Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee

on 21st Century Competitiveness,

Committee on Education and the

Workforce, House of Representatives

United States General Accounting Office

GAO

September 2001 REGISTERED

APPRENTICESHIPS

Labor Could Do More

to Expand to Other

Occupations

GAO-01-940
Page i GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2

Background 3

Lack of Systematic Identification of Occupations and the Need to

Allay Employers’ Concerns Slow Expansion of Apprenticeships 6

Some Apprenticeship Programs That Respond to Current Labor

Needs Have Overcome Impediments 11

Conclusions 16

Recommendations for Executive Action 17

Agency Comments 17

Appendix I Scope and Methodology 19

Appendix II Summaries of Example Programs 20

Appendix III Comments From the Department of Labor 30

Appendix IV GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 33

Tables

Table 1: Occupations Recognized as Apprenticeable, 1996–2000 8

Table 2: Apprenticeship Programs Analyzed 12

Figures

Figure 1: Registered Apprentices by Industry as of September 30,

2000, for 36 Reporting States 4

Contents
Page ii GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

Abbreviations

AIMS Apprenticeship Information Management System

ATELS Office of Apprenticeship Training, Employer and Labor

Services

CompTIA Computing Technology Industry Association

IBEW International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

IT information technology
Page 1 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

September 7, 2001

The Honorable Howard P. McKeon

Chairman, Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness

Committee on Education and the Workforce

House of Representatives

Dear Mr. Chairman:

In recent years, employers in some industries have faced challenges

obtaining workers with specific skills. At the same time, many workers

have not mastered the skills that are most in demand in the labor market.

One approach to addressing this mismatch between labor demand and

supply—the apprenticeship model—has been used for decades in

construction trades and some manufacturing occupations to ensure that

workers have the skills employers need. Apprenticeship combines

supervised on-the-job training with formal instruction. It benefits both

employers and employees by providing the skills and knowledge necessary

for a specific job and a credential recognized throughout an industry.

Apprenticeship programs typically last from one to several years and are

sponsored by employers who pay an apprentice’s wages; the employer or

the apprentice may fund the formal instruction. The use of apprenticeship

is standard practice in some industries, but expansion beyond occupations

not traditionally apprenticed has been limited.

To promote the apprenticeship model and safeguard the welfare of

apprentices, the Department of Labor established the federal registered

apprenticeship program, in which more than 360,000 apprentices are

currently enrolled. Labor determines whether occupations in which

employers want to sponsor apprentices should be approved as

apprenticeable. Employers, sometimes with the help of unions and other

employee groups, can establish and operate programs in those approved

occupations. Labor or representatives of state apprenticeship councils

designated by Labor promote the apprenticeship concept and must

approve individual programs for them to be part of the federal registered

apprenticeship program.

To address your concern that apprenticeship is not being used as much as

it could be to develop a skilled workforce, you asked us to (1) describe

efforts Labor has made to expand apprenticeship to new occupations and

explain some of the impediments to getting apprenticeship programs

established in fields not traditionally apprenticed, and (2) describe

examples of apprenticeship programs that responded to current labor

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548
Page 2 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

market needs and how they have done so. To answer your questions, we

spoke with Labor officials at headquarters and regional offices about their

efforts to promote the apprenticeship program. We also interviewed

federal and state employees in four states—California, Indiana,

Massachusetts, and New Jersey—who promote and register

apprenticeship programs. We analyzed the approval process for 40 new

programs in these four states and identified and obtained more detailed

information on challenges faced by six programs in occupations not

traditionally apprenticed. We also spoke with experts and employer and

employee group representatives about how apprenticeship meets labor

market needs. Our work was conducted in accordance with generally

accepted government auditing standards between November 2000 and July

2001. See appendix I for a full discussion of our scope and methodology.

Labor has not systematically identified new occupations suitable for

apprenticeship programs that could respond to needs for skilled labor, nor

has it successfully alleviated concerns of some employers about the

requirements of apprenticeship, resulting in slow expansion of

apprenticeship to new occupations. While the apprenticeship model is not

appropriate for all occupations, it can fill an essential need for developing

certain skills in workers. In the last 5 years, Labor has approved 19 new

occupations as apprenticeable and a substantial number of these have

been in less traditional occupations. For example, internetworking

technician and youth development practitioner were both approved in

2000. However, these approvals have usually been initiated by employers’

requests for apprenticeships, not as a result of Labor’s initiative. Labor

does not systematically review occupations and related labor market data

to identify occupations with labor needs that would be suitable for

apprenticeships. Further, some employers’ apprehension about program

requirements, and Labor’s inability to alleviate this apprehension, have

been an impediment to getting apprenticeships established in occupations

not traditionally apprenticed. Employers expressed a range of concerns

that made them wary of apprenticeship programs. For example, some

employers were reluctant to commit to incremental increases in wages as

required by apprenticeship regulations. Labor and state apprenticeship

council representatives often meet with individual employers to address

these concerns and explain how apprenticeship works, which helps

employers overcome their uncertainties. However, there is no national

information-sharing mechanism to help employers learn from others who

have established similar programs. In addition, Labor’s apprenticeship

database is incompatible with some states’ systems; as a result, the agency

is unable to measure its progress in expanding apprenticeship and cannot

readily identify and share its successes with potential sponsors.

Results in Brief
Page 3 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

We identified several apprenticeship programs in which apprenticeship

training helped to develop workers with particular skills sought by

industry. The six examples of apprenticeship programs we examined—all

established to respond to employers’ needs for skilled labor—range from

those in industries that have had apprenticeships in the past, such as

construction-related occupations, to those in occupations not traditionally

apprenticed, such as youth development practitioners who advise youth

on training and employment. These programs overcame many of the

impediments that employers had identified as reasons for their reluctance

to establish apprenticeship programs. Key to the establishment of several

programs was the close interaction between employers and federal or

state apprenticeship officials to ensure that employers understood the

value of apprenticeships. Typically, apprenticeship representatives who

developed the program, including apprenticeship staff and union

representatives in some instances, fostered good communication early in

the process that identified and resolved concerns among all parties, such

as unions and employers. In addition, coordination with other federal and

state workforce development efforts to obtain necessary resources was

important to getting these programs established.

We are making recommendations to the Secretary of Labor to help the

agency expand the use of apprenticeships in occupations not traditionally

apprenticed and improve the apprenticeship program data system. Labor

was provided a draft of this report and concurred with our

recommendations.

