IT PAYS TO HIRE 

AN APPRENTICE: 

Calculating the Return on 

Training Investment for 

Skilled Trades Employers 

in Canada

A Study of 16 Trades 

Phase II

FINAL REPORT

June 2009

Canadian Apprenticeship Forum

Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

ii | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

IT PAYS TO HIRE AN APPRENTICE: 

Calculating the Return on Training Investment for 

Skilled Trades Employers in Canada 

A Study of 16 Trades Phase II FINAL REPORT

© 2009 Canadian Apprenticeship ForumForum canadien sur l’apprentissage (CAF-FCA)

Funded by the Government of 

Canada’s Sector Council Program

Canadian Apprenticeship ForumForum canadien sur l’apprentissage (CAF-FCA)

116 Albert Street, Suite 812

Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5G3

Tel: (613) 235-4004

Fax: (613) 235-7117

info@caf-fca.org

www.caf-fca.org

Design: Walker Communications

The Canadian Apprenticeship Forum – Forum 

canadien sur l’apprentissage (CAF-FCA) gratefully acknowledges the individuals and organizations who contributed their time to this 

project. CAF-FCA would like to thank the project’s working group for their assistance, R.A. 

Malatest & Associates Ltd. for conducting the 

research and the Government of Canada for 

its financial support. Finally, CAF-FCA would 

especially like to thank each of the employers 

who filled in the survey. The contribution of 

their time was greatly appreciated. 

The opinions expressed in this research document do not necessarily represent the views or 

official policies of the CAF-FCA or other agencies or organizations that may have provided 

support, financial or otherwise for this project.

Acknowledgements

Working group members

Allan Bruce

CAF-FCA Board of Director

International Union of Operating Engineers

Catherine Cottingham

Electricity Sector Council 

Barbara Kirby

Mining Industry Human Resources Council

Rui Martins

Canadian Tire

Chair of the Automotive Human Resource Sector Council 

of Nova Scotia

Trevor Sandwell

Wood Manufacturing Council

Michael Zagorac

Arcelor-Mittal Dofasco

Paul Stoll

Human Resources & Skills Development Canada

Jean Pageau

Human Resources & Skills Development Canada

Emily Arrowsmith

Project Manager 

Canadian Apprenticeship Forum – Forum canadien sur 

l’apprentissage

Allison Rougeau

Executive Director

Canadian Apprenticeship Forum – Forum canadien sur 

l’apprentissage
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | iii

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Executive Summary

Research Highlights 

The main findings from this study reveal there 

is a strong business case for apprenticeship.

•	 Data from almost 1000 employers across 

Canada was obtained as a part of the 

research. This data set surpasses any previous study of this type in Canada. 

•	 Employers receive a return when they 

invest in apprentices. For every $1 spent 

on apprenticeship training, an employer 

receives a benefit, on average, of $1.47 or a 

net return of $0.47.

•	 Analysis over the four-year apprenticeship indicates a net benefit ranging from 

$39,524 (Cook) to $245,264 (Heavy Duty 

Equipment Mechanic)

•	 The largest monetary net benefits accrue to 

employers who train an apprentice in trades 

such as heavy-duty equipment mechanics 

($245,264); automotive service technicians 

($173,122); and construction millwright 

and industrial mechanics ($148,985). In 

these trades, the revenue generated by an 

apprentice far exceeds the total training 

costs.

•	 Detailed analysis for 3 trades shows there 

is a return for all regions across the country 

and for all sizes of business. 

•	 The net benefit of apprenticeship training 

increases in each year over the course of the 

apprenticeship period. 

Introduction

What are the benefits of apprenticeship training for an employer? Can a financial return be 

calculated? Does the investment support an 

employer’s bottom line? These are the main 

research questions that prompted the Canadian Apprenticeship Form-Forum canadien 

sur l’apprentissage (CAF-FCA) to complete 

this study. To answer these questions CAF-FCA 

asked almost 1,000 employers in 16 different 

trades in a variety of sectors to fill in a survey 

on the costs and benefits of apprenticeship 

training. The results show that there is a positive return for those employers that invest in 

apprenticeship training. 

This report will be of interest to industry. 

Trade-specific data is provided with a detailed 

breakdown of the costs and benefits of 

apprenticeship training as well as the average 

benefit for each trade. Employers, employer 

associations, and Sector Councils supported 

the collection of this additional data. Employers did say that they would consider this data 

when making a decision about whether or not 

to hire an apprentice. 

Apprenticeship stakeholders who talk to 

employers about the value of investing in 

apprentices will also be interested in this 

report’s findings. This information dispels 

myths that apprenticeship training has little or 

no financial benefit. This study confirms that 

the benefits of apprenticeship training outweigh the costs, especially when one considers 

the gains to overall business performance. 
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

iv | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORG•	 The revenue generated by apprentice

increases throughout the apprenticeship.

•	 Employers noted their journeypersons 

benefit from having an apprentice. 

•	 The majority of employers believe a “homegrown” journeyperson who they trained as 

an apprentice is more productive. Employers estimated that a “homegrown” journeyperson is 29% more productive. 

•	 Additional benefits to hiring apprentices include having employees which are 

a better fit with the organization and 

reduced risk of skills shortages.

•	 Employers were evenly split in terms of 

whether they view a poaching risk from 

other employers to be a very serious issue

•	 14% of employers who hired journeypersons in one of the sixteen trades, but did 

not hire apprentices, indicated that they 

would be willing to hire an apprentice, 

except that there were few or no apprentices applying to their organization.

•	 When asked if anything would motivate 

them to hire apprentices, about half of the 

employers without apprentices said yes 

there was something that would motivate 

them. 30% indicated that they would hire 

apprentices if they could find them, suggesting that perhaps a number of employers are having difficulty getting access to 

apprentices.

Background

Given the anticipated shortages of skilled 

workers, reducing the barriers to apprenticeship and increasing investment in 

apprenticeship are critical. The findings of a 

2004 study commissioned by the Canadian 

Apprenticeship Forum – Forum canadien 

sur l’apprentissage (CAF-FCA) indicated that 

employers perceive the cost of apprenticeship 

as a major barrier to apprenticeship training.1

In order to more fully explore the extent to 

which apprenticeship represented a cost to 

employers, the CAF-FCA commissioned R.A. 

Malatest & Associates Ltd. and the Conference 

Board of Canada in 2006 to complete a landmark study, “Apprenticeship Building a Skilled 

Workforce for a Strong Bottom Line, Return 

on Apprenticeship Training Investment for 

Employers, A Study of 15 Trades, June 2006.” 

The results of this study indicated there was 

a positive net return of apprenticeship training. In fact, employers from all trades, except 

three, showed a positive net return in the first 

year of the apprenticeship. 

1 Canadian Labour and Business Centre (2004), Accessing and Completing Apprenticeship Training in Canada: 

Perceptions of Barriers.

Employers receive a benefit, on average, 

of $1.47 for every $1 invested in 

apprenticeship training. This is up 9 cents 

since the 2006 pilot study!

Industry supported the completion of this 

additional return on training investment 

research. After the 2006 pilot was 

complete, employers said they wanted 

to see more trade-specific results. Others 

were interested in gathering data for 

new trades. Employers noted they would 

use this information when making a 

decision about whether or not to hire an 

apprentice.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | v

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Objectives and Scope of Study

To gain a more comprehensive understanding of the return on apprenticeship training 

investment to employers, CAF-FCA commissioned R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd. to 

assess the costs and benefits of apprenticeship 

training. The overall objectives of this research 

were:

•	 to determine the overall costs incurred by 

employers in hiring and training apprentices using the same methodology used in 

2006 for ten trades included in the 2006 

pilot study as well as six additional trades,

•	 to build on the dataset developed in 2006 

by surveying a sample of employers who 

participated in the 2006 pilot study to 

update their data and,

•	 to examine reasons why employers do not 

employ apprentices by surveying employers 

who employ journeypersons in the sixteen 

trades of interest for the current study, but 

who have not hired an apprentice in the 

past three years.

Data was collected through a national survey 

of employers across sixteen trade areas, 

which was administered by R.A. Malatest 

& Associates Ltd. from June to November 

2008. The survey instrument was initially 

developed by Prism Economics and Analysis 

and subsequently modified by R.A. Malatest 

& Associates Ltd. in 2006, in consultation with 

CAF-FCA, to ensure that it would capture the 

information required to conduct a detailed 

cost-benefit analysis. 

The 2008 research builds on the results of the 

pilot study completed in 2006 by R.A. Malatest 

& Associates Ltd., and is intended to deepen 

the results from the original study for ten 

trades areas:

•	 Automotive Service Technician,

•	 Bricklayer,

•	 Construction Electrician,

•	 Construction Millwright and Industrial 

Mechanic,

•	 Cook,

•	 Heavy-Duty Equipment Technician,

•	 Machinist,

•	 Motor Vehicle Body Repairer,

•	 Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Mechanic, and

•	 Sheet Metal Worker.

In addition, information was collected for 

six new trades not covered in the pilot. This 

information was collected to broaden the 

business case for apprenticeship. These six 

new trades included:

•	 Boilermaker,

•	 Cabinetmaker,

•	 Electrical Power Line and Cable Worker,

•	 Hairstylist,

•	 Plumber, and

•	 Partsperson.

Data from over 784 employers across 

Canada was obtained as a part of the 

new research. This data set surpasses any 

previous study of this type in Canada. 

This additional data confirms once 

again there is a strong business case for 

apprenticeship!
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

vi | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGThe information was provided b

•	 784 new employers who participated in 

Phase II of the project, 

•	 106 employers who completed a survey in 

the 2006 who updated their information in 

2008, and

•	 1,163 employers with journeypersons in one 

of the sixteen trades of interest who do not 

employ apprentices.

Research Considerations

Here are some things to keep in mind when 

reviewing the results: 

•	 The results are based on averages across all 

employers and may not necessarily reflect 

the costs and benefits of apprenticeship 

training on an employer-by-employer basis.

•	 While the data at the national level can 

be viewed with confidence given the participation of over 700 employers, the limited number of employer completions for 

some trades suggests that, in these cases, 

trade-specific data should be interpreted 

with caution. During the sample selection 

process, it was difficult to identify employers who hire apprentices in trades with a 

relatively small workforce. For example, 

the number of workers employed in the 

Boilermaker (3,830) and Power Line Technician (11,700) trades is significantly lower 

than the combined average employment of 

63,601 of the fourteen remaining trades.2

In addition, there were significant difficulties identifying Partsperson apprentices, 

2 National Occupational Classification for Statistics 

2006 (720), Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan 

Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2006 Census - 20% 

Sample Data.

even with the 21,020 employers that were 

contacted. As a result, the sample sizes for 

the Boilermaker and Partsperson trades 

are below the minimum target of twenty 

employers. Caution should therefore be 

exercised when looking at these results. 

•	 Although the costs associated with apprenticeship training are generally quantifiable, 

the benefits are more difficult to measure. 

A part of the survey given to employers was 

designed to capture qualitative benefits 

derived from apprenticeship training. Keep 

in mind employers provided their subjective 

assessments when they were filling in that 

part of the survey. 

•	 The economic climate in which the survey 

was undertaken differs considerably from 

the current economic climate. For example, 

the bulk of the data collection occurred in 

the spring and summer of 2008 at a time 

when Canadian unemployment was very 

low, world oil prices were at record levels, 

and there was a general shortage of journeypersons across Canada. Since that time, 

there has been considerable decline in economic activity, higher unemployment, and 

increased competition in the market place. 

At this point, it is unclear as to whether 

or not the economic downturn will have 

an impact on the economic returns associ-
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | vii

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

ated with apprenticeship. While employers 

have cited a decline in charge-out rates, 

other employers contacted as part of recent 

validation sessions noted that they had also 

witnessed a slight decline in wage rates, 

but, more importantly, increased quality 

in the caliber of individuals who were now 

pursuing apprenticeship training. This could 

imply that returns could be higher in periods of slower economic growth due to the 

increased quality of individuals available for 

apprentice positions.

•	 It is also important to keep in mind that 

even though Canada is experiencing an 

economic downturn during the present 

time, analysts still predict that Canada will 

not have enough skilled journeypersons 

to meet future shortages when the baby 

boomers retire. The importance of investing 

in apprenticeship is still a message that 

needs to be communicated.

Validation Roundtables

R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd. and CAF-FCA 

facilitated a series of roundtables across 

Canada in early 2009 with employers to determine if any significant costs and benefits of 

apprenticeship training had been excluded 

from the methodology.3

 One roundtable was 

held with employers representing Automotive 

Service Technicians and another session was 

held with employers representing Construction Electricians. A third session was conducted with Cabinetmakers. For each of the 

employer roundtable sessions, R.A. Malatest 

3 Roundtables were held in Edmonton Alberta (construction electricians) and Vancouver BC (automotive service technicians) and Calgary Alberta (Cabinetmakers).

& Associates Ltd. presented the trade-specific 

cost-benefit results. Employers for the most 

part said that the costs and benefits were 

accurately captured in the study. Employers 

generally agreed that there was a positive 

net return associated with the training of 

apprentices.

Promising Practices in the 

Economic Downturn

Many employers are trying to keep their 

apprentices during the economic downturn. 

They know from experience that when the 

economy picks up again they will need skilled 

workers. Some promising employer practices 

include: 

•	 Cross-training apprentices so they have 

the capacity to work on a wider range of 

projects. 

•	 Working with stakeholders including 

clients, managers, journeypersons, and 

unions to ensure, if possible, apprentices 

continue to be trained, even though the 

number of projects may be decreasing. 

•	 Communicating with apprentices about 

their training options. Using the downturn, 

for example, to complete technical training 

is one option.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

viii | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Administration

An estimate of the costs associated with the 

administering of apprenticeships was made. 

These costs included filling in the appropriate 

the paperwork. These costs were allocated on 

a per apprentice basis.

Benefit Components

Revenue Generated by Apprentice

Using employer-supplied data on charge-out 

or mark-up rates and the total annual chargeable hours of work, an estimate was made 

of the average revenue associated with each 

apprentice.

It should be noted however, that while many 

employers could easily compute a “chargeout” rate for their apprentices and, hence, 

develop an estimate of the revenue that 

would be derived from the apprentice, some 

employers had more difficulty in estimating a 

charge-out rate. For example, among employers of Cooks and Partspersons, employers 

were unable to provide an estimate of the 

charge-out rates of the apprentices. For these 

trades, the consultant utilized a “mark-up” 

rate based on the journeyperson wage rate. 

As a result, caution should be exercised in the 

interpretation of results for these two trades. 

Cost-Benefit Model

The cost-benefit model is based on a standard cost-benefit analysis for a single firm 

that hires apprentices. Net benefits and costs 

are calculated on a per apprentice, per year 

of apprenticeship basis. The cost and benefit 

components are detailed in the following 

sections.

Cost Components

Wages and Benefits

Wages and Benefits includes base pay and 

non-compulsory and compulsory benefits such 

as Workers Compensation, Employment Insurance, and Canada Pension Plan.

Opportunity Costs

Opportunity costs include costs related to 

the resources that apprentices draw from the 

organization as part of their training process. 

Opportunity costs associated with journeyperson time and wastage were included in the 

model. Wastage was defined as the material 

costs associated with any mistakes made by 

the apprentices. The time required to correct 

the mistake was also included. The costs were 

estimated on a per apprentice, per year basis. 

In each situation, an attempt was made to 

price these factors and to determine the scale 

of their usage by apprentices.

Disbursements

Disbursements refer to costs incurred by the 

employer related to the ongoing training and 

development of apprentices, such as registration fees and wages during in-school training. 

The cost-benefit model used tried to 

accurately capture the variety of costs and 

benefits associated with apprenticeship 

training. The methodology used has 

generated interest in Switzerland, New 

Zealand, Australia, and the United States.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | ix

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Cost-Benefit Results

Summary of Cost-Benefit Results by Trade

The following observations can be made 

regarding the findings of the cost-benefit 

analysis for each of the sixteen trades:

•	 The net benefit of apprenticeship training 

increases in each year over the course of the 

apprenticeship period. 

•	 The revenue generated by an apprentice 

increases throughout the apprenticeship.

