadership and set out intentions on that with urgency.
Apprenticeships in Scotland are a mixed story. Employers are very keen to hire apprentices, and apprenticeships are in high demand. A higher percentage of apprentices go on to work in the subject area that they have been trained in, compared with university students. However, I was unable to find statistics on that for college graduates, which somewhat begs the question about the difference in focus and funding between those two routes. It could be said that substantial public funds are being wasted on students who study at university but do not go on to work in their field of study. At the very least, that should be a matter of self-reflection for universities that are claiming financial difficulties.
Additional funding for apprenticeships to allow more people of all ages to take them up would be a sound investment in Scotland’s future. About 90 per cent of the people who study in an apprenticeship go on to work in the field or sector in which they have studied, so that learning is valuable.
Several matters concern me about how apprenticeships are being delivered in Scotland, despite the positive headlines. First, the quality of apprenticeships varies widely, with no standards for minimum training hours or quality of instructors. I met an apprentice who worked for one of our local authorities. That young woman had no standard hours for training, and she was expected to do online training. If she did not get on with her supervisor or did not think that the training was adequate, there was no one that she could complain to, and her supervisor could fail her if she issued complaints. That is not a good standard of training.
Apprentices in traditional trades have union representation to look out for their interests and the quality of their instruction, but other apprentices lack that representation and have no one to turn to if they are mistreated or are provided with sub-par training. Apprentices need an independent regulatory body to ensure fair treatment and quality control. That is especially critical for apprentices in sectors that do not have a college affiliation.
Apprenticeships in Scotland are substantially focused on men, to the disadvantage of women.