Apprenticeship is an employee training approach that combines on-the-job

training and formal instruction to teach workers the practical and

theoretical aspects of a skilled occupation. It is appropriate for many

occupations that require at least 1 year of hands-on training and formal

instruction. Apprentices work under the auspices of a mentor who is a

fully trained worker, often called a journey worker. The content and length

of the apprenticeship training and instruction are determined by the needs

of the specific occupation. For employers, apprenticeship helps ensure

that workers learn consistent skills, practices, and safety procedures. It

also can be a way to retain employees because it indicates an employer’s

willingness to invest in the worker and ensures regular wage increases if

skills are attained. Additionally, employers are permitted to pay

apprentices in a registered program less than prevailing wages while they

are working on a federal construction project. At least two states and

municipalities have similar requirements or mandate that contractors

employ apprentices on projects. Employees benefit from registered

apprenticeship by advancing their skills and obtaining a credential

Background
Page 4 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

recognized throughout an industry. Apprenticed occupations have

historically been concentrated in the building trades, metalworking trades,

and various repair occupations, as we described in an earlier report.1

Figure 1 shows the apprentices as of September 30, 2000, for 36 states that

provided data on apprentices by industry. Construction and manufacturing

apprentices continue to make up the vast majority—82 percent—of

apprentices.

Figure 1: Registered Apprentices by Industry as of September 30, 2000, for 36

Reporting States

Source: U.S. Department of Labor

The National Apprenticeship Act of 1937, commonly known as the

Fitzgerald Act (29 U.S.C. 50), authorized and directed the Secretary of

Labor to formulate and promote labor standards safeguarding the welfare

of apprentices and to bring employers and labor together to establish

programs of apprenticeship. The Secretary issued regulations

 1

See Apprenticeship Training: Administration, Use, and Equal Opportunity

(GAO/HRD-92-43, Mar. 4, 1992).
Page 5 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

implementing the act which provide for registration of apprenticeship

programs. In order to be registered, Labor requires that an apprenticeship

program be in an apprenticeable occupation as defined in the regulation

and meet certain standards. Programs are administered by the Department

of Labor Office of Apprenticeship Training, Employer and Labor Services

(ATELS)2

 or by State Apprenticeship Agencies or Councils3 recognized by

the Secretary of Labor.

The standards prescribed by Labor require that federal registered

apprenticeships must include at least 1 year or 2,000 hours of on-the-job

training and a recommended 144 hours of formal instruction. In general,

most programs last 3 to 4 years. Each program must meet 20 additional

requirements, which include a specified minimum age for an apprentice, a

specified term of apprenticeship, a progressively increasing wage schedule

based on skills acquired, safety training, and a minimum ratio of

apprentices to skilled workers. States can impose additional requirements

on programs. Program sponsors may also identify additional minimum

qualifications that apprentices must possess—for example, a certain level

of education or specific physical abilities needed to perform essential

functions of the occupation.

In addition to meeting the prescribed labor standards, an apprenticeship

program must be in an apprenticeable occupation to be eligible for

registration. Labor makes this determination based on criteria outlined in

the regulations. Labor can make this determination when a program is

presented for registration or before apprenticeship programs are

developed. In the latter situation, for example, an employer may submit a

list of the skills needed to complete various tasks in an occupation and the

necessary training to complete these tasks. Typically, Labor then

distributes this list to appropriate industry representatives for feedback on

the occupation’s apprenticeability. Once Labor has determined that an

occupation is apprenticeable, it notifies federal and state apprenticeship

representatives who can begin to promote programs within that

occupation. If an employer decides to establish an apprenticeship

program, he or she can work with an apprenticeship representative, either

from Labor or a state council, to ensure that the program complies with

 2

The regulations specify the Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training; however, under a

recent reorganization, responsibility for administration of the program was assigned to

ATELS, which includes the Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training.

3

In 23 states, Labor administers the federal registered apprenticeship program; in 27 states,

Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the District of Columbia, state apprenticeship councils

administer the program.
Page 6 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

Labor’s standards and state laws. Frequently, the apprenticeship

representative will help the employer by suggesting various program

practices, providing examples of programs that have been successful, or

modifying the requirements to meet the needs of individual employers.

Employers can sponsor registered apprenticeship programs

independently, with a group of employers, or with organized labor.

Despite having an important presence in industry, the federally registered

apprenticeship program operates using relatively little federal money. In

fiscal year 2001, ATELS has an appropriation of about $22 million to

administer the program, while state councils run the program with an

additional $20 million.4

 The employers and apprentices themselves

contribute at least $1 billion for the training. According to Labor, more

than 37,000 apprenticeship programs in about 850 occupations employed

about 360,500 registered apprentices in fiscal year 2000.

Progress in expanding apprenticeships to address skill needs in

occupations not traditionally apprenticed has been hampered because

Labor’s efforts to identify new apprenticeable occupations are not

systematic, nor has Labor been able to alleviate some employers’

apprehension about program requirements. Instead of proactively

identifying occupations in which apprenticeship could help provide

needed skills, Labor has reacted to employers’ requests to have their

occupations recognized as apprenticeable. While some employers take the

initiative to make this request, others are deterred from doing so by their

apprehension about apprenticeship. Employer concerns that have

impeded the establishment of apprenticeship programs ranged from

stringent program requirements to the increased government scrutiny they

may invite. Apprenticeship representatives working one-on-one with

employers try to allay these concerns; however, Labor does not have a

centralized effort to reach out to industry representatives and explain how

apprenticeship could be implemented in their industry. Further, Labor

cannot identify and share its successes because it cannot fully assess its

progress in establishing new programs. Its apprenticeship database is

incompatible with states’ systems, resulting in data that are incomplete

and too general to provide information on specific occupations’

expansion.

 4

An estimate provided by National Association of State and Territorial Apprenticeship

Directors.

Lack of Systematic

Identification of

Occupations and the

Need to Allay

Employers’ Concerns

Slow Expansion of

Apprenticeships
Page 7 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

Labor does not have a formal process to determine how the

apprenticeship program could be expanded to meet an increasing demand

for skilled labor or to respond to the technological advances of today’s

economy. Labor has primarily reacted to employers’ requests for

apprenticeships in new occupations and has allowed industry to take the

lead in requesting new occupations. Further, Labor has not made a

comprehensive effort to locate funding for all new apprenticeable

occupations; however, it has recently recognized several occupations that

respond to evolving labor market needs. In March 2000, at the request of a

union, it approved internetworking technician as an apprenticeable

occupation to respond to the increased need for skilled workers to install,

maintain, and operate advanced data networks and their components. In

October 1999, Labor approved Hotel Associate as an apprenticeable

occupation to respond to increased labor needs in the tourism industry

and to help retain workers in a competitive labor market. In a few cases,

Labor has been proactive in identifying specific occupations, providing

funding for their development, and encouraging their implementation. For

example, in the late 1990s, Labor initiated (and approved in 2000) the

youth development practitioner apprenticeship to provide quality training

for workers who deliver comprehensive services to young people and

provided grants for its implementation. In the last 5 years, 19 occupations

have been recognized by Labor as apprenticeable and a substantial

number of these have been in less traditional occupations. Table 1 lists the

occupations and approval dates for these occupations.