•	 Wages and benefits paid to apprentices 

increase commensurately with training and 

experience.

•	 The cost in terms of journeyperson 

time declines through each year of the 

apprenticeship.

The overall results of the cost-benefit analysis 

indicate that the benefits of apprenticeship 

training exceed the costs for the majority of 

trades. All but two4

 of the trades, showed a 

positive net return. The net benefit ranged 

from $39,524 (Cook) to $245,264 (Heavy Duty 

Equipment Mechanic). In addition, the results 

indicate that for every $1 spent on apprenticeship training, an employer receives a benefit, 

on average, of $1.47 or a net return of $0.47. 

Notwithstanding other qualitative benefits, these findings suggest that apprenticeship training is a worthwhile investment for 

employers.

There are particular circumstances that may 

contribute to a negative return for selected 

trades. The specific circumstances and characteristics for each trade are discussed below:

4 The two trades are hairstylist and electrical power 

line and cable worker. 

•	 Electrical Power Line and Cable Worker 

apprentices incurred a negative return 

primarily due to the high wage rates paid to 

apprentices in this trade and the considerable use of journeyperson time required to 

supervise the apprentice. This could reflect 

the safety aspects of the job, which may 

require more “hands on” supervision by 

journeypersons. For example, in contrast 

to construction electrician activities, in 

many instances, Electrical Power Line and 

Cable Workers have to work in a “hot” 

environment meaning that they are working in an environment whereby power can 

not always be turned off while working. 

Furthermore, the relatively generous benefit provisions provided to apprentices in this 

trade area also contributed to a higher cost 

structure for these apprentices relative to 

apprentices in other trade areas.

•	 Hairstylist apprentices also incurred a negative return, primarily due to the relatively 

low level of revenue that could be attributed to a first or second year apprentice. As 

the apprenticeship period for this trade is 

only two years, it appears that employers 

have only a limited period to recoup costs. 

In contrast, for most other trades, which 

typically involve a four-year apprenticeship 

period, employers generally observe higher 

economic returns in the third and fourth 

years of apprenticeship.

Analysis over the four-year apprenticeship 

indicates a net benefit ranging from 

$39,524 (Cook) to $245,264 (Heavy Duty 

Equipment Mechanic)
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

x | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Detailed in Figure 1 are the net cost and 

benefits associated with the sixteen trades 

examined in this study. The benefit/cost ratio 

represents the total return to the employer 

for each dollar invested in an apprentice. A 

benefit/cost ratio of greater than one implies 

a positive net return, while a ratio of less than 

one implies a net cost.

Figure 1

Total Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Trade

Trades Duration1 of Costs2 ($) Benefits3 ($) Net Benefit4 Benefit-Cost 

Apprenticeship ($) Ratio5

(Years)

Automotive Service Technician 4 250,016 423,138 173,122 1.69

Boilermaker 4 246,889 473,696 226,807 1.92

Bricklayer 4 237,687 316,853 79,166 1.33

Cabinetmaker 4 180,369 247,298 66,929 1.37

Construction Electrician 4 196,811 293,048 96,237 1.49

Construction Millwright and 4 254,287 403,272 148,985 1.59

Industrial Mechanic

Cook 4 125,344 164,868 39,524 1.32

Electrical Power Line and 4 336,770 319,759 (17,011) 0.95

Cable Worker

Hairstylist 2 77,096 42,620 (34,476) 0.55

Heavy Duty Equipment Mechanic 4 252,371 497,636 245,264 1.97

Machinist 4 204,921 383,877 178,955 1.87

Motor Vehicle Body Repairer 4 210,088 362,237 152,149 1.72

Plumber 4 237,681 329,728 92,047 1.39

Refrigeration and Air 4 240,060 344,601 104,541 1.44

Conditioning Mechanic

Sheet Metal Worker 4 258,160 322,022 63,862 1.25

Partsperson 4 215,323 361,276 145,954 1.68

Average 4 220,242 330,371 110,128 1.47

1 Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q28)

2 Represents the total per apprentice costs incurred over the apprenticeship period.

3 Measured as the revenue generated by an apprentice.

4 Benefits – Costs

5 Benefits / Costs
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | xi

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Analysis of Benefit-Cost Returns 

by Region, Size of Employer

In addition to collecting information at a 

national level with respect to the net costs/

benefits of apprenticeship by trade area, a 

goal of the research was to ascertain whether 

or not the net return on apprenticeship varied 

on the basis of regions, defined as Atlantic, 

Quebec, Ontario, West, or on the basis of 

the size of employer in terms of number of 

employees, defined as less than 10, 10-19, 

and 20+.

The regional/employer size analysis was completed for those trades in which there were 

sufficient numbers of employers to allow 

for robust estimates. These trades included 

Automotive Service Technicians with 159 

employers, Construction Electricians with 166 

employers, and Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Mechanics with 118 employers.

On average, employers in all regions witnessed a positive return on their apprenticeship investment. Overall, while results 

suggest that employers in Western Canada 

have a greater ability to earn higher revenues 

from their apprentices, they also incur significant costs in terms of wages and benefits 

and use of journeyperson time. Relative to 

the national average, employers in Quebec 

The largest monetary net benefits accrue 

to employers who train an apprentice in 

trades such as Heavy-Duty Equipment 

Mechanics ($245,264), Automotive Service 

Technicians ($173,122), and Construction 

Millwright and Industrial Mechanics 

($148,985). In these trades, the revenue 

generated by an apprentice far exceeds 

the total training costs.

Generally, the key costs were the 

apprentices’ wages and benefits and 

journeyperson time to supervise the 

apprentice. Other costs such as wastage, 

other disbursements, or administration, 

represented only a small proportion 

of the total cost of an apprentice. This 

information may bring into question 

the commonly held perception that the 

administration costs of apprenticeship are 

prohibitive.

experienced net benefits that were, on average, 12% to 16% higher than the national 

average. This return occurs because Quebec 

employers generally reported a lower cost 

in terms of average wages and benefits paid 

to apprentices, lower levels of “other” costs 

such as disbursements and less use of journeyperson time to supervise such apprentices.5

Employers in Ontario generally witnessed net 

benefits that were slightly below the national 

average due primarily to lower charge-out 

revenues attributable to apprentices. Employers in Atlantic Canada generally experienced a 

net positive return within 5% of the national 

average. 

All employers, no matter what their size, had 

a return. Larger employers have a higher 

return for the Automotive Service Technician and Refrigeration and Air Conditioning 

Mechanic trades. In the Construction Electrician trade, medium-sized employers (10-19) 

showed the highest return. 

5 The less use of journeypersons’ time could be a 

result of the way the educational system is structured 

in Quebec. In that province apprentices typically attend 

college prior to entering into an apprenticeship so the 

apprentices may be more experienced. 
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

xii | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Highlighted in Figure 2 is a summary of the 

difference in net benefits6

 for the three trades 

which analysis could be completed on the 

basis of region and size of employer.7

Summary of Trends Since 2006

The results from the pilot study, “Apprenticeship Building a Skilled Workforce for a Strong 

Bottom Line, Return on Apprenticeship Training Investment for Employers, A Study of 15 

Trades, June 2006,” were compared to the 

current study. Comparing the results of the 

two studies suggests that while the cost to 

hire, train, and supervise an apprentice has 

increased over the past two years, the ability of employers to generate revenues from 

6 Percentage difference from the national average. 

7 Based on number of employees

Figure 2

Analysis of Differences in Net Return on the Basis of Region and Size of Employer

Selected Trades

Characteristic AST Refrig. & Construction Average–

% Difference from National A/C Electrician Three

Average Mechanic Trades

Region

Atlantic n/a1 -2.8% +3.4% -0.3%

Quebec +12.4% +16.0% +12.1% +13.5%

Ontario -4.7% -11.8% -2.0% -6.2%

West -7.1% +9.7% -0.6% +0.7%

Size of Employer

< 10 employees -7.9% -13.9% +1.0% -10.4%

10-19 employees +3.69% +10.0% +22.5% +12.0%

20+ employees +14.1% +19.6% -9.0% +8.2%

1 Insufficient Sample Size

apprentices increased at a higher rate than 

the costs. This analysis was not only identified through the comparison of overall costs/

benefits among the ten trades studied in 2006 

and 2008, but was also confirmed through 

the detailed examination of employer costs/

benefits for those 106 employers who provided data in both 2006 and 2008. Examining 

the cost/benefit data for the employers who 

participated in both studies suggests that, 

while apprenticeship wage costs increased for 

these employers, on average, apprenticeshiprelated revenues increased at a greater rate.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | xiii

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3

Summary of Changes in Apprenticeship Costs/Revenues

Selected Categories

Average for Ten Trades1 Studied in 2006 & 2008

Category 2006 2008 % Change

Average Charge-Out $285,710 $351,155 +23%

Revenue

Apprentice Wages/Benefits $144,918 $154,399 +7%

Use of Journeyperson Time $51,088 $53,385 +5%

Other Costs2 $12,940 $15,190 +17%

Total Costs $208,946 $222,975 +7%

Benefit/Cost Ratio 1.37 1.57 +15%

1 Trades include AST, Bricklayer, Construction Electrician, Millwright, Cook, Heavy Duty Equipment Technician, 

Machinist, Motor Vehicle Body Repair, Refrigeration and A/C Mechanic and Sheet Metal Worker.

2 Other costs include wastage, disbursements and administration.

Summarized in Figure 3 are the changes in 

key cost/revenue components for the ten 

trades examined in both 2006 and 2008 for all 

employers. As highlighted in the table, it can 

be seen that:

•	 charge-out revenues increased by 23% 

between 2006 and 2008 for the ten comparable trades,

•	 with the exception of “other costs,” most 

cost elements increased between 5% and 

7%, and

•	 the net-benefit cost ratio for the ten trades 

increased from 1.37 in 2006 to 1.57 in 2008 – 

an increase of 15%.8

8 The 1.57 figure refers to the 10 trades included in 

the Phase I and Phase II studies. It does not include the 6 

new trades added for Phase II . The $1.47 figure is based 

on the data from all 16 trades. 

Survey Results

Proportion of Employers with 

Apprentices

Although the study was not designed to 

measure the “incidence rate” of apprentices 

among eligible employers, it does appear 

that there was a modest increase in the use of 

apprentices among Canadian employers. For 

example, relative to the 16.7% of employers 

who had an apprentice in 2006, the proportion of employers who indicated that they 

employed an apprentice increased to 19.7% 

for this 2008 study.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

xiv | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGQualitative Benefits o

Apprenticeship Training

When filling in the survey, employers were 

asked a series of questions designed to 

measure the importance of the several qualitative benefits of apprenticeship training. 

Employers were asked about:

•	 the benefit of apprenticeship training to 

journeypersons, and

•	 the advantages of employing a “homegrown” journeyperson.

Benefits of Apprenticeship Training to

Journeypersons

The majority of employers (81.3%) indicated 

that their journeypersons derive a benefit 

from training an apprentice. 

Advantages of Employing a “Homegrown”

 Journeyperson

Over sixty percent (61.3%) of employers 

consider a journeyperson they trained as an 

apprentice to be more productive relative to 

an external journeyperson, with only 3.5% 

indicating that “homegrown” journeypersons 

are less productive. Approximately, thirty 

five per cent (35.2%) of employers indicated 

that there is no difference in the productivity 

between a “homegrown” journeyperson and 

an externally hired journeyperson. Overall, 

employers estimated, based on their experiences, that a “homegrown” journeyperson is, 

on average, 29.0% more productive.

Employers rated “better fit with the organization” as the most significant benefit of 

employing a journeyperson who they trained 

as an apprentice. Employers also indicated 

that training their own journeyperson results 

in “reduced risk of skill shortages,” “increased 

potential for career advancement for the 

apprentice in the company,” “greater overall 

productivity,” and “fewer mistakes.”

Figure 4

Benefits of Employing a “Homegrown” 

Journeyperson

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (A11, n=589-602)

No benefit Significant benefit

Better fit with the organization 8.3

Avoids risk of skill shortages 8.1

Potential for career advancement in company 8.0

Better health and safety performance 8.0

Greater overall productivity 7.9

Better relations with customers 7.8

Fewer mistakes 7.7

02468 10
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | xv

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

(32.7%) of employers perceive a net benefit to 

apprenticeship training by the end of the first 

year or earlier. Interestingly, the data collected 

from employers suggests that many trades 

witness a positive return in the first year of an 

apprentice’s employment in the trade. 

Poaching Risk

Employers were evenly split in terms of 

whether they view the poaching risk from 

other employers to be a very serious issue. 

Fifty-three per cent of employers gave poaching a risk value of 1 to 5 (not serious). Fortyseven percent gave poaching a risk value of 6 

to 10 (very serious). These results indicate that 

there is some concern among employers with 

respect to poaching.

Figure 5

Employers’ Perceived Seriousness of 

Poaching Risk

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q27, n=850)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Percentage of Respondents

Not a Serious Risk (0–5) 53%

Serious Risk (6–10) 47%

Employers were evenly split in terms of 

whether they view poaching risk from 

other employers to be a very serious issue

Perceived Productive Value 

vs. Training Costs

Employers estimated when an apprentice’s 

productive value to their organization begins 

to exceed the training costs. More than 

one-quarter (30.2%) 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 

It works! 

Hydro Ottawa has found that apprenticeship 

in their organization led to better business 

performance through increased productivity 

and efficient project completion, increased 

morale, higher retention, and revitalization 

of workforce. 

Arcelor-Mittal Dofasco has found that 

apprenticeship training results in higher 

productivity and higher completion when 

compared to employees that receive shorter 

or more informal training. 

United Kingdom employers found apprenticeship training improves their business performance by making them more competitive, 

enhancing productivity, and reducing staff 

turnover. 

Training in Northern Ireland has led to higher 

profits, higher labour productivity, growth, 

creativity, and entrepreneurship.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

xvi | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGAs highlighted in Figure 6, there are som

regional differences in employers’ assessments 

of the poaching risk. The concern was greatest 

in the West and least in Atlantic Canada. The 

issue of poaching did not differ much based 

on employer size.9

Comparison of 2006 and 2008 

results

A comparison of the survey results from 2006 

to 2008 study yields interesting observations 

as outlined in Figure 7.

•	 The proportion of employers who feel that 

their journeypersons benefit from having 

apprentices increased from 67.6% in 2006 

to 81.3% in 2008.

•	 A high proportion of employers, more than 

60%, feel that a “homegrown” journeyperson is more productive than an externally-trained journeyperson. 

•	 Employers’ assessment of the “poaching 

risk” remained relatively unchanged over 

the past two years.

Employers with Journeypersons, but no 

Apprentices

Employers who hired journeypersons in one 

of the trades included in the study, but did not 

employ apprentices, were asked to complete 

a short survey. They were asked about the reasons that they did not invest in apprenticeship. 

As outlined in Figure 8, the most common 

reason reported by employers for not hiring 

an apprentice was that their business did not 

have enough continuous contracts to support 

hiring an apprentice (30%). Another common 

reason for not investing in apprenticeship 

9 Number of employees

Figure 6

Employers’ Perceived Seriousness of 

Poaching Risk

(Regional Basis & Basis of Employer Size)

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q27, n=850)

0 10 20 30 40 50

Serious Risk (6–10)

West 48%

Ontario 44%

Quebec 47%

Atlantic 41%

Less than 10 employees 47%

10 to 19 employees 47%

20 or more employees 48%

was that the business was too small and there 

was no reported need for additional workers 

(25%). Of great interest, however, is the 14% 

of employers who indicated that they would 

be willing to hire an apprentice, except that 

there were few or no apprentices applying to 

their organization.

As a part of the short survey, employers were 

also asked if anything would change their 

minds about hiring apprentices. About half of 
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | xvii

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 7

Comparison of Employer Opinion

2006 vs. 2008

Trends 2006 2008 Conclusion

Benefits of Apprenticeship 67.6% 81.3% Employers continue to strongly 

Training to Journeypersons believe that their journeypersons

benefit from training apprentices

Advantages of Employing a 65.3% 61.3% Persistent perception among

“homegrown” Journeyperson: employers that “homegrown”

More productive journeypersons are more

productive 

Most Significant benefit Better fit with the Better fit with the Agreement among employers

organization organization about the most significant 

(rating 8.5 out of 10) (rating 8.5 out of 10) benefit of apprenticeship 

training

Poaching Average of 5.1 on a 1⁄2 (approx) 1 to 5 Some concern over poaching

scale from 1 (not at 1⁄2 (approx) 6 to 10

all serious) to 10 

(very serious)

the employers answered yes to this question.