Labor Lacks a Systematic

Process to Expand

Apprenticeship
Page 8 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

Table 1: Occupations Recognized as Apprenticeable, 1996–2000

Occupation Approved

Safety inspector/technician 1997

Production technologist 1997

Fence erector 1998

Residential wirer 1998

Production finisher 1998

Fish hatchery worker 1998

Coating machine operator I 1998

Mold designer (plastics industry) 1998

Mine inspector (government) (metal-nonmetal) 1998

Mine inspector (government) (coal) 1998

Construction driver 1999

Calibrator (military) 1999

Office manager/administrative services 1999

Undercar specialist 1999

Hotel associate 1999

Electrostatic powder coating technician 1999

Industrial machine systems technician 2000

Internetworking technician 2000

Youth development practitioner 2000

Source: U.S. Department of Labor

Labor officials recognize the need for Labor to become more proactive in

identifying new occupations as apprenticeable and providing funds for the

development of new apprenticeship programs but, according to the

officials, Labor’s efforts in this area have been hindered by resource

limitations. Specifically, Labor officials commented that staff and funding

shortages have prevented the agency from fully addressing all its

responsibilities, including marketing apprenticeship programs,

coordinating with other partners in the job training arena, and providing

technical assistance to employers. However, despite their funding

limitations, Labor has been able to make some progress in developing and

expanding the apprenticeship program. Further, information to help them

identify additional occupations in which more skilled workers are needed

and apprenticeship can effectively be used to train workers is readily

available. Future plans call for taking a more systematic approach,

especially in assessing the labor needs of occupations and determining the

possibility of apprenticeships helping to address these needs.
Page 9 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

Some employers’ perceptions and concerns about the apprenticeship

program have presented challenges to expanding the program. In our

discussions with apprenticeship representatives and employers from the

states we visited, we were told that employers were apprehensive about

agreeing to a progressive wage schedule for an apprentice without first

receiving feedback on how the apprentice was performing both on the job

and during formal instruction. Employers were reluctant to commit to a

program lasting several years, especially in view of uncertain economic

conditions and rapidly changing technology. Employers were concerned

with what they considered strict training requirements, such as the 144

hours of formal instruction, recommended by federal regulation but

required by some states. Employers were also concerned about getting

involved in a program that they thought would lead to increased

government oversight or scrutiny of their business. Additionally,

employers regarded apprenticeship as a “blue collar” approach to training

that is inappropriate to their industry.

Employers in some industries, such as high technology and biotechnology,

have difficulty envisioning how apprenticeship would benefit them.

Apprenticeship officials in several states commented that they have tried

to reach out to these industries but have not been successful because

employers see difficulty incorporating the apprenticeship structure within

their industry. The computer-generated imaging industry in California is an

example of an unsuccessful attempt to reach out to an industry by the

state apprenticeship representatives. The need for animators to create

computer-generated graphics has greatly increased, but is largely projectdriven. Workers are needed for a short period of time and then are laid off

when the project ends, which is not conducive to long-term

apprenticeships. State officials suggested that studios adopt the

construction trade model, where workers are essentially pooled and

employers draw from the pool as needed. Employer reaction was strongly

against this model because the motion picture industry did not want to

share workers; the proprietary nature of the work, with companies

operating in very competitive fields with new technology, made them

uneasy.

Labor has efforts under way to reach out to individual employers as well

as to inform the general public about apprenticeship. In developing

individual apprenticeship programs, Labor deals with employers on a oneon-one basis. Although costly, time-consuming, and labor intensive, Labor

officials commented that this approach is very effective at allaying the

fears and concerns of employers regarding apprenticeship and was

instrumental in gaining their support. Many apprenticeship representatives

from Labor are former apprentices who are knowledgeable about the

Employer Perceptions

Present Challenges to

Expanding

Apprenticeships
Page 10 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

program and can relate to employer concerns. Their approach is to meet

with employers to explain the details of the program and resolve any

concerns the employer raises. For example, in response to concerns about

wage progression, apprenticeship representatives might explain the need

to increase workers’ pay over time, noting that this is not automatic but

rather based on a demonstrated increase in skills. To allay concerns about

the long-term nature of apprenticeship training, they might describe how

the program provides flexibility in determining the length of the program.

Some programs such as the cable television installer apprenticeship are 1-

year programs whereas more complex apprenticeships would be longer,

for example, 4 years for a carpenter or electrician apprenticeship. When an

employer expresses concern about increased governmental scrutiny, the

representative might explain that oversight would not include reviewing

other aspects of the operations. Officials commented that once employers

fully understand the reasons for apprenticeship requirements, they are

often supportive of apprenticeship and can see the benefit to both

themselves and the employee.

Additionally, Labor has begun an initiative using its current resources to

better market apprenticeship. In October 2000 Labor started the

Registered Apprenticeship Awareness Initiative, which consisted of a

variety of efforts aimed at increasing awareness of and support for

registered apprenticeship beyond the employers. For example, Labor

produced a compact disc to help spread information about

apprenticeships to employers and potential apprentices. It includes

information on how to contact apprenticeship representatives, what

resources are available to help set up a program, and the benefits of a

program. Labor has found this to be a way to conduct outreach, within

their present resources, to a broad segment of employers and potential

apprentices.

The Apprenticeship Information Management System (AIMS), Labor’s

current apprenticeship information system, cannot provide a complete,

detailed picture of progress in implementing apprenticeships in new fields

and cannot be used to assess progress or program development.

Apprenticeship officials in 36 states enter data directly into AIMS but the

remaining 14 states—which have a labor force of 49 million, or 35 percent

of the total U.S. labor force—have chosen not to directly report data to the

system, do not have access to it, and in some cases provide only summary

data. Detailed information is not included in AIMS for these states, and

some information, such as programs being developed, is not included for

any states. The system was developed to provide Labor with capabilities to

report statistical information and track apprenticeship registration, not to

Labor’s Inadequate

Information System

Prevents Measuring

Progress and Sharing

Information
Page 11 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

manage the program. Labor hopes that a new system under development

will be used by all states so that it can provide information with which to

measure progress in expanding apprenticeships to new occupations. Labor

has developed specifications for a state-of-the-art AIMS system that can be

used by headquarters, regions, and all states. The new system is expected

to provide detailed information, such as data on apprentices who start,

complete, or leave the program. The new system is expected to be

designed by February 2002 and to be operational by June 2002.

Labor lacks a mechanism to share information among all states, which

could be helpful as Labor tries to expand apprenticeships to lesstraditionally apprenticed occupations. Labor does not maintain a national

information-sharing system that provides information on lessons learned

and experiences with these apprenticeships. This lack precludes states

from quickly learning of and benefiting from the experiences of others.

For example, two states we visited were each working independently to

develop potential apprenticeships within the information technology (IT)

industry. They were unaware of similar efforts by the other or by Labor

nationally. Both were unable to benefit from the other’s experiences, and

neither was successful in getting an IT-related apprenticeship started.

Neither could readily access national information on other states’ progress

or success at similar efforts. According to Labor officials, such information

is not readily available. Labor officials believe that their system should

have more capabilities, such as on-line queries, that would enable this

information to be obtained readily. The data gaps and insufficient

capability of the AIMS system further reduce the value of information that

is obtainable on the system.

We identified a diverse group of programs for which apprenticeship was

chosen as an approach to developing skills needed by an industry. The

people involved in establishing these programs overcame difficulties in

order to set up apprenticeship programs. While the programs were at

various stages of maturity at the time of our study, none had developed

quickly; they required much discussion and negotiation among different

parties, and in a few cases their development is still under way. Generally,

the start-up effort required additional resources, sometimes provided by

employers and sometimes by Labor. Program sponsors frequently used

innovative practices, such as on-line training, to respond to the special

characteristics of individual programs.

As shown in table 2, the programs we studied represent a variety of

industries and meet particular labor skill needs. Most of these programs

were started in the last decade, and a few are still being established. More

Some Apprenticeship

Programs That

Respond to Current

Labor Needs Have

Overcome

Impediments
Page 12 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

recent efforts to establish apprenticeships in new occupations have

involved reaching out to industries in which apprenticeship is not a

familiar concept and developing a comfort level among potential sponsors

and apprentices. (See app. II for detailed descriptions of the development

and status of each program.)

Table 2: Apprenticeship Programs Analyzed

Occupation and

location of

program(s)

reviewed Description Labor need/objective Approved Status

Sound and

communication

systems installer,

northern California

Install low-voltage systems,

such as remote controls,

burglar and fire alarms, data

and telephone lines, and

audio and video systems

The union realized the need for

skills outside the “electrician”

occupation to respond to

increased work on low-voltage

systems.

1987 Began operating in 1993 in

northern California. About

1,100 apprentices enrolled

and 650 have completed the

program as of June 2001.

Production

technologist,

Shreveport, La., and

Denver, Colo.

Manufacturing workers

responsible for direct

production (for example,

assembling products and

setting up machines) and

indirect production (for

example, managing materials

and maintaining equipment)

The employer wanted

manufacturing workers to be

more responsive to customer

needs and developed a new

occupation title to bridge

existing occupations.

1997 Eight apprentices are in the

program. Apprentices’ skills

have been found to be

helpful, but instability in

ownership of the employing

company has made

expansion difficult.

Childcare

development

specialist, Indiana,

New Hampshire, and

Vermont

Provide direct care to

children in a center or home

setting

This is part of a federal initiative

to raise skills of childcare

workers throughout the United

States to meet a recognized

lack of skilled workers and low

pay for the profession.

1981a A major effort to implement

this program began in the

late 1990s. Programs have

been established or are

being established in at least

21 states and the District of

Columbia, with over 500

apprentices registered.

Youth development

practitioner, Alaska

Provide employment-related

services to youth; for

example, assess youth job

readiness, assist with job

searches, and maintain youth

case records

This is a federal initiative to

develop workers able to

counsel youth on employment

and other issues.

2000 Apprenticeships are being

established at several local

and national organizations

and entities. Labor has

provided some grants for

implementation.

Pharmacy technician,

Maine and

Washington, D.C.

Under supervision,

technicians fill orders for unit

doses and prepackaged

pharmaceuticals and perform

other duties, for example,

recording drug deliveries and

storing merchandise

Employers recognized a need

for more skilled workers and

better retention of these

workers.

1980a

The program is newly

established at a few locations

with plans to market the

program elsewhere.
Page 13 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

Occupation and

location of

program(s)

reviewed Description Labor need/objective Approved Status

IT technical support

specialist, national

This program is still being

defined, but it is expected to

fill the need for many entrylevel workers in IT technical

support--for example, help

desk specialist, network

technician, and web

developer

The IT industry association

perceives a need for “handson” skills to accompany

industry certifications and fill

labor shortages.

Not yet

approved

In May 2001, the association

received Labor funds to

finance a workforce

development committee to

identify the apprenticeable

occupation and develop the

work processes and related

technical instruction for the

apprenticeship.

a

Although this occupation was approved as apprenticeable about 20 years ago, apprenticeships in it

were not available widely until the last few years.

Source: GAO’s analysis of data from the apprenticeship programs.

Open communication among employers, employee groups, and the

approving agencies has helped speed up and ensure the establishment of

these apprenticeship programs. For example, the production technologist

apprenticeship was the result of a joint meeting of union and employer

representatives. Because the apprenticeship would cross several job

classifications, such as engineer, machinist, and electrician, some workers

and Labor were not enthusiastic about its potential. This concept was not

immediately accepted by some local union workers, who were concerned

that allowing these workers to perform tasks that were part of other

occupations would jeopardize the other occupations. However,

discussions involving all parties allayed their fears. Program planners

explained that the quick availability of production technologists who could

make small repairs would reduce the production line’s lost time, yet

machinists would still be called when more expertise was needed. The

youth development practitioner apprenticeship also required good

communication. Labor officials worked with staff from its Office of Youth

Services to hold several forums across the nation to discuss the

apprenticeability of the occupation. The exact nature of the position was

defined based on information from these forums.

Apprenticeship was initially an unfamiliar concept to the people involved

in establishing some of these programs. However, discussion with

apprenticeship representatives helped them to understand its value to the

employers. The responsibility for educating program sponsors—

sometimes one-on-one—typically fell to the Labor or state apprenticeship

council representatives who marketed the concept. The expansion of the

childcare development apprenticeship from a one-state program to a

national one required this type of effort. As part of a national initiative to

strengthen childcare workers’ skills, Labor sponsored a nationwide
Page 14 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

videoconference to discuss the value of childcare worker apprenticeships.

Representatives from various state agencies, industry representatives, and

apprenticeship representatives participated in the conference, which led

to further meetings to discuss the possible implementation of the program

in their states. In the three states whose childcare programs we reviewed,

training was developed at the state level, which eliminated the need for

individual employers to develop their own training plans. Apprenticeship

representatives explained the formal training and helped employers

understand how it would integrate with the apprenticeship’s structure.

Similarly, the pharmacy technician apprenticeship required education

outreach. Representatives from the apprenticeship councils in Maine and

the District of Columbia contacted hospitals and pharmacies to convince

them of the value of apprenticeship, particularly in retaining pharmacy

technicians. In Maine, the apprenticeship representative explained how

the progressive wage schedule would be helpful in overcoming the

problem a hospital was having with retaining workers.

Typically, the programs we reviewed required significant resources to

develop and deliver formal training. For example, the development of

technical courses for the production technologist apprenticeship has cost

about $160,000. The employer who provided this money viewed it as an

investment in high quality training. For the northern California sound and

communication workers, whose apprenticeship training has been provided

by a joint employer/union council, two sources have provided funding for

training. The employers themselves have contributed $0.30 for each hour

that union employees worked, and the state provided more than $4 per

hour from a training fund for each apprentice’s classroom time.