As outlined in Figure 9, this group identified 

some factors that would change their minds. 

Over 40% of employers indicated that they 

would hire apprentices if there were a need 

for them in their business. Nearly one-third 

(31%) of respondents indicated that they 

would hire apprentices if there were more 

financial support for employers doing so, such 

as tax credit incentives. Importantly, 30% of 

employers, without apprentices, indicated 

that they would hire apprentices if they could 

find them, suggesting that employers may be 

having difficulty getting access to apprentices. 

14% of employers who hired 

journeypersons in one of the sixteen 

trades, but did not hire apprentices 

indicated that they would be willing to 

hire an apprentice, except that there were 

few or no apprentices applying to their 

organization.

30% of employers without apprentices 

indicated that they would hire apprentices 

if they could find them, suggesting that 

employers may be having difficulty 

getting access to apprentices.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

xviii | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGFigure

Reasons that Employers Without Apprentices Did not Hire an Apprentice

Source: Apprenticeship Survey – Survey of Employers without Apprentices (Q2, n=1,163)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Percent of Respondents

Didn’t have enough continuous contracts (Business has enough workers) 30%

Business too small (Don’t need apprentices at this time) 25%

Lack of interest/response (no apprentices applying) 14%

Too much journeyperson’s time 14%

Too many essential skills issues 10%

Insufficient journeypersons 9%

Workers compensation costs 7%

Insurance costs 6%

Health and safety costs 6%

Too many apprentices being poached 6%

Too many life management issues 5%

Business just starting (Don’t need apprentices at this time) 5%

Business closing down soon (Don’t need apprentices at this time) 5%

Interruption in apprentice availability due to need for technical training 3%
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | xix

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 9

What Would Change Employers’ Decisions About Hiring an Apprentice

Source: Apprenticeship Survey – Survey of Employers without Apprentices (Q3, n=627)

0 10 20 30 40 50

Percent of Respondents

More need in my business 41%

More financial support/Tax credit incentive 31%

Would hire apprentices if I could find them 30%

If apprentices were more qualified 18%

More assistance with pre-screening candidates 15%

More accessible avenues to contact potential apprentices 15%

More information about flexible training options 13%

Trade specific data that shows apprenticeship training is a profitable investment 12%

More liaison and co-ordination support 12%

Fellow employers talking about apprenticeship’s profitability 7%

Change in the collective agreements 4%

Having apprentices commit to a contract 3%

Other 9%
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

xx | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGConclusi

This study allows industry and other apprenticeship stakeholders to gain a more accurate 

understanding of the costs and benefits of 

apprenticeship training for sixteen trades. 

This information is valuable in dispelling 

myths that investing in apprentices reaps little 

financial benefit. According to the data collected from almost 1,000 employers, there are 

direct financial benefits. For every $1 invested, 

employers receive a return, on average, of a 

$1.47. This is 9 cents up from the 2006 pilot 

study. In fourteen of the trades, employers 

received a return by the end of the second 

year or earlier. In these tough economic times, 

Canadian companies can further enhance 

their business performance through apprenticeship. The majority of employers who filled 

in the survey believe “homegrown” journey–

persons who they trained as apprentices 

are more productive. Additional benefits to 

hiring apprentices include having employees 

which are a “better fit with the organization.” According to the survey findings with 

employers who did not hire apprentices, some 

of them perceived that no apprentices were 

applying to their companies. This finding indicates there are still opportunities to increase 

investment in apprenticeship by connecting 

those interested in apprenticeship with 

employers. Ongoing dialogue with industry 

about the value of apprenticeship and continued support for employers will be essential 

to ensure Canadians have the opportunities to 

train and to gain skills.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 1

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Contents

Part 1: Introduction.................................................................................................. 2

Part 2: Cost-Benefit Model ...................................................................................... 7

Part 3: Cost-Benefit Results.................................................................................... 10

Part 4: Survey Results ............................................................................................. 52

Part 5: Conclusions................................................................................................. 58

Appendix A: Survey Administration...................................................................... 60

Appendix B: Follow-up with Respondents to the Pilot Study.............................. 62

Appendix C: Cost-Benefit Methodology............................................................... 66

Appendix D: Detailed Cost-Benefit Results by Region......................................... 75

Appendix E: Detailed Cost-Benefit Results by Employer Size.............................. 82
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

2 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGPart 1

Introduction

This section outlines the background, objectives, and research considerations that will 

provide important context for readers when 

analyzing the results.

1.1 Background

A commonly held belief that apprenticeship 

training had few financial benefits motivated 

CAF-FCA to complete this return on training 

investment research. One of the nine barriers 

identified in the Canadian Apprenticeship 

Forum – Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage 

(CAF-FCA) report, “Accessing and Completing 

Apprenticeship Training in Canada, Perceptions of Barriers,” was the perceived cost of 

apprenticeship training. According to CAFFCA’s 2006 “Employers’ Perceptions and Attitudes Survey,” only 11 per cent of employers 

said it makes financial sense to hire an apprentice.1

 Only 5 per cent of employers surveyed 

said that hiring an apprentice makes good 

business sense.2

 Perceived cost-related barriers 

included: the overall cost of apprenticeships, 

loss of company productivity during the initial 

phase of an apprenticeship that requires 

extra supervision and training, possible loss 

of apprentices who depart after certification, and possible loss of apprentices to larger 

firms. These issues precipitated the need for 

more in-depth research into the return on 

apprenticeship training investment. In 2006, 

1 CAF-FCA, “Employers’ Perceptions and Attitudes,” 

February 2006. 

2 Ibid. 

on behalf of the CAF-FCA, R.A. Malatest & 

Associates Ltd. completed a pilot Phase I study 

with employers in 15 trades from across the 

country. As a part of this study very detailed 

surveys with 433 employers were completed. 

This research formed the basis for the CAFFCA’s publication, “Apprenticeship Building a 

Skilled Workforce for a Strong Bottom Line, 

Return on Apprenticeship Training Investment 

for Employers, A Study of 15 Trades, June 

2006.” The pilot research study suggested 

there was a positive return for employers who 

invest in apprentices.

1.2 Objectives and Scope of 

Study

To gain a more comprehensive understanding of the return on apprenticeship training 

investment for employers, CAF-FCA commissioned R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd. to 

complete another Phase II study in 2008.3

 The 

overall objectives of this research were:

•	 to determine the costs/benefits incurred by 

employers within the apprenticeship community in hiring and training apprentices 

using the same methodology used in 2006. 

Ten trades included in the 2006 pilot were 

selected as well as 6 additional trades;

•	 to determine differences in the benefit-cost 

ratio for employers of different sizes and 

regions; 

3 Funding for this study was provided by Human 

Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC).
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 3

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

•	 to build on the dataset developed in 2006 

by surveying a sample of employers who 

participated in the 2006 pilot study to 

update employer data concerning apprenticeship training costs and benefits; and

•	 to examine reasons why employers do not 

employ apprentices by surveying employers 

who do employ journeypersons in the 16 

trades of interest for the current study, but 

who have not hired an apprentice in the 

past three years.

Data was collected through a national survey 

of employers across 16 trade areas, which was 

administered by R.A. Malatest & Associates 

Ltd. from June to November 2008. The survey 

instrument was initially developed by Prism 

Economics and Analysis and subsequently 

modified by R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd. 

in 2006, in consultation with CAF-FCA, to 

ensure that it would capture the information 

required to conduct a detailed cost-benefit 

analysis. Using the data provided by employers, R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd. produced 

trade-specific cost-benefit estimates to 

determine the net benefit of apprenticeship 

training.

The 2008 research is intended to deepen the 

results from the original study for 10 trades 

areas:

•	 Automotive Service Technician;

•	 Bricklayer;

•	 Construction Electrician;

•	 Construction Millwright and Industrial 

Mechanic;

•	 Cook;

•	 Heavy-Duty Equipment Technician;

•	 Machinist;

•	 Motor Vehicle Body Repairer;

•	 Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Mechanic; and

•	 Sheet Metal Worker.

In addition, information was collected for 

six new trades not covered in the pilot study. 

The interest in the results for these additional 

trades was industry driven:

•	 Boilermaker;

•	 Cabinetmaker;

•	 Electrical Power Line and Cable Worker;

•	 Hairstylist;

•	 Plumber; and

•	 Partsperson.

This report summarizes the findings based on 

the following employer respondents:

•	 784 new employers who participated in the 

2008 Phase II of the project, 

•	 106 of the 3214

 employers who completed a 

survey in the 2006 who updated their information in 2008, and

•	 1,163 employers with journeypersons in 

one of the 16 trades of interest who do not 

employ apprentices.

By comparing the results provided by 106 

employers from the 2006 study who also par4 Even though 433 employers completed surveys in 

the Phase I study, this total was based on the 15 trades 

that were examined. Only 10 of the trades included in 

Phase I were included in Phase II. The 321 figure is based 

on the number of employer surveys received in the 10 

trades that are being included in both phases of the 

study. 
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

4 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGticipated in the 2008 study, it was possible t

extrapolate changes in charge-out rates/costs 

to the entire sample collected in 2006.

Detailed in Figure 1.1 are the number of surveys completions from the 2006 pilot study, 

the 2008 survey, and the combined file that 

contains data from the pooled sample. The 

pooled sample includes the 2008 surveys plus 

the 2006 surveys adjusted based on changes in 

costs/benefits for employers in both samples.

Figure 1.1 

Survey Completions – 2008, 2006 & Pooled Sample

Trade NOC 2008 Useable Pilot Total

Employer Surveys Number of

Surveys (2006) Surveys

(Pooled)

Automotive Service Technician 7321 114 45 159

Motor Vehicle Body Repairer 7322 41 21 62

Cook 6242 31 21 52

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning 7313 78 40 118

Mechanic

Heavy-Duty Equipment Technician 7312 29 37 66

Construction Millwright and 7311 7 23 30

Industrial Mechanic

Electrician (construction) 7241 114 52 166

Bricklayer 7281 32 21 53

Machinist 7231 15 33 48

Sheet Metal Worker 7261 23 28 51

Cabinetmaker 1272 48 48

Partsperson 1472 15 15

Boilermaker 9612 5 5

Plumber 7251 75 75

Electrical Power Line & Cable Worker 7244 27 27

Hairstylist 6271 38 38

TOTAL 692 321 1,013
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 5

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

1.3 Research Considerations

This study provides an estimate of the costs 

and benefits of apprenticeship training to 

employers across 16 trade areas. Here are 

some things to keep in mind when reviewing 

the results: 

•	 The results are based on averages across all 

employers and may not necessarily reflect 

the costs and benefits of apprenticeship 

training on an employer-by-employer basis.

•	 While the data at the national level can 

be viewed with confidence given the participation of over 700 employers, the limited number of employer completions for 

some trades suggests that, in these cases, 

trade-specific data should be interpreted 

with caution. During the sample selection 

process, it was difficult to identify employers who hire apprentices in trades with a 

relatively small workforce. For example, 

the number of workers employed in the 

Boilermaker (3,830) and Power Line Technician (11,700) trades is significantly lower 

than the combined average employment 

of 63,601 of the 14 remaining trades.5

 In 

addition, there were significant difficulties identifying Partsperson apprentices, 

even with the 21,020 employers that were 

contacted. As a result, the sample sizes for 

the Boilermaker and Partsperson trades are 

below the minimum target of 20 employers. 

Caution should therefore be execercised 

when looking at these results. 

•	 Although the costs associated with apprenticeship training are generally quantifiable, 

5 National Occupational Classification for Statistics 

2006 (720), Provinces, Territories, Census Metropolitan 

Areas and Census Agglomerations, 2006 Census - 20% 

Sample Data.

the benefits are more difficult to measure. 

A part of the survey given to employers was 

designed to capture qualitative benefits 

derived from apprenticeship training. It 

should be noted that employers provided 

their subjective assessments when they 

were filling in that part of the survey. 

•	 The economic climate in which the survey 

was undertaken differs considerably from 

the current economic climate. For example, 

the bulk of the data collection occurred in 

the spring/summer 2008 at a time when 

Canadian unemployment was very low, 

world oil prices were at record levels, and 

there was a general shortage of tradespersons across Canada. Since that time, 

the considerable decline in economic activity, higher unemployment, and increased 

competition in the market place may have 

an impact on charge-out rates and could 

impact the net returns for the 16 studied trades. At this point, it is unclear as to 

whether or not the economic downturn 

will have a positive or negative impact 

on the economic returns associated with 

apprenticeship. While employers have cited 

a decline in charge-out rates, other employers contacted as part of recent validation 

sessions noted that they had also witnessed 

a slight decline in wage rates, but, more 

importantly, increased quality in the caliber of individuals who were now pursuing 

apprenticeship training. This could imply 

that returns could be higher in periods 

of slower economic growth due to the 

increased quality of individuals available for 

apprentice positions.

•	 It is also important to keep in mind that 

even though Canada is experiencing an economic downturn during the present time, 
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

6 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGanalysts still predict that Canada will no

have enough skilled tradespeople to meet 

future shortages when the baby boomers retire. The importance of investing in 

apprentices is still a message that needs to 

be communicated. 

1.4 Validation Roundtables

R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd. and CAF-FCA 

facilitated a series of roundtables across 

Canada with employers to determine if any 

significant costs and benefits of apprenticeship training had been excluded from 

the methodology and to validate the costbenefit results.6

 Roundtables were held 

with employers representing Automotive 

Service Technicians, Construction Electricians and Cabinetmakers. For each of the 

employer roundtable sessions, R.A. Malatest 

& Associates Ltd. presented the trade-specific 

cost-benefit results. For the most part, the 

employers validated the results. 

6 Roundtables were held in Edmonton, AB (construction electricians), Vancouver, BC (automotive service 

technicians) and Calgary, AB (cabinetmakers).

1.5 Report Structure

Information obtained through the survey 

research is presented in several sections. 

Detailed in Section 2 is a description of the 

cost-benefit model. Summarized in Section 3 

are the detailed cost-benefit results for the 16 

trade areas and the findings of the validation 

roundtables. Section 3 also includes an examination of net costs and benefits on the basis 

of region and size of establishment. Section 4 

provides the qualitative survey results, including the survey findings from the employers 

without apprentices. The conclusions are contained in Section 5 of the report. 
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 7

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Part 2: 

Cost-Benefit Model

The cost-benefit methodology for this study 

was originally developed by Prism Economics 

and Analysis, and subsequently modified by 

R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd. to more fully 

capture a range of benefits that accrue to 

employers who participate in apprenticeship 

training. Highlighted in this section are the 

major elements that comprise the cost-benefit 

model adopted for this study. A detailed 

discussion of the cost-benefit methodology is 

included in Appendix C.

2.1 Overview of the Model

The model is based on a standard cost-benefit 

analysis for a single firm that hires apprentices. Net benefits are calculated on a per 

apprentice, per year of apprenticeship basis. 

2.2 Cost Components

Wages and Benefits

Wage rates include base pay and non-compulsory and compulsory benefits such as Workers 

Compensation, Employment Insurance, and 

Canada Pension Plan.

Opportunity Costs

Opportunity costs are related to the resources 

that apprentices draw from the organization as part of their training process. These 

include journeyperson time spent supervising the apprentice and wastage. Wastage 

was defined as material costs and any time 

required to fix mistakes. In each situation, 

an attempt was made to price these factors 

and to determine the scale of their usage by 

apprentices. In the case of journeyperson time 

and wastage, a per-apprentice, per-year cost 

was estimated. It should be noted that lost 

productivity of major assets, such as tools and 

equipment valued at more than $50,000 that 

are pulled out of production to train apprentices, is another opportunity cost associated 

with apprenticeship training. However, as only 

a small percentage of surveyed employers 

(7.3%) indicated this as a cost, it was excluded 

from the analysis.1

Disbursements

Disbursements are primarily related to 

the employer share of costs to support the 

ongoing training and development of apprentices. These include costs associated with registration fees and continuing training.