For some of the programs, particularly those in industries where

apprenticeship is not common, government funding was provided to pay

for program design, as Labor took on responsibility for helping to identify

such funding. Although Labor’s ATELS unit does not have regular

appropriations for program design, in some cases Workforce Investment

Act discretionary funds have been used.5

 The Congress also appropriated

$12 million to bolster Labor’s childcare development worker

apprenticeship initiative. To date, 20 states and the District of Columbia

have received grants from this appropriation, which they have used for

various purposes, including subsidizing formal instruction and funding

apprenticeship representatives who “market” apprenticeship to childcare

centers and monitor the on-the-job training. Officials we spoke with in

 5

The Workforce Investment Act provides employment and training assistance for youth,

adults, and dislocated workers through one-stop centers.
Page 15 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

three states emphasized the important role that these funds played in

marketing and implementing apprenticeship within the industry. For the

new youth development practitioner apprenticeships that Labor

spearheaded, Labor requested grant proposals in April 2001 from entities

that wished to receive funds to establish individual programs. About $1.45

million will be available for local organizations and institutions, national

organizations, and an organization that can provide technical assistance as

programs develop their procedures and curriculum. In May 2001, Labor

provided $550,000 to the Computing Technology Industry Association

(CompTIA), an IT trade association, to design an IT technical support

specialist apprenticeship program. The association will use the funds to

convene industry representatives to identify which jobs and skill sets

within the IT career clusters would fit the apprenticeship model.

Several sponsors of the apprenticeship programs we studied used

innovative approaches to meet apprenticeship requirements while

accommodating unique characteristics of the occupation or industry. In

four of the programs, distance learning—formal instruction over the

Internet or by videoconferencing—was used or is being developed to

accommodate workers who could not meet with instructors personally.

The production technologist position’s formal instruction, designed and

taught by university personnel in Illinois, was provided via

videoconferencing to workers at the two participating manufacturing

facilities in Shreveport, Louisiana, and Denver, Colorado. New Hampshire

sponsored on-line training for the childcare development specialist

apprentice mentors (the supervisors of the apprentices) and lent them

laptop computers to enable them to participate in the courses and network

with others who were mentoring childcare apprentices.

Some of the programs adapted their apprenticeships to accommodate

unique characteristics of their occupation or industry. For example, the

childcare industry typically has low wages relative to other industries.

Vermont officials decided to use some of their childcare grant funds to

subsidize the wages for apprentices and their mentors, which they

believed would raise the status of apprenticeship and attract both

apprentices and mentors. In some industries, skill certifications have

become key elements of workers’ credentials, and in some of the programs

we studied, the certifications were made part of the training. For example,

the sound and communication workers in northern California integrate

into their apprenticeship program the BICSI training, an industryrecognized certification that some contracts require all workers to have.

Similarly, CompTIA, a trade association that develops certifications in

many technical aspects of personal computer service, support, and
Page 16 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

networking, plans to offer certification for IT technical support specialist

apprentices who pass the formal instruction.

Labor has not led a systematic effort to identify apprenticeable

occupations and, therefore, the full potential of apprenticeships may not

have been realized. Some industries with shortages of skilled labor have

not used apprenticeship to meet those needs. Labor has focused its efforts

to expand apprenticeship on a few occupations for which skills need to be

improved and shortages exist. Its efforts to identify new occupations for

apprenticeship have been largely reactive and, as a result, Labor is not

influencing the expansion of apprenticeships to industries in need of

skilled training. Instead of being reactive, Labor can take a leadership role

in identifying occupations where apprenticeship can contribute to

providing needed skills, using available information and staff to better

direct the expansion of apprenticeship nationally. In addition, Labor has

identified workforce development funds to support some of these efforts,

but has not systematically located resources for apprenticeships needing

funds for program design, which could help ensure their success.

Further, Labor has not done all it could to widely disseminate information

about the apprenticeship program, although doing so would result in

employers overcoming their concerns and wanting to participate. The

agency has not set up a way for program sponsors to share information on

lessons learned, such as through online databases that sponsors could

query, with other employers interested in establishing apprenticeships.

Such an information exchange would help potential program sponsors

understand how apprenticeship could be beneficial, overcome difficulties

that may arise in their efforts to establish a program, and alleviate

concerns they have about apprenticeship requirements. For example, this

exchange could allow the classroom training modules and work standards

established for programs in one location to inform employers and

apprenticeship representatives in other locations. Similarly, a more

detailed apprenticeship database could help people who are considering

establishing new programs by identifying others who have experience in

operating similar programs. Currently, the database’s incompatibility with

some state systems hinders networking and sharing of lessons learned

among apprenticeship representatives who are working to establish new

programs. It also limits Labor’s ability to measure progress on the use of

apprenticeship in newly approved occupations.

Conclusions
Page 17 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

To expand apprenticeship, particularly into occupations not traditionally

apprenticed, Labor must take the lead in coordinating and promoting the

development of programs. As part of this effort, we recommend that the

Secretary of Labor ensure that ATELS

• Lead a systematic effort to work with state apprenticeship councils and

others interested to identify apprenticeable occupations that have

shortages of skilled labor and establish plans for promoting apprenticeship

programs in these occupations,

• Work with other federal workforce development programs to identify

funding for developing apprenticeships when additional support is needed,

• Establish a mechanism for sharing among Labor representatives and

employers information on apprenticeship programs, particularly those in

occupations not traditionally apprenticed, and

• Ensure that the apprenticeship database contains detailed information on

current programs so that accurate and complete information is shared and

progress in meeting labor market needs can be evaluated.

The Department of Labor commented on a draft of this report, stating that

it agrees with all four recommendations and is planning actions to

implement them (see app. III). Labor plans to have ATELS take the lead in

identifying apprenticeship opportunities for occupations with skilled labor

shortages as well as in new and emerging industries. Through enhanced

coordination with other federal workforce investment system programs,

ATELS will explore additional financial, technical, and communications

support for expanding apprenticeship opportunities. To better share

information on apprenticeship programs, ATELS has engaged a contractor

to manage a major public information initiative, including reaching out to

growth industries and high-demand occupations. Further, Labor stated

that in redesigning the apprenticeship information management system, it

has begun to make necessary improvements, and expects that the final

design will provide accurate and complete information throughout the

registered apprenticeship system.

Recommendations for

Executive Action

Agency Comments
Page 18 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Labor and other

interested parties. We will also make copies available to others upon

request. If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please

contact me at (202) 512-7215 or Joan T. Mahagan at (617) 565-7532. Key

contacts and staff acknowledgments for this report are listed in app. IV.