Administration

An estimate of administrative costs associated with hiring and training apprentices 

was made. Administration included the 

time required to fill in paperwork related to 

apprenticeship and the staff time to manage 

the process. These costs were allocated on a 

per apprentice basis.

1 Apprenticeship Survey (Q14a, n=752)
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

8 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORG2.3 Benefit Componen

Revenue Generated by Apprentice

In most cases, apprentice labour is priced to 

market either in terms of direct charge-out 

rates or mark-ups on labour. Based on data on 

the total annual chargeable hours of work, an 

estimate was made of the average revenue 

associated with each apprentice.

It should be noted however, that while many 

employers could easily compute a “chargeout” rate for their apprentices and, hence, 

develop an estimate of the revenue that 

would be derived from the apprentice, some 

employers had more difficulty in estimating a 

charge-out rate. For example, among employers of Cooks and Partspersons, employers 

were unable to provide an estimate of the 

charge-out rates for the apprentices. For these 

trades, the consultant utilized a “mark-up” 

rate based on the journeyperson wage rate. 

Caution should be exercised in the interpretation of the results for these two trades.

Analysis was completed to assess the overall 

cost of apprenticeship using the major cost 

elements detailed. While the cost elements 

varied by trade, it was generally found that 

the key costs were the apprentices wages 

and benefits, which, on average, represented 

approximately 71% of the cost of an apprentice. The cost of the journeyperson time to 

supervise the apprentice represented approximately 23% of the cost. Other costs such as 

wastage (3%), other disbursements (2%) or 

administration (1%) represented only a small 

proportion of the total cost. 

2.4 Reporting Framework

Results are reported by trade and broken out 

by year of apprenticeship. This analysis demonstrates the time profile for costs and benefits. The results of the model are presented in 

a simplified table format that clearly shows 

the net benefit by year of apprenticeship. 

There is no attempt to discount these through 

a present value type of analysis.

The reported net benefits are best interpreted 

as partial gross benefits per apprentice per 

year. Even though the model may produce a 

positive benefit in a particular year, each firm 

Figure 2.1

Relative Share of Apprenticeship Costs–

by Key Cost Elements

Overall Average across All Trades 

0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent of Average Total Costs

Wages and Benefits 71%

Journeyperson Time 23%

Wastage 3%

Disbursements 2%

Administration 1%
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 9

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

will have its own standards on the necessary 

level of benefit required to participate in an 

apprenticeship program (the so-called “hurdle 

rate”). These “hurdle rates” will depend on 

the broader cost structure of the organization, particularly the cost of capital. In addition, the analysis does not address whether 

investment in apprenticeship training would 

be superior to other potential investments 

including hiring of qualified journeypersons, 

training of existing staff, or purchase of capital equipment.

2.5 Use of Data from the Pilot 

Survey (2006)

One of the goals of the current study is to 

build on the dataset developed in 2006 by 

surveying a sample of employers who participated in the 2006 pilot study to update 

employer data concerning apprenticeship training costs and benefits. Of the 321 

employers who completed a survey in the 

2006, 106 employers updated their information in 2008. Appendix B summarizes the 

trends in costs and benefits reported by 

employers who responded to both the 2006 

and 2008 surveys. Data provided in 2006 and 

2008 by 106 employers was used to assess 

consistency between the previous study and 

present day costs/charge out rates. The percentage change in charge-out rates, wages, 

benefits, and other costs between 2006 and 

2008 was also used to impute updated data 

for 215 employers who participated in the 

2006 study, but who did not provide updated 

information in 2008. In this way, it was possible to pool the results of the 2006 study with 

that of 2008, although it should be emphasized that the 2008 study relies primarily on 

cost/benefit data of 692 employers (68.3% of 

total employer results) who provided usable 

data in 2008.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

10 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGPart 3

Cost-Benefit Results

This section provides the trade specific results 

for the 16 trades analyzed. It also provides a 

summary of the differences between the 2006 

and 2008 results. In three trades where there 

was enough results, a further breakdown 

by region and size of business has also been 

provided. The main findings in this section 

indicate there is a strong business case for 

apprenticeship: 

•	 Analysis over the four-year apprenticeship indicates a net benefit ranging from 

$39,524 (Cook) to $245,264 (Heavy Duty 

Equipment Mechanic).

•	 The largest monetary net benefits accrue to 

employers who train an apprentice in trades 

such as heavy-duty equipment mechanics 

($245,264), automotive service technicians 

($173,122), and construction millwright 

and industrial mechanics ($148,985). In 

these trades, the revenue generated by an 

apprentice far exceeds the total training 

costs.

•	 All regions showed a return in the three 

trades examined. Quebec tended to show 

higher returns than other regions. 

•	 All business sizes showed a return in the 

three trades examined. Larger businesses 

tended to show higher returns than smaller 

businesses.

3.1 Detailed Cost-Benefit Results 

by Trade

In this section, detailed cost-benefit results are 

presented for the 16 trade areas:

•	 Automotive Service Technician (n=159);

•	 Boilermaker (n=5);

•	 Bricklayer (n=53);

•	 Cabinetmaker (n=48);

•	 Construction Electrician (n=166);

•	 Construction Millwright and Industrial 

Mechanic (n=30); 

•	 Cook (n=52);

•	 Electrical Power Line and Cable Worker 

(n=27);

•	 Hairstylist (n=38);

•	 Heavy Duty Equipment Mechanic (n=66);

•	 Machinist (n=48);

•	 Motor Vehicle Body Repairer (n=62);

•	 Plumber (n=75);

•	 Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Mechanic (n=118);

•	 Sheet Metal Worker (n=51); and 

•	 Partsperson (n=15).
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 11

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

As detailed above, the total number of 

employer responses included in the analysis 

for 14 of the 16 trades exceeds the minimum 

sample target of 20. The Boilermaker and 

Partsperson trades, which have relatively small 

workforces, are represented by fewer than 20 

employers.

A detailed example of the cost-benefit calculations for Automotive Service Technician is 

included in Appendix C.

Automotive Service Technician

The results of the cost-benefit analysis for 

the Automotive Service Technician trade 

are presented in Figure 3.1. According to 

the model, there is a net benefit of $14,227 

during the first year of the apprenticeship. 

The net benefit increases each year to $70,428 

by the fourth year. The cost in terms of journeyperson time declines considerably from 

year 1 to year 4, indicating that the apprentice becomes more proficient and requires 

less training as he/she progresses through 

the apprenticeship. Cash disbursements and 

administration costs are relatively small components of the total cost of apprenticeship 

training, comprising 1.8% and 1.1% of total 

costs, respectively.

Figure 3.1

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship – 

Automotive Service Technician (n=159)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 81,927.82 $ 96,029.04 $ 115,897.79 $ 129,283.39 $ 423,138.04

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 26,273.13 $ 30,747.62 $ 36,583.27 $ 43,316.66 $ 136,920.68 

Journeyperson Time $ 34,304.71 $ 26,890.31 $ 20,442.07 $ 12,921.84 $ 94,558.92 

Wastage $ 4,755.01 $ 3,102.86 $ 2,229.89 $ 1,120.19 $ 11,207.95 

Disbursements $ 1,682.35 $ 1,068.09 $ 1,026.83 $ 811.38 $ 4,588.65 

Administration $ 684.93 $ 684.93 $ 684.93 $ 684.93 $ 2,739.71 

Total $ 67,700.12 $ 62,493.81 $ 60,966.99 $ 58,854.99 $ 250,015.91 

Net Benefit $ 14,227.70 $ 33,535.23 $ 54,930.81 $ 70,428.39 $ 173,122.13
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

12 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGBoilermak

As shown in Figure 3.2, there is an overall net 

benefit of apprenticeship training for employers in the Boilermaker trade. The net benefit 

increases considerably from year 1 to year 4, 

due in part to the higher revenue generated 

by more experienced apprentices. There are 

no costs related to wastage and cash disbursements, according to the employer survey 

respondents. The costs related to administration are negligible. In addition, the cost 

in terms of journeyperson time that is spent 

training an apprentice declines from 26.6% of 

total costs during the first year to 4.1% during 

the fourth year. Readers should note only five 

employers from this trade filled in the survey 

so some caution should be excercised in drawing conclusions based upon the results.

Figure 3.2

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship – 

Boilermaker (n=5)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 91,584.72 $ 114,260.00 $ 129,666.25 $ 138,185.00 $ 473,695.97

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 41,338.15 $ 50,739.81 $ 60,102.98 $ 67,632.35 $ 219,813.29

Journeyperson Time $ 15,047.34 $ 4,836.64 $ 3,851.40 $ 2,866.16 $ 26,601.55

Wastage

Disbursements

Administration $ 118.52 $ 118.52 $ 118.52 $ 118.52 $ 474.07

Total $ 56,504.00 $ 55,694.98 $ 64,072.90 $ 70,617.03 $ 246,888.91

Net Benefit $ 35,080.71 $ 58,565.02 $ 65,593.35 $ 67,567.97 $ 226,807.05
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 13

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Bricklayer

As shown in Figure 3.3, there is an overall 

net benefit of apprenticeship training for 

employers in the Bricklayer trade. The revenue 

generated by first, second, third, and fourth 

year apprentices exceed the costs incurred 

by employers. The productive contribution 

of the apprentice in terms of revenue generated increases throughout the apprenticeship. 

In addition, the cost associated with journeyperson time declines indicating that the 

apprentice becomes more proficient throughout the apprenticeship period. Administration 

costs are a relatively insignificant cost component, comprising 0.4% of total costs.

Figure 3.3

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Bricklayer (n=53)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 69,227.01 $ 76,232.62 $ 82,363.37 $ 89,030.41 $ 316,853.40

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 35,133.55 $ 41,711.47 $ 48,935.20 $ 64,132.25 $ 189,912.48 

Journeyperson Time $ 18,772.95 $ 8,250.09 $ 5,916.39 $ 4,823.23 $ 37,762.66 

Wastage $ 3,641.22 $ 1,927.65 $ 1,143.87 $ 549.06 $ 7,261.79 

Disbursements $ 797.90 $ 482.77 $ 443.51 $ 145.41 $ 1,869.59 

Administration $ 191.78 $ 305.14 $ 191.78 $ 191.78 $ 880.49 

Total $ 58,537.40 $ 52,677.12 $ 56,630.75 $ 69,841.74 $ 237,687.01

Net Benefit $ 10,689.60 $ 23,555.50 $ 25,732.62 $ 19,188.68 $ 79,166.40
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

14 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Cabinetmaker

As shown in Figure 3.4, there is an overall net 

benefit of apprenticeship training for employers in the Cabinetmaker trade. The net benefit 

increases considerably from year 1 to year 

4, due in part to the higher revenue generated by more experienced apprentices. Costs 

related to wastage, cash disbursements, and 

administration are not significant. In addition, 

the cost in terms of journeyperson time that 

is spent training an apprentice declines from 

32.6% of total costs during the first year to 

12.2% during the fourth year.

Figure 3.4

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Cabinetmaker (n=48)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 50,733.05 $ 56,880.12 $ 64,549.80 $ 75,135.29 $ 247,298.27

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 25,195.67 $ 30,699.67 $ 36,062.04 $ 41,732.41 $ 133,689.80 

Journeyperson Time $ 13,304.74 $ 11,738.77 $ 8,473.64 $ 6,011.88 $ 39,529.03 

Wastage $ 1,705.14 $ 1,215.16 $ 1,029.67 $ 948.38 $ 4,898.36 

Disbursements $ 441.48 $ 370.21 $ 376.27 $ 251.92 $ 1,439.88 

Administration $ 202.93 $ 202.93 $ 202.93 $ 202.93 $ 811.71 

Total $ 40,849.96 $ 44,226.73 $ 46,144.55 $ 49,147.52 $ 180,368.77

Net Benefit $ 9,883.09 $ 12,653.39 $ 18,405.25 $ 25,987.77 $ 66,929.49
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 15

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Construction Electrician

The cost-benefit results for the Construction Electrician trade are presented in Figure 

3.5. During the first year of the apprenticeship, employers experience a net benefit of 

$15,725. A second year apprentice generates 

a net benefit of $20,648, increasing to $32,434 

by the fourth year. Overall, the total net benefit to employers of apprenticeship training 

over the course of the apprenticeship for this 

trade is $96,237.

Figure 3.5

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Construction Electrician (n=166)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 60,447.51 $66,721.49 $77,827.35 $ 88,051.58 $ 293,047.93

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 29,056.83 $35,396.78 $42,191.38 $ 50,219.16 $ 156,864.16 

Journeyperson Time $ 11,879.41 $ 8,321.64 $ 6,282.19 $ 3,573.05 $ 30,056.29 

Wastage $ 2,492.91 $ 1,345.44 $ 925.57 $ 819.03 $ 5,582.94 

Disbursements $ 987.91 $ 704.12 $ 693.39 $ 701.23 $ 3,086.66 

Administration $ 305.14 $ 305.14 $ 305.14 $ 305.14 $ 1,220.58 

Total $ 44,722.21 $46,073.12 $50,397.67 $ 55,617.62 $ 196,810.62

Net Benefit $ 15,725.30 $20,648.37 $27,429.68 $ 32,433.96 $ 96,237.30
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

16 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Construction Millwright and Industrial 

Mechanic

As detailed in Figure 3.6, the net benefit of 

apprenticeship training increases over the 

course of the apprenticeship, from $33,371 

during the first year to $44,416 by the fourth 

year. Wastage costs in this trade are higher 

in comparison to other trades. These costs 

account for 5.8% of the total costs. Overall, 

the total net benefit of apprenticeship training for this trade is $148,985.

Figure 3.6

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship – 

Construction Millwright and Industrial Mechanic (n=30)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 93,093.29 $ 97,938.66 $ 102,167.87 $ 110,072.31 $ 403,272.13

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 37,245.72 $ 43,305.53 $ 49,345.47 $ 55,511.55 $ 185,408.27 

Journeyperson Time $ 16,172.36 $ 14,756.69 $ 10,855.13 $ 5,675.06 $ 47,459.25 

Wastage $ 4,471.66 $ 3,214.72 $ 4,012.14 $ 3,058.86 $ 14,757.38 

Disbursements $ 957.20 $ 821.30 $ 846.90 $ 535.71 $ 3,161.11 

Administration $ 875.35 $ 875.35 $ 875.35 $ 875.35 $ 3,501.42 

Total $ 59,722.29 $ 62,973.59 $ 65,935.00 $ 65,656.54 $ 254,287.42

Net Benefit $ 33,371.00 $ 34,965.06 $ 36,232.87 $ 44,415.77 $ 148,984.70
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 17

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.7

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Cook (n=52)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue1 $ 33,028.26 $ 39,199.73 $ 46,235.81 $ 46,404.18 $ 164,867.98

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 18,492.90 $ 20,090.53 $ 22,948.58 $ 25,480.28 $ 87,012.29 

Journeyperson Time $ 9,477.70 $ 7,410.42 $ 5,873.53 $ 3,111.44 $ 25,873.09 

Wastage $ 3,438.24 $ 1,547.91 $ 1,287.98 $ 643.99 $ 6,918.12 

Disbursements $ 1,970.71 $ 1,428.77 $ 1,149.55 $ 260.20 $ 4,809.24 

Administration $ 182.73 $ 182.73 $ 182.73 $ 182.73 $ 730.92 

Total $ 33,562.28 $ 30,660.37 $ 31,442.37 $ 29,678.64 $ 125,343.66

Net Benefit (Cost) $ (534.02) $ 8,539.36 $ 4,793.44 $ 16,725.54 $ 39,524.32

Cook 

The results for the Cook trade are presented 

in Figure 3.7. A negative net benefit accrues 

to employers who train cook apprentices in 

the first year of the apprenticeship. However, 

by the second year, employers experience 

a positive net return of $8,539. It should be 

noted that due to the inability of employers to 

provide a charge-out rate, the consultant utilized a mark-up rate, which was 100% of the 

journeyperson rate.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

18 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGElectrical Power Line and Cable Work

The cost-benefit results for the Electrical 

Power Line and Cable Worker trade are 

presented in Figure 3.8. Employers in this 

trade area tend to be larger than employers in other trade areas. For example, almost 

three-quarters (74%) of employers in this 

trade had 20 or more employees, compared 

to the survey average of 33% who had 20 

or more employees. During the four-year 

apprenticeship period, the model estimates 

that there is a total net cost of $17,011. This 

is due, in part, to the relatively high wages 

paid to the apprentices and the relatively 

high cost of journeyperson time to supervise 

the apprentices. The costs associated with 

journeyperson time account for 23.8% of the 

total costs of apprenticeship training in this 

trade. This higher percentage likely reflects 

the safety considerations for this occupation. For example, in contrast to construction 

electrician activities, in many instances, Electrical Power Line and Cable Workers work in 

a “hot” environment, meaning the power 

can not always be turned off while working. 

The high wage rates paid, even to first year 

apprentices, suggests that it is difficult for 

employers to experience a net benefit until 

the 3rd or 4th year of an apprenticeship. The 

relatively generous benefit provisions also 

contribute to a higher cost structure when 

compared to apprentices in other trade areas. 

Employers reported benefits representing 

approximately 25% of total wages, which was 

higher than the average of 19% reported for 

other construction-related trades.

Figure 3.8

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Electrical Power Line and Cable Worker (n=27)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 73,111.15 $ 75,459.17 $ 84,590.53 $ 86,597.66 $ 319,758.51

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 48,918.17 $ 55,840.70 $ 62,013.39 $ 68,359.20 $ 235,131.46 

Journeyperson Time $ 9,408.98 $ 22,526.03 $ 17,216.34 $ 13,413.08 $ 82,564.42 

Wastage $ - 

Disbursements $ 4,764.58 $ 2,672.81 $ 2,672.81 $ 1,510.72 $ 11,620.92 

Administration $ 1,863.26 $ 1,863.26 $ 1,863.26 $ 1,863.26 $ 7,453.04 

Total $ 84,954.98 $ 82,902.79 $ 83,765.80 $ 85,146.26 $ 336,769.83

Net Benefit (Cost) $ (11,843.83) $ (7,443.63) $ 824.74 $ 1,451.40 $ (17,011.32)
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 19

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Hairstylist

According to the results of the cost-benefit 

analysis for the Hairstylist trade, which are 

presented in Figure 3.9, employers incur a net 

cost of apprenticeship training. This is due to 

the relatively lower attributed revenue associated with apprentices in the Hairstylist trade. 

On average, employers reported that first year 

apprentices spent 18 hours on work chargeable to a customer per week, and generate 

$18,374 in revenue in year 1. The very low 

charge out revenue attributed to 1st and 2nd 

year apprentices minimizes their net contribution. As this trade only has a two-year training 

period, unlike other trades, employers are 

generally less able to recoup costs. Overall, 

there is net cost of apprenticeship training to 

employers of $34,478 per apprentice.

Figure 3.9

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Hairstylist (n=38)

Year 1 Year 2 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 18,374.49 $ 24,245.67 $ 42,620.16

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 16,923.48 $ 20,680.49 $ 37,603.98 

Journeyperson Time $ 20,406.32 $ 13,573.15 $ 33,979.46 

Wastage $ 1,591.81 $ 941.15 $ 2,532.96 

Disbursements $ 777.80 $ 413.30 $ 1,191.10 

Administration $ 894.47 $ 894.47 $ 1,788.94 

Total $ 40,593.89 $ 36,502.55 $ 77,096.44

Net Benefit (Cost) $ (22,219.40) $ (12,256.88) $ (34,476.28)
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

20 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGFigure 3.

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Heavy Duty Equipment Mechanic (n=66)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 98,156.26 $ 116,321.65 $ 132,937.68 $ 150,220.18 $ 497,635.77

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 35,517.19 $ 42,345.47 $ 48,246.50 $ 54,225.81 $ 180,334.97 

Journeyperson Time $ 18,809.17 $ 14,292.36 $ 9,627.61 $ 8,041.12 $ 50,770.26 

Wastage $ 4,471.66 $ 3,214.72 $ 4,012.14 $ 3,058.86 $ 14,757.38 

Disbursements $ 1,547.56 $ 1,214.20 $ 1,030.02 $ 812.69 $ 4,604.47 

Administration $ 476.10 $ 476.10 $ 476.10 $ 476.10 $ 1,904.40 

Total $ 60,821.68 $ 61,542.85 $ 63,392.37 $ 66,614.57 $ 252,371.47

Net Benefit $ 37,334.58 $ 54,778.80 $ 69,545.31 $ 83,605.61 $ 245,264.30

Heavy Duty Equipment Mechanic

The cost-benefit results for the Heavy Duty 

Equipment Mechanic trade are presented in 

Figure 3.10. During the four-year apprenticeship period, the model estimates that there 

is a total net benefit of $245,264. The costs 

associated with journeyperson time and wastage account for 20.1% and 5.8% of the total 

costs of apprenticeship training in this trade, 

respectively. This trade has one of the highest 

net returns due to the high charge-out rates 

that employers report for their apprentices 

across all years.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 21

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Machinist 

As illustrated in Figure 3.11, the net benefit 

of apprenticeship training increases over each 

year of the four-year apprenticeship period 

for the Machinist trade. The revenue generated by a fourth year apprentice is 28.3% 

higher relative to a first year apprentice. In 

addition, costs associated with journeyperson 

time, wastage, and disbursements decline 

as the apprentice progresses through the 

apprenticeship. Overall, the model estimates 

that the total per apprentice net benefit for 

this trade is $178,995.

Figure 3.11

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship – 

Machinist (n=48)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 82,421.69 $ 93,090.79 $ 102,583.19 $ 105,781.21 $ 383,876.88

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 28,143.18 $ 33,280.41 $ 38,359.54 $ 44,275.13 $ 144,058.25 

Journeyperson Time $ 20,365.14 $ 9,175.31 $ 6,353.60 $ 5,898.44 $ 41,792.49 

Wastage $ 3,304.18 $ 3,002.72 $ 2,759.56 $ 2,703.35 $ 11,769.81 

Disbursements $ 1,838.25 $ 1,366.76 $ 1,357.44 $ 1,258.49 $ 5,820.95 

Administration $ 369.99 $ 369.99 $ 369.99 $ 369.99 $ 1,479.97 

Total $ 54,020.74 $ 47,195.19 $ 49,200.14 $ 54,505.40 $ 204,921.47

Net Benefit $ 28,400.95 $ 45,895.60 $ 53,383.06 $ 51,275.80 $ 178,955.41
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

22 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Motor Vehicle Body Repairer

The cost-benefit results for Motor Vehicle 

Body Repairer trade are presented in Figure 

3.12. The benefits of apprenticeship training exceed the costs during the first year of 

apprenticeship. According to the model, there 

is a total net benefit of $152,148 that accrues 

to employers over a four-year apprenticeship. 

The largest components of the training costs 

are wages and benefits (64.5%) and journeyperson time (30.7%).

Figure 3.12

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship – 

Motor Vehicle Body Repairer (n=62)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 76,671.89 $ 81,803.95 $ 95,632.77 $ 108,128.33 $ 362,236.94

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 26,598.57 $ 31,819.95 $ 36,114.31 $ 41,052.51 $ 135,585.33 

Journeyperson Time $ 22,083.62 $ 19,339.69 $ 14,006.61 $ 8,978.30 $ 64,408.22 

Wastage $ 2,768.01 $1,533.87 $ 1,029.79 $ 604.18 $ 5,935.85 

Disbursements $ 723.38 $ 434.59 $ 434.65 $ 195.85 $ 1,788.47 

Administration $ 592.57 $ 592.57 $ 592.57 $ 592.57 $ 2,370.29 

Total $ 52,766.15 $ 53,720.66 $ 52,177.93 $ 51,423.41 $ 210,088.16

Net Benefit $ 23,905.73 $ 28,083.29 $ 43,454.83 $ 56,704.92 $ 152,148.77
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 23

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.13

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Plumber (n=75)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 63,391.24 $ 76,410.70 $ 91,907.81 $ 98,017.84 $ 329,727.60

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 30,770.86 $ 37,049.06 $ 43,823.35 $ 51,481.85 $ 163,125.13 

Journeyperson Time $ 27,105.34 $ 24,366.70 $ 9,754.17 $ 6,903.89 $ 68,130.10 

Wastage $ 1,475.79 $ 1,049.33 $ 727.25 $ 432.78 $ 3,685.14 

Disbursements $ 546.17 $ 476.78 $ 376.05 $ 353.67 $ 1,752.67 

Administration $ 246.90 $ 246.90 $ 246.90 $ 246.90 $ 987.59 

Total $ 60,145.05 $ 63,188.77 $ 54,927.73 $ 59,419.08 $ 237,680.63

Net Benefit $ 3,246.19 $ 13,221.93 $ 36,980.08 $ 38,598.76 $ 92,046.97

Plumber

The cost-benefit results for the Plumber trade 

are presented in Figure 3.13. The benefits 

of apprenticeship training exceed the costs 

during each year of the apprenticeship. 

According to the model, there is a total net 

benefit of $92,047 that accrues to employers 

over a four-year apprenticeship. The largest 

components of the training costs are wages 

and benefits (68.6%) and journeyperson time 

(28.7%). As with other trades, costs associated with wastage and cash disbursements are 

relatively small. 
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

24 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Refrigeration and Air Conditioning 

Mechanic

As shown in Figure 3.14, the revenue generated by an apprentice is greater than the total 

costs for each year of the apprenticeship. As 

a result, the model estimates an overall net 

benefit of $104,541 over the four-year period. 

As a proportion of total costs, wastage (3.2%), 

disbursements (2.5%), and administration 

(1.1%) are not significant relative to wages 

and benefits (69%) and journeyperson time 

(24%).

Figure 3.14

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Mechanic (n=118)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 65,018.57 $ 83,084.99 $ 91,520.04 $ 104,977.74 $ 344,601.34

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 30,048.87 $ 36,929.08 $ 44,994.05 $ 54,012.59 $ 165,984.60 

Journeyperson Time $ 24,079.34 $ 18,351.46 $ 9,603.29 $ 5,549.45 $ 57,583.55 

Wastage $ 2,858.10 $ 2,234.46 $ 1,531.62 $ 1,127.89 $ 7,752.08 

Disbursements $ 1,872.66 $ 1,536.91 $ 1,389.75 $ 1,288.34 $ 6,087.66 

Administration $ 663.03 $ 663.03 $ 663.03 $ 663.03 $ 2,652.13 

Total $ 59,522.01 $ 59,714.94 $ 58,181.75 $ 62,641.31 $ 240,060.01

Net Benefit $ 5,496.56 $ 23,370.04 $ 33,338.30 $ 42,336.43 $ 104,541.33
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 25

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Sheet Metal Worker

Similar to the Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Mechanic trade, the revenue generated by 

an apprentice is greater than the total costs 

for each year of the apprenticeship, shown in 

Figure 3.15. As a result, the model estimates 

an overall net benefit of $63,862 over the 

four-year period. As a proportion of total 

costs, wastage (3.2%), disbursements (1.2%), 

and administration (0.4%) are not significant 

relative to wages and benefits (62.7%) and 

journeyperson time (32.4%).

Figure 3.15

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Sheet Metal Worker (n=51)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 65,646.10 $ 78,586.57 $ 81,661.96 $ 96,127.29 $ 322,021.91

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 28,887.35 $ 40,696.42 $ 42,659.43 $ 49,667.01 $ 161,910.22 

Journeyperson Time $ 30,135.36 $ 24,248.65 $ 18,189.27 $ 11,014.72 $ 83,587.99 

Wastage $ 3,105.94 $ 2,152.04 $ 1,656.87 $ 1,422.13 $ 8,336.98 

Disbursements $ 1,051.10 $ 819.99 $ 677.52 $ 620.53 $ 3,169.13 

Administration $ 288.84 $ 288.84 $ 288.84 $ 288.84 $ 1,155.36 

Total $ 63,468.59 $ 68,205.93 $ 63,471.93 $ 63,013.23 $ 258,159.67

Net Benefit $ 2,177.51 $ 10,380.63 $ 18,190.03 $ 33,114.06 $ 63,862.24
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

26 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.16

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Partsperson (n=15)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue1 $ 59,322.72 $ 83,870.05 $105,008.03 $113,075.33 $ 361,276.11

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 33,198.14 $ 38,903.72 $ 45,245.46 $ 50,875.21 $ 168,222.53 

Journeyperson Time $ 16,168.12 $ 13,685.20 $ 8,657.41 $ 5,069.05 $ 43,579.78 

Wastage $ - 

Disbursements $ 489.07 $ 438.51 $ 441.23 $ 61.66 $ 1,430.47 

Administration $ 522.46 $ 522.46 $ 522.46 $ 522.46 $ 2,089.82 

Total $ 50,377.79 $ 53,549.89 $ 54,866.54 $ 56,528.38 $ 215,322.60

Net Benefit $ 8,944.92 $ 30,320.16 $ 50,141.48 $ 56,546.95 $ 145,953.52

Partsperson

One caveat associated with the results for 

the Partsperson trade is that only fifteen 

survey responses were received, due to the 

difficulty in recruiting employers with Partsperson apprentices. As illustrated in Figure 

3.16, employers incur a net benefit of apprenticeship training during all four years of the 

apprenticeship. In total, the model estimates 

an overall net benefit of $145,953.52 associated with the Partsperson trade. Similar to the 

Cooks trade, few employers could provide a 

charge-out rate for apprentices in this trade. 

A mark-up rate of 100% was utilized to compute the revenue for this trade group. Due 

to the small sample size, results for this trade 

should be interpreted with caution. 
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 27

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

3.2 Summary of Cost-Benefit 

Results by Trade

To summarize, the following observations 

regarding the cost-benefit results can be 

made:

•	 For the 14 out of 16 trades, the total benefits of apprenticeship training exceed the 

total costs over the apprenticeship period;

•	 The cost in terms of journeyperson time to 

supervise the apprentice declines during the 

apprenticeship;

•	 Wastage, disbursements and administration 

are relatively small components of the total 

costs of apprenticeship training; and

•	 The revenue potential of an apprentice 

increases through each year of his/her 

apprenticeship.

Figure 3.17 presents a summary of the costbenefit results by each of the 16 trade areas. 

The figures presented represent the total costs 

and benefits to employers over the entire 

period of 4 years of apprenticeship training. 

Overall, all trades show a net benefit per 

apprentice over the apprenticeship period, 

except for Electrical Power Line & Cable 

Worker and Hairstylist trades.

Overall, the most significant cost components for employers who train apprentices are 

wages and benefits and journeyperson time. 

The lowest costs of apprenticeship training 

occur in the Hairstylist trade at $77,096, which 

is well below the average total training costs 

of $220,242. Trades where employers incur 

relatively high training costs include Construction Millwright & Industrial Mechanic 

($254,287), Sheet Metal Worker ($258,160), 

and Heavy-Duty Equipment Mechanic 

($252,371). This is due in part to the relatively high wages paid to apprentices in these 

trades.

The largest monetary net benefits accrue to 

employers who train apprentices as Automotive Service Technicians ($173,122), Boilermakers1

 ($226,807), Machinists ($178,955), and 

Heavy-Duty Equipment Mechanics ($245,264). 

In these trades, the revenue generated by an 

apprentice far exceeds the total training costs. 

It the case of Heavy-Duty Equipment Mechanics it would appear there are high training 

costs, but also high monetary benefits. 