Sincerely yours,

Sigurd R. Nilsen, Director

Education, Workforce, and

 Income Security Issues
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

Page 19 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

We took several steps to determine efforts the U. S. Department of Labor

has made to expand apprenticeship to new occupations and to understand

the impediments to starting apprenticeship programs in fields not

traditionally apprenticed. We interviewed Labor officials at the national,

regional, and state levels to obtain an understanding of how

apprenticeable occupations are identified and how apprenticeship

programs are registered. We visited four states to discuss how each state

implements and manages the apprenticeship program, particularly how

they approve new programs. From those programs registered in recent

years, we judgmentally selected 10 programs in each state that addressed

labor market needs or were in nontraditional occupations. We collected

detailed information on the approval process and any impediments to it

from the responsible federal or state apprenticeship representative and

from the employers. We also spoke with members of the Federal

Committee on Registered Apprenticeship, National Association of State

and Territorial Apprenticeship Directors, as well as trade associations,

unions, and other knowledgeable individuals to discuss their roles and

obtain their views on expanding apprenticeship to respond to labor

market needs.

In order to describe examples of apprenticeship programs that responded

to current labor market needs and how they have done so, we studied in

depth several apprenticeship programs that either had been established or

were being established in occupations that are not traditionally

apprenticed. To identify these, we obtained suggestions from Labor

officials, state apprenticeship council officials, and other knowledgeable

experts in apprenticeship. Our activities in reviewing these programs

included speaking to employers, observing and touring a training facility,

and speaking to developers of the formal training.

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
Appendix II: Summaries of Example Programs

Page 20 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

Following are summaries of programs that exemplify efforts to develop

new apprenticeships that respond to labor needs.

In 1995, high-level representatives of AT&T’s wireless telephone facilities

and the union, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW),

met to discuss their mutual concerns about the workforce’s capability to

meet the company’s needs as manufacturing processes changed. From that

meeting, development of a new apprenticeship was undertaken in an

occupation called production technologist. Production technologists were

to be responsible for both direct production work on products and for

indirect work, such as production planning, routine equipment

maintenance, and training.

Management at the Shreveport, Louisiana, and Denver, Colorado, plants

agreed to implement the apprenticeship with the union. One issue needing

resolution was concern that the position involved combining the skills of a

variety of different workers, such as engineers, electricians, and

machinists. Some union members believed it would hurt workers in

individual trades if the production technologists worked across trades.

However, union management convinced them of the importance of

including specific training in the apprenticeship, such as less-complicated

machine repairs that could reduce production downtime. Labor approved

the occupation as apprenticeable in December 1997.

The production technologist apprenticeship was developed as an 8-year

program. Under the guidance of the Enhanced Training Opportunity

Program, a training program sponsored by both the employer and the

union, Northern Illinois University developed many aspects of the

position, including the training program. Although workers entering an

apprenticeship program at the company would normally have expected to

take a pay reduction, IBEW representatives believed that would

discourage high-quality workers from applying and negotiated with the

employer to pay apprentices their previous salary.

Appendix II: Summaries of Example

Programs

Production

Technologist

Apprenticeship

Purpose and Description

Development of the

Apprenticeship
Appendix II: Summaries of Example Programs

Page 21 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

To date, many of the courses have been developed and taught, although

development of the work process-specific courses has been expensive—

totaling about $160,000 so far. The training developers report that the most

expensive part of course development is the design of tests that measure

the mastery of critical competencies. Videoconference training has been

provided to allow workers from the two geographically dispersed sites to

“attend” classes at Northern Illinois University, but transitioning to webbased training to reduce telecommunications costs is actively under

consideration. Because of technological changes, the training developers

anticipate that some of the courses, such as those on semiconductors and

industrial controls, will need to be updated before they are presented to

another class of apprentices. In total, the apprenticeship will include 17

major courses as well as some additional training.

One challenge to the apprenticeship’s continuity is the change of

employers during the planning and implementation of the apprenticeship.

Initial apprenticeship program discussions were with AT&T, the program

was implemented when Lucent owned the production facility, and the

division was bought out by Avaya. As of May 2001, Avaya was negotiating

the sale of various manufacturing assets and capacity to another company,

leaving the future of the apprenticeship program uncertain. As a result, the

production technologist apprenticeship program has not expanded since

its inception, although it was initially conceived as a program that would

train hundreds of apprentices. The training developers report, however,

that the eight apprentices in the program have had a major impact on the

production process. Some apprentices received corporate recognition for

their novel work on improving production-related processes.

A trade association of companies and professional members in the

computing and communications market—the Computing Technology

Industry Association (CompTIA)—has recently obtained a grant from

Labor to pursue developing an apprenticeship for workers to provide

information technology (IT) technical support. CompTIA representatives

Present Status

Information

Technology Technical

Support Specialist

Apprenticeship

Purpose and Description
Appendix II: Summaries of Example Programs

Page 22 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

had recognized the need for on-the-job experience for these workers.

Their research has revealed that companies often must train their IT

service and support staff to meet company needs. Further, almost half of

companies surveyed would pay a higher salary to an individual who had

already completed an industry-sponsored IT service and support a

certification program that included hands-on working experience,

interaction with customers, and working in teams. CompTIA

representatives believe these skills can only be developed on the job;

students at the postsecondary level often receive technical instruction and

successfully test for an industry certification (some of which CompTIA

sponsors), but lack the on-the-job experience, thereby reducing their

employability.

A representative from CompTIA, aware of the concerns about IT staff

needing on-the-job training, heard a Labor Office of Apprenticeship

Training, Employer and Labor Services (ATELS) staff member’s

presentation on apprenticeships at a conference. He realized that the

apprenticeship structure could be used to overcome this skill deficiency

but also recognized that the industry had not delineated the occupations

within the IT service industry and their skill requirements. CompTIA

submitted a proposal to Labor requesting a grant of $550,000 to explore

registered apprenticeship as a means of addressing the IT workforce

shortage and the lack of on-the-job experience that entry-level IT workers

often have. Labor, recognizing that CompTIA was in a unique position to

convene a knowledgeable team from industry, decided to fund the grant,

using monies that the Workforce Investment Act authorized the Secretary

of Labor to set aside for dislocated worker demonstration projects.

With the Labor grant of $550,000, CompTIA plans to convene a group from

industry to identify IT occupations that are apprenticeable, the skills

required, and the related instruction requirements. CompTIA believes that

with the 2,000 hours of work experience required under the apprenticeship

model, the apprentices would be able to gain the skills necessary to

perform many of the entry-level jobs in IT technical support, including

customer service technician, help desk specialist, network technician,

configuration technician, and web developer. The industry representatives

would also develop the work processes and related technical instruction

required for the apprenticeship, including certifications identified as

necessary. CompTIA plans to enlist pilot sites to test the apprenticeship

model(s) that is developed.