A standardized measure that can be used to 

compare the cost-benefit results by trade is 

the benefit-cost ratio. For example, the average benefit-cost ratio for the 16 trades is 1.47, 

which indicates that for every $1 spent on 

training an apprentice, an employer receives 

a benefit, on average, of $1.47 or a net return 

of $ 0.47 per apprentice. Trades with the 

highest benefit-cost ratios include Heavyduty Equipment Mechanic (1.97), Boilermaker 

(1.92), Machinist (1.87), Motor Vehicle Body 

Repairer (1.72), and Automotive Service Technician (1.69). In other words, the return on 

apprenticeship training investment is relatively high in these trades. Conversely, trades 

with a low benefit-cost ratio include Hairstylists (0.55), Electrical Power Line and Cable 

1 Results need to be interpreted with caution due to 

small sample size. 
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

28 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGWorkers (0.95), Sheet Metal Worker (1.25)

Cook (1.32), Bricklayer (1.33), and Cabinetmaker (1.37). Nevertheless, the model estimates that employers in most of these trades 

receive a net return on their apprenticeship 

training investment by the third year of 

Figure 3.17

Total Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Trade

Trade Duration1 of Costs2 Benefits3 Net Benefit4 BenefitApprencticehip ($) ($) ($) Cost

(Years) Ratio5

Automotive Service Technician 4 250,016 423,138 173,122 1.69

Boilermaker 4 246,889 473,696 226,807 1.92

Bricklayer 4 237,687 316,853 79,166 1.33

Cabinetmaker 4 180,369 247,298 66,929 1.37

Construction Electrician 4 196,811 293,048 96,237 1.49

Construction Millwright and 4 254,287 403,272 148,985 1.59

Industrial Mechanic

Cook 4 125,344 164,868 39,524 1.32

Electrical Power Line and 4 336,770 319,759 (17,011) 0.95

Cable Worker

Hairstylist 2 77,096 42,620 (34,476) 0.55

Heavy Duty Equipment Mechanic 4 252,371 497,636 245,264 1.97

Machinist 4 204,921 383,877 178,955 1.87

Motor Vehicle Body Repairer 4 210,088 362,237 152,149 1.72

Plumber 4 237,681 329,728 92,047 1.39

Refrigeration and Air Conditioning 4 240,060 344,601 104,541 1.44

Mechanic

Sheet Metal Worker 4 258,160 322,022 63,862 1.25

Partsperson 4 215,323 361,276 145,954 1.68

Average 4 220,242 330,371 110,128 1.47

1 Apprenticeship Survey (Q25)

2 Represents the total per apprentice costs incurred over the apprenticeship period.

3 Measured as the revenue generated by an apprentice.

4 Benefits – Costs

5 Benefits / Costs

apprenticeship, if not earlier. The results have 

not been discounted to take into account 

the time profile of the costs and benefits of 

apprenticeship training 
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 29

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

3.3 Summary of Trends 

Since 2006

The results from the 2006 pilot study were 

compared to those from the current study. As 

Figure 3.18 illustrates, charge-out revenues 

have increased by a substantially greater magnitude than wages/benefits or the cost to have 

journeypersons train apprentices. The average charge-out rates were highest for Heavy 

Duty Equipment Technician (64%), Machinist 

(35%), and Construction Millwright and Industrial Mechanic (35%). Comparatively, wages 

and benefits increased since 2006. The greatest increases were 17% for Motor Vehicle 

Body Repairer and Bricklayer. Overall the 

increases in wages were lower than the average increases in charge-out rates. Changes in 

the cost associated with time required for a 

journeyperson to train an apprentice varied 

Figure 3.18

Changes in Charge-out Revenue and Key Apprenticeship Training Costs

2008 compared to 2006

Trade Charge-out Wages and Journeyperson

Rate Benefits Time

Automotive Service Technician +29% +10% +20%

Motor Vehicle Body Repairer +23% +17% +8%

Cook -1% +3% +64%

Refrigeration & Air +8% +4% -17%

Conditioning Mechanic

Heavy-Duty Equipment +64% +11% +94%

Technician

Construction Millwright & +35% +6% -4%

Industrial Mechanic

Electrician (construction) +15% -3% -20%

Bricklayer +17% +17% +1%

Machinist +35% +14% +6%

Sheet Metal Worker +7% +13% -13%

Average (unweighted) +23% +9% +14%

by trade. If the training took place when the 

journeyperson’s time was chargeable to a customer, or used to earn revenue, then the cost 

was less than if the journeyperson was taken 

out of productive work. For trades such as 

Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Mechanic, 

the cost in 2008 was lower compared to 2006 

because employers reported that a higher 

percentage of the time spent by the journeyperson with the apprentice was chargeable to 

a customer.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

30 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGFigure 3.

Changes in Charge-out Revenue and Key Apprenticeship Training Costs

Employers Responding in 2008 and 2006

Year of Apprenticeship Charge-out Wages Journeyperson

Rate Time

First 19% 7% -13%

Second 16% 9% -5%

Third 14% 11% 3%

Fourth 15% 16% 3%

One limitation of the analysis presented in 

Figure 3.19 is that the sample of employers 

differed from 2006 to 2008. As a result, it is 

possible that changes in average charge-out 

rates and key costs may be due to differences 

in the employer sample. One hundred and six 

employers that completed the pilot survey in 

2006 were contacted again in 2008 and asked 

to update the information that they provided 

in 2006. This data can be used to compare 

longitudinal changes in charge-out rates in 

the same sample of employers. A comparison 

of the responses provided by 106 employers in 2006 and 2008 indicates that wages 

have increased, but not as dramatically as the 

charge-out rates. With respect to opportunity 

costs, use of journeypersons’ time supervising 

apprentices has remained fairly consistent 

with slightly less supervisory time for first and 

second year apprentices.

The results from the 2006 pilot study, “Appren

ticeship Building a Skilled Workforce for a 

Strong Bottom Line, Return on Apprenticeship 

Training Investment for Employers, A Study 

of 15 Trades, June 2006,” were compared to 

the current study. Comparing the results of 

the two studies suggests that while the cost 

to hire, train and supervise an apprentice 

has increased over the past two years, the 

ability of employers to generate revenues 

from apprentices increased at a higher rate 

than the costs. This analysis was identified 

through the comparison of overall costs/

benefits among the 10 trades studied in 2006 

and 2008. It was also confirmed through the 

detailed examination of employer costs/benefits for those employers who provided data in 

both 2006 and 2008. Examining the cost/benefit data for the employers who participated in 

both studies suggests that, while apprenticeship wage costs increased for these employers, 

on average, apprenticeship-related revenues 

such as charge-out revenues increased at a 

greater rate than did costs associated with 

apprentices.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 31

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Summarized in Figure 3.20 are the changes 

in key cost/revenue components for the ten 

trades examined in both 2006 and 2008. As 

highlighted in the table, it can be seen that:

•	 charge-out revenues increased by 23% 

between 2006 and 2008 for the ten comparable trades;

•	 with the exception of “other costs,” most 

cost elements increased between 5% and 

7%;

•	 the net-benefit cost ratio for the ten trades 

increased from 1.37 in 2006 to 1.57 in 2008 

– an increase of 15%.2

2 The 1.57 figure refers to the 10 trades included in 

the Phase I and Phase II studies. It does not include the 6 

new trades added for Phase II . The $1.47 figure is based 

on the data from all 16 trades. 

Figure 3.20

Summary of Changes in Apprenticeship Costs/Revenues

Selected Categories

Average for Ten Trades1 Studied in 2006 & 2008

Category 2006 2008 % Change

Average Charge-Out Revenue2 $285,710 $351,155 +23%

Apprentice Wages/Benefits $144,918 $154,399 +7%

Use of Journeyperson Time $51,088 $53,385 +5%

Other Costs $12,940 $15,190 +17%

Total Costs $208,946 $222,975 +7%

Benefit/Cost Ratio 1.37 1.57 +15%

1 Trades include AST, Bricklayer, Construction Electrician, Millwright, Cook, Heavy Duty Equipment Technician, 

Machinist, Motor Vehicle Body Repair, Refrigeration and A/C Mechanic and Sheet Metal Worker.

2 Other costs include wastage, disbursements and administration.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

32 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Construction Electrician

Three employers attended the roundtable 

for Construction Electrician. Two were small 

employers with 8 journeypersons and 8 

apprentices in each firm. There was also one 

large employer with 40 journeypersons and 40 

apprentices. 

Participants were asked to comment on the 

costs outlined in the study. The participants 

felt that the Alberta wage rates were higher 

than the national average.3

 As the journeyperson rate in Alberta is higher than the 

national average, the apprentice wage rates 

are also higher. In Alberta, apprentice wages 

are set as a percentage of those for journeypersons. The rates are 60% for the first year, 

70% for the second year, 80% for the third 

year, and 90% for the fourth year. Participants 

did agree that the stepped increase in apprentice wage rates utilized in the model seemed 

reasonable. Employers in general agreed that 

most other costs, including the use of journeyperson time, wastage, and administrative 

costs were realistic and in-line with their own 

costs.

Employers talked in detail about charge out 

rates. Originally, all three employers agreed 

that the charge-out rate for construction 

electricians at approximately $65 per hour was 

reasonable and reflected their own charge 

out rates. However, at the end of the session, when confirming the net benefit/costs, 

2 of the three employers noted that while 

they had a charge out rate of approximately 

3 The national average was around $33 to $35 for a 

journeyperson. 

3.4 Validation Roundtable 

Findings

A series of roundtable discussions were held 

with employers representing 3 trade areas: 

Automotive Service Technician, Construction 

Electrician, and Cabinetmaker. The purpose of 

these roundtables was to identify any possible omissions in the cost-benefit calculations 

and to determine if the cost-benefit results 

were consistent with employers’ experience 

and knowledge of apprenticeship training. 

Detailed in the following sections is the feedback received during each of the roundtable 

sessions.

These comments only represent the opinions 

of those who participated in the validation 

roundtables and do not represent the opinions of CAF-FCA or any of its stakeholders. 
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 33

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

$65 per hour for journeypersons, the pricing 

model that they used relied on a “blended 

labour cost” that incorporated a different 

hourly rate than the standard charge out 

rate. For these two employers, they felt that 

the “real” rate included, wages, plus benefits, overhead, materials, and “10% profit.” 

This rate did not equate to the $65 per hour 

for their apprentices or journeypersons. Of 

course, this would have ramifications for the 

actual charge out rate, and would suggest for 

these 2 employers that the charge-out rate 

was likely closer $40 to $45 per hour for an 

apprentice, averaged across all years, rather 

than the stepped rates rising from $38.80 in1st 

year to $53.11 in 4th year. The third employer 

noted that he charged his apprentices out at 

the journeyperson rate of $65 per hour and 

said that the net benefit from an apprentice 

as cited in the study was correct. The other 

two employers felt that the net benefit of an 

apprentice was lower than what was reported 

due to the practice of providing a “blended 

labour rate” for jobs in which they submitted 

competitive bids. The main issue they had was 

if they were doing small jobs, they would use 

the $65/hr “standard” Alberta charge out rate 

for construction electricians and charge the 

same rate whether they used a journeyperson 

or apprentice, but for larger jobs, where they 

had to compete for work, they used a lower 

rate. Some follow-up analysis indicated that 

even if the current model used these employers’ average rate of $40 per hour, the result is 

not much different. 

Automotive Service Technician

Two employers participated in the Automotive Service Technician session. They 

employed one apprentice each. The employers consulted indicated that charge out rates 

for Automotive Service Technician apprentices 

are similar to those of journeypersons because 

the employers tend to use industry standard 

rates. The only difference between a journeyperson and an apprentice would be in the 

type of work that the employer would have 

them do. For instance, the apprentice would 

tend to do maintenance work, and the journeyperson would be more likely to take on 

more complex tasks.

One employer indicated that in his business 

about 55% of the time he paid staff for what 

was actually billed to customers. This is much 

lower than the industry average in the current 

report. He said there would be a big difference between the larger businesses which 

are now sometimes advertising that they will 

maintain new cars only, which the employer 

described as being more profitable than 

repair work for older vehicles.

One employer indicated that even though he 

felt the study had captured all the important 

costs of apprenticeship, that it was extremely 

difficult to estimate costs such as lost journeyperson time.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

34 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGCabinetmake

Four employer representatives attended 

the roundtable for Cabinetmaker trade in 

Calgary, Alberta. Two employers had a residential sector focus, while one employer 

with two representatives indicated that they 

focused primarily on commercial work. The 

size of the firms ranged from 25 to more 

than 100 employees. Two of the firms had 

only 1 apprentice, while one firm employed 5 

apprentices.

Employers, in general, agreed with the costs 

presented in the presentation, although it 

was felt that the charge-out rates had likely 

declined somewhat between the time of the 

study, early to mid-2008, to the time of the 

validation session in March 2009. Most participants acknowledged that the revenues/costs 

would be valid for the 2008 time period.

There was some discussion as to the chargeable hours of apprentices in this trade, as one 

employer felt that 32 hours of chargeable 

time for a 1st year apprentice was to high. 

He noted that 25 hours would be more realistic. The two other employers were comfortable with the estimate of chargeable hours 

presented. There was also discussion around 

wastage, as one employer felt that wastage 

costs were too low. Other validation session 

participants noted that they felt that wastage 

costs were reasonable.

One employer noted that their disbursements 

to apprentices were higher than what was 

presented. The amount presented was $441 

per apprentice in the first year. The employer 

noted that they would pay the full cost of 

technical training, which was approximately 

$900 per year, if the apprentice had marks of 

“A” or better. The employer noted that he 

typically paid between $500 to $600 “on average” for apprentices. Administration costs 

were viewed as negligible.

Employers generally agreed that there was a 

positive net return associated with the training of apprentices. 

Employers at the Cabinetmakers session provided a range of other comments with respect 

to apprenticeship. Among these included:

•	 preference to use apprentices rather than 

the Temporary Foreign Worker (TFW) to fill 

labour needs. Two of the three employers 

who had made use of the TFW program 

noted that foreign workers, in their opinion, did not have equivalent skill sets of 

Canadian workers, and, in most cases, if 

they could, they would have preferred to 

hire/train apprentices;

•	 difficult to find apprentices for non-compulsory trade area. Because the cabinetmaker trade is not a compulsory trade, 

many workers are not certified. Employers 

note that it is difficult to convince individuals to sign up for a four year apprenticeship program when individuals can work in 

the sector and obtain journeyperson wage 

rates without a certificate of qualification;

•	 economic downturn has contributed to 

better quality apprenticeship candidates. 

While employers were concerned about 

the economic impact of the recent downturn, participants noted the improvement 

in the quality of individuals interested in 

apprenticeship in their region/province. 

Employers said that their current apprentice 

candidates were better skilled and “more 

productive” when compared to apprentices 

hired 2-3 years ago. 
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 35

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

3.5 Cost-Benefit Results by 

Region 

This section of the report summarizes the 

regional results for the Automotive Service 

Technician, Refrigeration & Air Conditioning 

Mechanic and Construction Electrician trades. 

These trades had more than 100 employers fill 

in the survey so more detailed analysis could 

be performed in these cases. The regions used 

were divided into four main areas: 

•	 Western Canada;

•	 Ontario;

•	 Quebec; and 

•	 Atlantic Canada. 

Overall all regions showed a return. Quebec, 

in general, showed higher returns than the 

rest of the regions. Although Quebec employers generally reported charge-out rates lower 

than that of employers in Western Canada, 

Quebec employers typically had lower cost 

structures, in that they paid their apprentices 

less, and reported less use of journeyperson 

time to supervise apprentices. In contrast, 

employers in Ontario generally experienced 

net returns that were below the national 

average. Employers in Quebec may experience higher returns due to the way their 

educational system is structured. Apprentices 

in Quebec typically complete their technical 

training prior to registering with an employer 

for an apprenticeship. In this context, there 

may be less journeyperson time required and 

lower costs associated with disbursements 

and/or program administration.