Development of the

Apprenticeship

Present Status
Appendix II: Summaries of Example Programs

Page 23 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

In about 1987, the National Electrical Contractors Association and the

IBEW operating in Northern California realized that more sound and

communications installers were needed to meet the growing demand for

the installation of low-voltage systems, such as those used in remote

controls, burglar and fire alarms, data and telephone lines, and audio and

video systems. For example, sound and communications installers

working at a grocery store construction site could be installing intercom

connections throughout the store, public address systems, alarms at

entrances, electronic locks that could be on timers, data lines from the

cash registers, and satellite data link systems.

A joint apprenticeship and training committee hired a training director to

develop the apprenticeship program. The committee identified an existing

occupation title that could be used, and modified the work process

standards to meet their needs. The training director then developed

training for the program and oversaw its implementation. California’s

apprenticeship council approved the apprenticeship program in 1987, and

the first formal training was started in 1993. Funding for the related

instruction is obtained from two sources. California provides funds that

cover about 40 to 50 percent of the cost of instructors for training. These

funds provide a set amount of money for each hour apprentices spend in

the classroom ($4.37 as of our March 2001 visit). In addition, the 135

contractors bound by the bargaining agreement that supports the joint

apprenticeship training committee pay $0.30 per hour ($0.60 beginning on

September 1, 2001) for each hour worked by individuals they employ who

are under the bargaining agreement.

The present program requires 6,000 hours of on-the-job training, and 450

hours of related formal instruction provided by the joint apprenticeship

training committee in facilities that are also used for other IBEW training

programs. Instruction ranges from basic courses, such as “Use and Care of

Hand Tools” to more technical courses, such as “Certifying the Fiber-Optic

Cabling System,” and includes BICSI training, a certification program on

Sound and

Communications

Systems Installer

Apprenticeship

Purpose and Description

Development of the

Apprenticeship

Present Status
Appendix II: Summaries of Example Programs

Page 24 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

cable installation. Twice a week, apprentices attend night classes taught

by instructors from the field who have received training on instructing. As

of June 2001, about 650 apprentices had completed the program and about

1,100 were enrolled.

Labor has spearheaded a national effort to develop apprenticeships for

childcare development specialists—those who provide care directly to

young children. Labor wished to provide a credentialed career path for

childcare providers through registered apprenticeships that would “reduce

turnover, increase wages for providers, provide a more stable environment

for children, and overall improve the quality of early childhood programs.”

1

Although childcare apprenticeships had been implemented in West

Virginia earlier, this effort was in response to a 1997 White House effort to

focus the nation’s attention on the importance of addressing the need for

safe, affordable, available, quality childcare.

Using funds provided for this purpose in its budget appropriation, Labor

made grants totaling $3.4 million in 1999 and $3.3 million in 2000 to states

to implement this initiative. Interest was aroused within the states and the

childcare industry through a nationally broadcast videoconference hosted

by the Secretary of Labor at a cost of $22,000. Although the

videoconference created interest, implementing apprenticeship programs

in an industry unfamiliar with the concept involved much coordination

and communication. We discussed implementation of the program with

officials from Indiana, New Hampshire, and Vermont who received firstround grants. In all three states, the next step was to bring together a

diverse mix of representatives—from industry, apprenticeship oversight

agencies, and state agencies—who had an interest in childcare. The

 1

As stated in the February 2, 1999, notice of availability of funds and solicitation for grant

application for the Quality Childcare Initiative Implementation.

Childcare

Development

Specialist

Apprenticeship

Purpose and Description

Development of the

Apprenticeship
Appendix II: Summaries of Example Programs

Page 25 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

apprenticeship representatives from the states all reported that several

meetings were held to reach consensus on what the apprenticeship should

entail. One commented that each group had its own jargon, and it took

several meetings to develop a common language.

Training was provided in a consistent way to all apprentices in each state.

Each state developed a common work process that laid out skills that

should be addressed in the 2-year on-the-job portion of the apprenticeship.

Each state also identified specific courses apprentices could attend—four

courses in Indiana, six in Vermont, and six or seven in New Hampshire—

and the colleges where they could attend them. In Vermont, the training is

free to childcare providers, and is funded with childcare grant funds; in

New Hampshire, the first course is free to the apprentice, paid for with a

state health and human service block grant, and half of the remaining

courses are also free; and in Indiana, some scholarship funds are available

from an organization that supports childcare workers. In addition, each

state has developed or is developing training specifically for the

apprentices’ supervisors. New Hampshire’s program used funds from the

Labor grant to develop this training and to buy laptop computers for

supervisors to borrow for participating in distance learning courses.

Because wage rates within the childcare industry are relatively low,

Vermont chose to use part of its Labor grant to subsidize wages for the

apprentices and their mentors. Apprentices can earn regular increases that

will raise their wages from $0.25 to $2 an hour over the 2-year

apprenticeship. Supervisors would also receive wage supplements of $0.50

to $2 an hour. Vermont representatives are planning how to continue this

wage subsidy after the grant funding ends. They have written a grant

proposal to obtain some state Workforce Investment Act funds and have

created an advisory board that is working toward securing long-term

funding.

Reaching out to childcare centers to encourage them to sponsor

apprentices entailed considerable effort in each of the states. New

Hampshire used some of its federal grant funds to hire three recruiters

who met with childcare center directors, helped them plan the

apprenticeships, and continue to monitor them. One center director

commented that if she had not had a representative to help develop the

apprenticeship program details, she probably would not have pursued the

program. Responsibility for marketing apprenticeship to childcare centers

in Vermont has primarily belonged to the Agency of Human Service,

whose staff members have made many direct contacts with center

directors. Information was also provided to the public through an

extensive website. Indiana used part of its federal grants to hire a full-time
Appendix II: Summaries of Example Programs

Page 26 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

project coordinator for the childcare apprenticeship project who recruits

both employers and apprentices.

As a result of the implementation of the first round of grant awards to 10

states and the District of Columbia, 251 programs registering 527

apprentices had been established through January 2001. In addition, a

second round of grants has been awarded to 10 states. Labor anticipates

distributing a third round in 2001. Recipients of grant awards are required

to identify ways to sustain the program once federal funding ends. States

we contacted are grappling with this condition and are exploring a number

of options to ensure their program’s longevity. Indiana plans to reduce the

full-time project coordinator position to part-time. Vermont is seeking

sources of funds to sustain its wage subsidies for apprentices and

supervisors. New Hampshire’s Commissioner of Labor has committed to

finding funds to continue to pay for staff to recruit apprenticeship

sponsors.

Over the last few years, Labor has recognized that an apprenticeship in the

youth work field could provide quality training for workers who deliver

comprehensive services to young people. Many resources are committed

to serving youth as a result of Labor’s youth opportunity grants and

increased emphasis on youth services under the Workforce Investment

Act. Labor wished to upgrade the field of youth work by developing an

occupation targeted to supporting youth, and believed that apprenticeship

provided the opportunity to systematically examine and address the needs

of the field.