The detailed regional cost-benefit results for 

the three selected trade areas are included in 

Appendix D.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

36 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.21

Average1 Charge-Out Revenue & Average Key Cost Elements

1 Average across four years of apprenticeship

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Average Charge-out Revenue

Wages & benefits Journeyperson Time Others

Average Charge-Out Revenue/

Key Cost Elements

($000/yr)

West

Average Charge-out Revenue _______________$110,869

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$41,407

Journeyperson Time ________________________$24,814

Others ______________________________________$4,549

Ontario

Average Charge-out Revenue _______________$104,512

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$33,215

Journeyperson Time _________________________$27,294

Others ______________________________________$4,402

Quebec

Average Charge-out Revenue _______________$101,274

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$29,536

Journeyperson Time _________________________$20,618

Others ______________________________________$3,023

Atlantic

Average Charge-out Revenue N/A

Wages & Benefits N/A

Journeyperson Time N/A

Others N/A

Overall

Average Charge-out Revenue _______________$105,785

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$34,230

Journeyperson Time _________________________$23,639

Others ______________________________________$4,634

Automotive Service Technician

For the automotive service technician, there 

were 159 employers in the sample from 

across Canada. More specifically there were 

66 employers in Western Canada, 43 employers in Ontario, 48 in Quebec and 5 employers 

in Atlantic Canada. Due to the insufficient 

number of employers in Atlantic Canada, data 

for this region is not presented for this particular trade.

Figure 3.21 depicts the average charge-out 

revenue per apprentice and the average key 
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 37

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.22

Net Return by Region–AST

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

1.57 1.61

1.90

1.69

West Ontario Quebec Overall

costs including wages and benefits, journeyperson time to supervise the apprentice, wastage, disbursements, and administration costs.

As detailed in the previous Figure 3.21, while 

employers in Western Canada reported higher 

charge-out revenues for apprentices relative 

to other regions in Canada, they also reported 

higher costs associated with journeyperson 

time required to supervise apprentices. While 

employers in Quebec had the lowest charge 

out revenue, the costs of training an apprentice were much lower than in Western Canada 

/Ontario. 

Figure 3.22 represents the benefit-cost ratio/

net return by the three regions. As detailed in 

the chart, employers in all regions witnessed 

positive net returns. 

To summarize, even though employers in 

Western Canada have higher charge-out revenue, on average, when compared with the 

rest of regions, they have higher key costs as 

well. The benefit-cost ratio by region depicted 

in Figure 3.22 indicates that employers in 

Quebec have the highest net return since they 

have lower key costs compared with those in 

the rest of Canada.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

38 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.23

Average Charge-Out Revenue & Average Key Cost Elements

0 20 40 60 80 100

Average Charge-out Revenue

Wages & benefits Journeyperson Time Others

Average Charge-Out Revenue/

Key Cost Elements

($000/yr)

West

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$98,895

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$43,804

Journeyperson Time ________________________$14,560

Others ______________________________________$4,206

Ontario

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$78,775

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$40,752

Journeyperson Time _________________________$18,433

Others ______________________________________$3,060

Quebec

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$85,439

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$44,317

Journeyperson Time __________________________$6,794

Others _______________________________________ $113

Atlantic

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$68,508

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$32,096

Journeyperson Time _________________________$12,722

Others ______________________________________$4,235

Overall

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$86,150

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$41,496

Journeyperson Time _________________________$14,396

Others ______________________________________$4,123

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning 

Mechanic

In total, there were 118 employers grouped 

in the trade area of Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic. There were 45 employers 

in Western Canada, 43 employers in Ontario, 

13 employers in Quebec, and 17 employers in 

Atlantic Canada. 

The average charge-out revenue and the average key costs associated with the wages and 
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 39

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.24

Net Return by Region–Refrigeration & A/C 

Mechanic

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

1.58

1.27

1.67

1.40 1.44

West Ontario Quebec Atlantic Overall

benefits, journeyperson time and other costs, 

including wastage, disbursements and administration costs are shown in Figure 3.23. 

Again, employers in Western Canada have 

the highest charge-out revenue, on average, 

compared to other regions in Canada and 

the national average, but they are also likely 

to have higher costs. Employers in Atlantic 

Canada have the lowest charge-out revenue, 

on average, and the lowest average key costs.

The benefit-cost ratios by the four regions are 

represented in Figure 3.24. Similar with the 

trends in the Automotive Service Technician 

analysis, employers in Quebec have the highest net return, (1.67). Employers in Ontario 

have lowest net return, (1.27).

As illustrated in Figure 3.24, there was little 

difference in the net return for Refrigeration 

and Air Conditioning Mechanic apprentices 

on the basis of regions. For example, the net 

return for apprentices in Ontario was only 

13% below the national average, while the 

net return for Quebec employers was less 

than 14% above the national average. This 

suggests that there is relative stability in the 

net return for apprentices in this trade across 

Canada.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

40 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.25

Average Charge-Out Revenue & Average Key Cost Elements

0 20 40 60 80 100

Average Charge-out Revenue

Wages & benefits Journeyperson Time Others

Average Charge-Out Revenue/

Key Cost Elements

($000/yr)

West

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$73,466

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$41,681

Journeyperson Time _________________________$5,793

Others ______________________________________$2,080

Ontario

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$73,466

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$37,826

Journeyperson Time __________________________$9,509

Others ______________________________________$2,031

Quebec

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$72,127

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$44,764

Journeyperson Time _________________________$10,123

Others _______________________________________ $103

Atlantic

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$91,910

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$30,801

Journeyperson Time __________________________$6,021

Others ______________________________________$3,730

Overall

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$62,397

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$39,216

Journeyperson Time __________________________$7,514

Others ______________________________________$2,473

Construction Electrician

Regarding the Construction Electrician trade, 

there were 67 employers who responded in 

Western Canada, 50 employers in Ontario, 

20 employers in Quebec and 29 employers in 

Atlantic Canada. Overall, the regional analysis 

was based on the responses provided by 166 

employers. 

Figure 3.25 shows the average charge-out 

revenue and the average key costs associated 

with the wages and benefits, journeyperson 

time and other costs, including wastage, 
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 41

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.26

Net Return by Region–Construction 

Electrician

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

1.48 1.46

1.67

1.54 1.49

West Ontario Quebec Atlantic Overall

disbursements and administration costs. 

Employers in Quebec have the highest average charge-out revenue and the highest key 

costs associated with journeyperson time and 

disbursements, but had the lowest administration cost. Employers in Atlantic Canada 

have the lowest average charge-out revenue 

and lowest journeyperson time. The rates are 

lower than the national average.

It should be noted that some caution should 

be exercised in the interpretation of data for 

Quebec, as the sample contained responses 

for only a relatively small number of employers. The number of employers was twenty.

The regional net benefit-cost ratios/net 

returns are provided in Figure 3.26. Quebec 

employers have the highest net return of 1.67. 

Western Canada has the lowest net return. 

Similar to the analysis of the Refrigeration and 

Air Conditioning Mechanic trade, analysis of 

the data suggests that the net returns do not 

vary substantially across regions. The range in 

net returns ranges from -11.8% in Ontario to 

+16% among employers in Quebec.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

42 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.27

% Difference from National Average (Regional Basis)

Automotive Service Technician Refrigeration & A/C Mechanic Construction Electrician

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

West Ontario Quebec Atlantic

% Difference from National Average

-7.1

9.7

-0.6

-4.7

-11.8

-2

12.4

16

12.1

-2.8

3.4

Summary of Net Returns by Region

The difference from the national average in 

each region is outlined in Figure 3.27.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 43

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

3.6 Cost-Benefit Results by 

Employer Size

Automotive Service Technician, Refrigeration 

& Air Conditioning Mechanic, and Construction Electrician were selected to perform a 

cost-benefit analysis by employer size due 

to the high number of survey completions 

received in these trades. 

The employer sizes were defined using the following classifications:

•	 small businesses have less than 10 

employees;

•	 medium-sized businesses have 10 – 19 

employees; and 

•	 large businesses have 20 or more employees. 

Overall all businesses, no matter what their 

size, receive a return on their investment. 

Generally larger businesses experience higher 

returns than smaller businesses. An exception 

was the Construction Electrician trade where 

the medium sized businesses tended to receive 

a higher return. 

The cost-benefit results for these three trade 

areas by employer size are included in 

Appendix E.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

44 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.28

Average Charge-Out Revenue & Key Cost Elements

0 25 50 75 100 125

Average Charge-out Revenue

Wages & benefits Journeyperson Time Others

Average Charge-Out Revenue/

Key Cost Elements

($000/yr)

Less than 10 employees

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$87,009

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$31,866

Journeyperson Time ________________________$19,932

Others ______________________________________$3,899

10–19 employees

Average Charge-out Revenue _______________$118,995

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$40,055

Journeyperson Time _________________________$22,150

Others ______________________________________$5,514

20 or more employees

Average Charge-out Revenue _______________$124,412

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$36,007

Journeyperson Time _________________________$25,822

Others ______________________________________$2,459

Overall

Average Charge-out Revenue _______________$105,785

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$34,230

Journeyperson Time _________________________$23,639

Others ______________________________________$4,634

Automotive Service Technician

For the Automotive Service Technician trade 

there were 159 employers in total. There were 

81 small businesses, 32 medium-sized businesses, and 46 large businesses. 

The average charge-out revenue and the average key costs associated with the wages and 

benefits, journeyperson time and other costs, 

including wastage, disbursements and administration costs are shown in Figure 3.28. Figure 

3.28 indicates that large businesses have the 

highest charge-out revenue and have relatively average key costs. Small businesses have 

relatively lower average charge-out revenue.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 45

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.29

Net Return by Employer Size–AST

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

1.56

1.76

1.94

1.69

<10 10–19 20+ Overall

Figure 3.29 shows the benefit-cost ratio/net 

return by different employer sizes.

Large businesses have the highest net return 

and small businesses have lowest net return 

when analyzing returns on the basis of 

employer size. This finding was corroborated 

by the validation session where employers 

reported that larger dealerships had a higher 

profit rate on service work than smaller, 

independent automotive service employers.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

46 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGRefrigeration & Air Conditionin

Mechanic

For the Refrigeration & Air Conditioning 

Mechanic trade, there were 62 small businesses, 24 medium-sized businesses, and 32 

large businesses. The total was 118 employers.

Figure 3.30 shows the average charge-out 

revenue and the average key costs associated 

with the wages and benefits, journeyperson 

time and other costs, including wastage, 

disbursements and administration costs. Large 

businesses have higher average charge-out 

revenue. Small businesses are likely to have 

the lowest average charge-out revenue. It 

is interesting to note that smaller establishments incur greater costs in terms of journeyperson time than do those establishments that 

have 10 or more employees.

Figure 3.30

Average Charge-Out Revenue & Key Cost Elements

0 25 50 75 100 125

Average Charge-out Revenue

Wages & benefits Journeyperson Time Others

Average Charge-Out Revenue/Key Cost Elements 

($000/yr)

Less than 10 employees

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$74,134

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$38,861

Journeyperson Time ________________________$17,332

Others ______________________________________$3,773

10–19 employees

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$95,146

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$43,194

Journeyperson Time _________________________$14,436

Others ______________________________________$2,608

20 or more employees

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$97,476

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$43,581

Journeyperson Time __________________________$9,686

Others ______________________________________$3,530

Overall

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$86,150

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$41,496

Journeyperson Time _________________________$14,396

Others ______________________________________$4,123
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 47

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.31

Net Return by Employer Size–Refrigeration 

& A/C Mechanic

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

1.24

1.58

1.44

1.72

<10 10–19 20+ Overall

The benefit-cost ratio/net return by different company sizes are represented in Figure 

3.31. In contrast to the Automotive Service 

Technician trade, it appears that there is a 

greater variance in the net return on the basis 

of employer size for the Refrigeration and 

Air Conditioning Mechanic trade. Smaller 

employer returns were 16% below the trade 

average, and employers who employed 20 or 

more employees had a net return that was 

19% above the trade average.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

48 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.32

Average Charge-Out Revenue & Key Cost Elements

0 25 50 75 100 125

Average Charge-out Revenue

Wages & benefits Journeyperson Time Others

Average Charge-Out Revenue/

Key Cost Elements

($000/yr)

Less than 10 employees

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$68,408

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$36,628

Journeyperson Time _________________________$7,836

Others ______________________________________$2,089

10–19 employees

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$79,775

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$39,443

Journeyperson Time __________________________$4,383

Others _______________________________________ $922

20 or more employees

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$76,027

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$43,907

Journeyperson Time __________________________$8,884

Others ______________________________________$4,621

Overall

Average Charge-out Revenue ________________$72,400

Wages & Benefits ___________________________$39,354

Journeyperson Time __________________________$7,576

Others ______________________________________$2,827

Construction Electrician

There were 166 employers in total for the 

Construction Electrician trade. There were 87 

small employers, 32 medium-sized employers, 

and 47 large employers. 

Figure 3.32 shows the average charge-out 

revenue and the average key costs associated 

with the wages and benefits, journeyperson 

time and other costs, including wastage, 

disbursements and administration costs. In 

contrast to the trade areas of Automotive Service Technician and Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic, medium-sized employers 

are likely to have the highest average chargeout revenue. Large businesses have the highest average key costs associated with the use 

of journeyperson time, disbursements, and 

administration.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 49

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.33

Net Return by Employer Size–Construction

Electrician

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

1.47

1.78

1.32

1.46

<10 10–19 20+ Overall

Figure 3.33 indicates the benefit-cost ratio/net 

return by different company sizes.

As highlighted in Figure 3.33, there is negative 

relationship between the net returns and size 

of employer. Again, some of the information 

obtained from the validation session could 

provide context to this result. In the validation session, it was pointed out that for small 

jobs or projects, employers would typically use 

a “charge-out” rate when quoting the cost 

for small projects. However, large employers 

noted that when bidding on large projects, 

they utilized a “blended labour rate” that 

included an average rate for apprentices and 

journeypersons. The lower return for the large 

employers in this trade area could reflect the 

heightened competition when bidding on 

large projects, and, hence, the lower chargeout revenues reported for this employer 

group.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

50 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.34

% Difference from National Average (Basis of Employer size)

Automotive Service Technician Refrigeration & A/C Mechanic Construction Electrician

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

Less than 10 employees 10–19 employees 20 or more employees

% Difference from National Average

-7.9

1

3.6

-13.9

10

22.5

19.6

14.1

-9

3.6.4 Summary of Net Return 

by Employer Size

Depicted in Figure 3.34 are the net returns by 

size of employer. As shown in the chart, for 

two of three trades, the net returns increase 

on the basis of the size of establishment. 

Large establishments generally are able to 

obtain higher charge-out rates and, hence, 

witness greater returns than establishments 

that employed fewer than 20 employees. 

However, this trend was not universal across 

all trade groups, as larger establishments in 

the Construction Electrician trade witnessed 

lower net returns when compared to those 

establishments who had fewer than 20 

employees.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 51

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure 3.35

Analysis of Differences in Net Return on the Basis of Region and Size of Employer

Selected Trades

Characteristic AST Refrigeration & Construction Average–

% Difference from National A/C Electrician Three

Average Mechanic Trades

Region

Atlantic n/a1 -2.8% +30.4% -0.3%

Quebec +12.4% +16.0% +12.1% +13.5%

Ontario -4.7% -11.8% -2.0% -6.2%

West -7.1% +9.7% -0.6% +0.7%

Size of Employer

< 10 employees -7.9% -13.9% +1.0% -10.4%

10-19 employees +3.69% +10.0% +22.5% +12.0%

20+ employees +14.1% +19.6% -9.0% +8.2%

1 Insufficient Sample Size

The net returns on apprenticeship have more 

variation when examined on the basis of size 

of employer rather than on the basis of the 

location of the employer.

Highlighted in Figure 3.35 is a summary of the 

difference in net benefits (% difference from 

the national average) for the three trades 

which analysis could be completed on the 

basis of region and size of employer (number 

of employees).
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

52 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORG Part 4

Survey Results

This section summarizes employers’ responses 

related to the qualitative benefits of apprenticeship training, the perceived productive 

value of an apprentice, and the poaching risk. 

This section also details the perceptions of 

employers who do not employ apprentices.1

Employers answered these questions based on 

their experiences. 

1 The sample sizes reported in this section refer to the 

valid n meaning only those employers who provided a 

response have been included in the analysis. 

4.1 Qualitative Benefits of 

Apprenticeship Training

The survey included a series of questions 

designed to measure the importance of 

several qualitative benefits of apprenticeship 

training. These include:

•	 The benefit of apprenticeship training to 

journeypersons; and

•	 The advantages of employing a “homegrown” journeyperson. A “homegrown” 

journeyperson refers to an employee 

trained as an apprentice who remains working at the employer’s company after their 

apprenticeship training is over.