Labor itself spearheaded the effort to define the occupation of youth

development practitioner and will be supporting its implementation

through grants. Early on, Labor drafted on-the-job training requirements

and proposed related instruction, and had a focus group comment on

them. Labor held forums around the United States to discuss the

apprenticeability of this occupation and incorporated those results into

the apprenticeship description, receiving enthusiastic support for the

Present Status

Youth Development

Practitioner

Apprenticeship

Purpose and Description

Development of the

Apprenticeship
Appendix II: Summaries of Example Programs

Page 27 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

apprenticeship. Labor then approved the occupation as apprenticeable and

formally established it as an apprenticeship occupation in October 2000.

In April 2001, Labor announced the availability of $1.45 million in

competitive grants to support the dissemination of information, to

publicize the occupation and apprenticeship, and to support interested

communities in the implementation of the apprenticeship programs. These

funds, whose source is discretionary funding authorized under the

Workforce Investment Act, are intended to stimulate and support the

broad implementation of the apprenticeship. In July 2001, Labor awarded

grants to nine entities at the local community level that can serve as

intermediaries to bring together stakeholders to establish and register

youth development practitioner apprenticeship programs. In addition,

Labor awarded three grants to national organizations that have youth

programs employing youth development practitioners. Labor also awarded

a grant to the National Council on Employment Policy to establish a

clearinghouse of information on practice and curriculum to support local

communities in developing and implementing their apprenticeship

programs.

We discussed the planned implementation of a youth development

practitioner apprenticeship program in Alaska with a program

representative and the ATELS state director. The Cook Inlet Tribal Council

in Alaska recently obtained a Youth Opportunity Program demonstration

grant to support about 70 staff members who work directly with youth in

47 locations. Although they have hired staff with available funding, they

realize that the level of education and experience among staff members

varies widely. Most do not have college degrees, and the employee

development director believes the apprenticeship model is a good way to

provide the professional development that staff need. She also believes

that for rural Alaska, apprenticeship is a useful model because it allows

staff to stay in the community to receive the necessary instruction. This

helps retain staff who may not return to their communities after locating

elsewhere.

Because the youth development practitioner occupation was not defined

specifically until recently, curriculum needs to be developed for the

occupation, which will cost an estimated $75,000. The Council estimates

that the development and delivery of training will cost an estimated

$300,000 to $400,000. Staff is widely spread throughout the state and

instruction will need to be provided over the Internet. However, many staff

members are in villages without Internet providers, which necessitates

significant spending on long-distance connections. The employee
Appendix II: Summaries of Example Programs

Page 28 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

development director expects to seek other state funding, possibly

through the Workforce Investment Boards.

At the national level, Labor selected 13 entities to receive grants totaling

about $1.5 million. Meanwhile, at the local level, the Alaska tribal council’s

employee development director noted that interest in the apprenticeship

among the council staff was high, and she planned to start the

apprenticeships by October 1, 2001.

We spoke with apprenticeship officials in Maine and the District of

Columbia, who noted that either hiring or retaining pharmacy technicians

is difficult for employers in their areas. Apprenticeships for pharmacy

technicians are either just recently under way or being developed in each

location. Pharmacy technicians serve as aids to pharmacists in store and

hospital pharmacies, performing such tasks as keeping records of drugs

delivered to the pharmacy, storing incoming merchandise in proper

locations, and cleaning equipment.

In the District of Columbia, CVS, a pharmacy chain, was operating a

training center housed at the District’s Department of Employment

Services’ center. An apprenticeship representative from the District

apprenticeship council convinced CVS that they should sponsor

apprenticeships for pharmacy technicians to help meet their growing need

for this staff. The apprenticeship representative explained that the

structured on-the-job training and formal instruction would provide the

staff with the necessary skills. A 2-year apprenticeship program was

established that requires 144 hours of formal instruction each year.

Workers are released from work to attend the training, and CVS provides

the formal instruction.

In Maine, a pharmacy technician apprenticeship program is being

established with Maine Medical Center, a large hospital with about 40 staff

members in its pharmacy department. The hospital had a high turnover

rate for these technicians—42 percent in 2000—who often left after they

were trained. After the representative from Maine’s apprenticeship council

explained apprenticeship to the pharmacy department, department

Present Status

Pharmacy Technician

Apprenticeship

Purpose and Description

Development of the

Apprenticeship
Appendix II: Summaries of Example Programs

Page 29 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

management became convinced that they needed to increase wages. After

an analysis of comparable wages elsewhere, they decided to raise

pharmacy technicians’ wages an average of 13 percent, with the entry-level

apprenticeship wage rising from $8.53 to $9.99 and the top wage rising

from $14.99 to $18.64. Management also established training requirements,

one of which is for apprentices to take two courses each semester from a

local technical college for which the state will pay $100 per course. The

college offers the required courses on-line, allowing other pharmacy

technicians located throughout the state to participate if their employers

sponsor apprenticeship programs.

The courses in the District presently have three apprentices enrolled. In

Maine, some apprentices had already started courses but the agreement

with the Maine apprenticeship council had not been finalized as of June

2001. A representative from the hospital expected that they would limit the

number of apprentices to 10. The apprenticeship representative hopes to

now convince other hospitals in Maine to replicate the Maine Medical

Center’s program and is reaching out to some pharmacy chains.

Present Status
Appendix III: Comments From the Department of Labor

Page 30 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

Appendix III: Comments From the

Department of Labor
Appendix III: Comments From the Department of Labor

Page 31 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships
Appendix III: Comments From the Department of Labor

Page 32 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships
Appendix IV: GAO Contacts and

Staff Acknowledgments

Page 33 GAO-01-940 Apprenticeships

Sigurd R. Nilsen, Director, (202) 512-7215

Joan T. Mahagan, Assistant Director, (617) 565-7532

In addition to those named above, Kevin F. Murphy, Corinna A. Nicolaou,

Carol L. Patey, and James P. Wright made key contributions to this report.

Appendix IV: GAO Contacts and Staff

Acknowledgments

GAO Contacts

Staff

Acknowledgments

(205551)

The first copy of each GAO report is free. Additional copies of reports are

$2 each. A check or money order should be made out to the

Superintendent of Documents. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are also

accepted.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are

discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

Orders by visiting:

Room 1100

700 4th St., NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

Washington, DC 20013

Orders by phone:

(202) 512-6000

fax: (202) 512-6061

TDD (202) 512-2537

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and testimony. To

receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list from the past 30 days,

please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone phone. A recorded menu will

provide information on how to obtain these lists.

Orders by Internet

For information on how to access GAO reports on the Internet, send an email message with “info” in the body to:

Info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web home page at:

http://www.gao.gov

Contact one:

• Web site: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

• E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

• 1-800-424-5454 (automated answering system)

Ordering Information

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in

Federal Programs