Figure 4.1

Comparison of Employer Opinion

2006 vs. 2008

Trends 2006 2008 Conclusion

Benefits of Apprenticeship 67.6% 81.3% Employers continue to strongly

Training to Journeypersons believe that their journeypersons

benefit from training apprentices

Advantages of Employing a 65.3% 61.3% Persistent perception among

“homegrown” Journeyperson employers that “homegrown”

More productive journeypersons are more 

productive

Most significant benefit Better fit with the Better fit with the Agreement among employers

organization (rating organization (rating about the most significant benefit

8.5 out of 10) 8.5 out of 10) of apprenticeship training

Poaching Average of 5.1 on 1⁄2 (approx) 1 to 5 Some concern over poaching

a scale from 1 (not 1⁄2 (approx) 6 to 10

at all serious) to 10

(very serious)
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 53

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Benefit of Apprenticeship Training to 

Journeypersons

Employers were asked whether there was a 

benefit to their journeypersons when providing training to apprentices. The majority of 

employers (81.3%) indicated that their journeypersons derive a benefit from training an 

apprentice.2

 This is a significant increase from 

the 67.6% of employers in the 2006 study who 

voiced a similar opinion.

2 Apprenticeship Survey (Q10, n=752)

Advantages of Employing a “Homegrown” Journeyperson

In the study, “Apprenticeship Building a 

Skilled Workforce for a Strong Bottom Line, 

Return on Apprenticeship Training Investment 

for Employers, A Study of 15 Trades, June 

2006,” employers reported several benefits 

to training their own journeypersons. The 

results from the current study confirm that 

employers value training their workers “inhouse.” Employers’ perceptions of the benefits of apprenticeship did not vary significantly 

between 2006 and 2008. Interestingly, “better 

health and safety performance” was accorded 

greater importance in 2008 than in 2006. 

Overall, employers rated “better fit with the 

organization” as the most significant benefit of employing a journeyperson who was 

trained as an apprentice. Other benefits were 

noted:

•	 better fit with the organization;

•	 avoids risk of skill shortages;

•	 greater overall productivity;

•	 potential for career advancement in the 

company;

•	 better relations with customers;

•	 fewer mistakes; and

•	 better health and safety performance.

Figure 4.2

Benefits of Employing a “Homegrown” 

Journeyperson

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q11, n=589-602)

02468 10

No benefit Significant benefit

Better fit with the organization 8.3

Avoids risk of skill shortages 8.1

Potential for career advancement in company 8.0

Better health and safety performance 8.0

Greater overall productivity 7.9

Better relations with customers 7.8

Fewer mistakes 7.7
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

54 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGFigure 4.3 presents the results related t

employers’ assessments of the productivity 

of a “homegrown” journeyperson relative 

to an externally trained journeyperson. Over 

sixty percent (61.3%) of surveyed employers consider a journeyperson they trained as 

an apprentice to be more productive relative to an external journeyperson, with only 

3.5% indicating that “homegrown” journeypersons are less productive. Slightly more 

than thirty-five per cent of employers (35.2%) 

indicated that there is no difference in productivity between a “homegrown” and an 

external journeyperson. Overall, employers 

estimated, based on their experience, that a 

“homegrown” journeyperson is 29.0% more 

productive, on average, when compared to an 

externally trained journeyperson.

4.2 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 

Figure 4.4, more than one-quarter (30.2%) 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. More than one-third 

(32.7%) of employers perceive a net benefit to 

Figure 4.3

Perceived Productivity of a “Homegrown” 

Journeyperson Relative to an Externally 

Trained Journeyperson

0 25 50 75 100

More Productive 61.3%

No Difference 35.2%

Less Productive 3.5%

Figure 4.4

Estimated Time for Benefit of Apprenticeship Training to Exceed Costs 

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q24, n=709)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Percent of Employers

Year of Apprenticeship

Before End of 1st year 14.8%

End of 1st Year 17.9%

End of 2nd Year 30.2%

End of 3rd Year 23.6%

End of 4th Year or Later 13.5%
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 55

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

apprenticeship training by the end of the first 

year or earlier. The data supports this perception. In many trades there is a return in the 

first year.

4.3 Poaching Risk

The survey included a section related to 

poaching risk. Poaching refers to the situation where competitors hire recently qualified journeypersons that an employer trained 

as apprentices. This can occur if there are 

not enough skilled trades workers available 

to meet demand. Poaching can undermine 

employers’ desire to train apprentices. For 

the purposes of this study, employers were 

asked to rate the seriousness of the poaching 

risk from competitors and other industries. It 

should be kept in mind that for some employers it may be hard to estimate the extent to 

which poaching occurs. 

As shown in Figure 4.5, it appears that 

employers are evenly split in terms of whether 

they view the poaching risk from other 

employers to be a very serious issue. Fiftythree per cent of employers gave poaching a 

“not very serious” risk value of 1 to 5. Fortyseven per cent gave the 6 to 10 rating identifying the risk as “serious.” These results indicate 

that there is some concern with respect to 

poaching.

As highlighted in Figure 4.6, while there are 

some differences in employers’ assessments of 

the poaching risk on the basis of region, the 

issue of poaching did not differ much on the 

basis of employer size.3

3 Based on number of employees. 

Figure 4.5

Employers’ Perceived Seriousness of 

Poaching Risk

Source : Enquête sur l’apprentissage (Q27, n = 850)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Not a Serious Risk (0–5) 53%

Serious Risk (6–10) 47%

Figure 4.6

Employers’ Perceived Seriousness of 

Poaching Risk

(Regional Basis & Basis of Employer Size)

Source: Apprenticeship Survey (Q27, n=850)

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Respondents citing Serious Risk (6–10)

West 48%

Ontario 44%

Quebec 47%

Atlantic 41%

Less than 10 employees 47%

10 to 19 employees 47%

20 or more employees 48%
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

56 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORG4.4 Employers without Apprentic

Employers hiring journeypersons in one of the 16 

trades who did not employ 

apprentices were asked to 

complete a short survey 

concerning the reasons that 

they did not invest in apprenticeship. The most common 

reason reported by employers was that their business did 

not have enough continuous 

contracts to support hiring an 

apprentice (30%). Another 

common reason for not 

investing in apprenticeship 

was that the business was 

too small and there was no 

reported need for additional 

workers (25%). Of great 

interest, however, is the 14% 

of employers who indicated 

that they would be willing 

to hire an apprentice, except 

that there were few or no 

apprentices applying to their 

organization.

Figure 4.7

Reasons that Employers Without Apprentices 

Did not Hire an Apprentice

Source: Apprenticeship Survey – Survey of Employers without Apprentices 

(Q2, n=1,163)

Percent of Respondents

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Not enough continuous contracts (Business has enough workers) 30%

Business too small (Don’t need apprentices at this time) 25%

Lack of interest/response (no apprentices applying) 14%

Too much journeyperson’s time 14%

Too many essential skills issues 10%

Insufficient journeypersons 9%

Workers compensation costs 7%

Insurance costs 6%

Health and safety costs 6%

Too many apprentices being poached 6%

Too many life management issues 5%

Business just starting (Don’t need apprentices at this time) 5%

Business closing down soon (Don’t need apprentices at this time) 5%

Interruption in apprentice availability due to technical training 3%
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 57

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Employers were also asked 

if anything would change 

their mind about hiring an 

apprentice. About half of the 

employers said “yes” something would change their 

minds. Over 40% of employers indicated that they would 

hire an apprentice if there 

was a need in their business. 

Nearly one-third (31%) of 

respondents indicated that 

they would hire an apprentice if there was more financial support for employers 

doing so, such as tax credit 

incentives. Importantly, 30% 

of respondents indicated that 

they would hire apprentices if they could find them, 

suggesting that a number 

of employers may be having 

difficulty getting access to 

apprentices.

Figure 4.8

What Would Change Employers’ Decisions About 

Hiring an Apprentice

Source: Apprenticeship Survey – Survey of Employers without Apprentices 

(Q3, n=627)

Percent of Respondents

More need in my business 41%

More financial support/Tax credit incentive 31%

Would hire apprentices if I could find them 30%

If apprentices were more qualified 18%

More assistance with pre-screening candidates 15%

More accessible avenues to contact potential apprentices 15%

More information about flexible training options 13%

Trade specific data that shows training is a profitable investment 12%

More liaison and co-ordination support 12%

Fellow employers talking about apprenticeship’s profitability 7%

Change in the collective agreements 4%

Having apprentices commit to a contract 3%

Other 9%

0 10 20 30 40 50
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

58 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGPart 5

Conclusions

Highlighted below are the key findings of 

this research. The results show employers get 

a return when they invest in apprentices. On 

average, for every $1 spent on apprenticeship 

training, an employer receives a benefit, on 

average, of a $1.47 or a net return of $0.47. 

Additional benefits to hiring apprentices 

include: 

•	 better fit with the organization,

•	 avoids risk of skills shortages,

•	 greater overall productivity,

•	 potential for career advancement in the 

company,

•	 better relations with customers,

•	 fewer mistakes, and 

•	 better health and safety performance.

The Research confirms that there are net positive returns to apprenticeship.

This study substantiates the findings from the 

2006 pilot that in most trades there are financial benefits to hiring apprentices.

Increasing charge-out rates have contributed 

to an increase in net returns since 2006.

The period between 2006 and 2008 represented a period of economic expansion in 

almost every region and sector of Canada’s 

economy. With a heightened demand for 

tradespersons at all levels, employers were 

able to significantly increase the charge out 

rates for apprentices. In fact, it appears that 

charge out rates increased by 23% during 

the two year period. Offsetting, the revenue 

gains, however, were increased wages (+ 9%) 

as well as the increased costs associated with 

the use of journeyperson time to supervise 

apprentices (+14%). 

Combining the data across all trades and 

all employers suggests that the net return 

increased from 1.38 in 2006 to 1.47 in 2008. 

This is up 9 cents from the 2006 pilot study.

The majority of trade areas have a positive 

return over the term of the apprentice.

Fourteen of the 16 trades studied had a net 

positive return over the period of apprenticeship. In fact, for most trades studied, employers witness a positive return in the first year of 

apprenticeship.

There were two trade areas that had 

returns that were below the investment of 

the employers. The Hairstylist trade had a 

return of only 55 cents for each one dollar 

invested by the employer. This low return 

can be explained by the very limited ability 

of employers to earn significant revenues on 
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 59

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

1st or 2nd year apprentices. Unlike the other 

trades, the shorter training program may 

not enable the employers to recoup their 

costs. The other trade that had a net return 

of below one dollar was the Electrical Power 

Line and Cable Worker trade with a return 

of 0.95. This trade experienced a below average return primarily on the basis of the high 

wages of apprentices. A first year apprentice 

could have wages/salaries and benefits of 

almost $50,000. Due to the safety issues associated with this trade, journeypersons also need 

to spend a lot of time training and monitoring 

1st and 2nd year apprentices. 

There were variations in the net return on the 

basis of region and size of the employer.

There were three trades in which a sufficient 

number of completions were obtained to 

facilitate a more detailed analysis: Automotive Service Technician, Refrigeration and 

Air Conditioning Mechanic, and Construction 

Electrician. 

Overall, at the regional level, the results suggest that employers in Quebec have slightly 

higher returns than employers in other 

regions of Canada. Although Quebec employers generally reported charge-out rates lower 

than that of employers in Western Canada, 

Quebec employers typically had lower cost 

structures, in that they paid their apprentices 

less, and reported less use of journeyperson 

time to supervise apprentices. In contrast, 

employers in Ontario generally experienced 

net returns that were below the national 

average. 

Employers in Quebec may experience higher 

returns than elsewhere in the country due 

to the educational system. Apprentices in 

Quebec typically complete their technical 

training prior to registering with an employer 

for an apprenticeship. In this context, there 

may be less journeyperson time required and 

lower costs associated with disbursements 

and/or program administration.

Analysis of the net return on the basis of 

employer size1

 suggests that, in general, the 

larger the employer, the greater the ability 

to obtain higher charge-out rates for apprentices. However, this trend was not universal 

across the three trades studied, as the larger 

employers of Construction Electrician apprentices reported lower net returns than did 

medium-sized employers. 

Analysis of the data suggests that there 

was greater variation in the net return on 

apprenticeship on the basis of the size of 

the employer rather than on the basis of the 

region in which the employer operated. 

This study allows industry and other apprenticeship stakeholders to gain a more accurate understanding of the financial costs and 

benefits of apprenticeship training for 16 

trades. This information is valuable in dispelling myths that investing in apprentices reaps 

little financial benefit. Ongoing dialogue with 

industry about the value of apprenticeship 

and continued support for employers will be 

essential to ensure Canadians have the opportunities to train and to gain skills.

1 Based on number of employees. 
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

60 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGAppendix A

Survey Administration

A screening process was required to identify 

employers who hire and train apprentices in 

the trades selected for the study. A mixedmode survey approach was used whereby 

employers were mailed, faxed, or e-mailed a 

copy of the survey questionnaire. In addition, 

employers were given the option to complete 

part or all of the survey by phone or online.

Overall, the majority of employers indicated 

that completing the survey was a challenge, 

not only because of the length of time 

required to complete the survey, one to two 

hours was average, but also the level of detail 

of the information requested. As a result, 

extensive follow-up with employers was 

necessary in order to verify the accuracy of the 

information provided. Given the limited availability of employers to complete the survey, 

several attempts were required to contact a 

single employer to clarify his/her responses.

R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd. contacted a 

total of 21,020 employers and 4,148 employer 

surveys were sent to qualified employers. A 

total of 784 surveys were completed. A total 

of 1,013 useable surveys were obtained from 

the 2006 and 2008 surveys. Figure A.1 details 

the number of qualifiers, completions, and 

response rates by trade.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 61

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure A.1 

Number of Qualifying Employers and Survey Completions by Trade

Trade No. of Phase 2 Pilot Total Useable Response

Qualifiers Completed Surveys Sample1 Rate (%)2

Surveys

Automotive Service Technician 719 131 45 159 18.2%

Motor Vehicle Body Repairer 307 41 21 62 13.4%

Cook 227 31 21 52 13.7%

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning 378 85 40 118 22.5%

Mechanic

Heavy-Duty Equipment Technician 142 32 37 66 22.5%

Construction Millwright and 98 18 23 30 18.4%

Industrial Mechanic

Electrician (construction) 566 119 52 166 21.0%

Bricklayer 172 40 21 53 23.3%

Machinist 146 18 33 48 12.3%

Sheet Metal Worker 237 33 28 51 13.9%

Cabinetmaker 230 57 - 48 24.8%

Partsperson 103 21 - 15 20.4%

Boilermaker 43 5 - 5 11.6%

Plumber 520 83 - 75 16.0%

Electrical Power Line and 69 33 - 27 47.8%

Cable Worker

Hairstylist 188 38 - 38 20.2%

Total 4,145 784 3213 1,013 18.9%

1 A small number of surveys were unusable due to incomplete data

2 Phase 2 Completions / Qualifiers Excludes 112 surveys that were received as part of the Pilot survey which were in 

trades not covered by Phase II

3 Excludes 112 surveys that were received as part of the Pilot survey which were in trades not covered by Phase II
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

62 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGAppendix B

Follow-up with Respondents to the Pilot Study

Number of Employers 

Responding to both the 2006 

and 2008 Surveys

Employers from the 10 trades areas in the 

pilot study were contacted as part of the 

current study to inform and/or validate 

assumptions made regarding increases from 

2005/2006 values to present day 2008 values 

regarding costs and/or benefits (e.g., charge 

out rates) provided in the first survey. One 

Comparison of Survey and Follow-up Completions

2006 vs. 2008 (10 trades)

Trade NOC Employed Pilot 2008

(2006 Surveys Follow-up

Census)* Survey

Automotive Service Technician 7321 149,995 45 14

Motor Vehicle Body Repairer 7322 31,250 21 8

Cook 6242 203,690 21 5

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic 7313 22,240 40 12

Heavy-Duty Equipment Technician 7312 39,140 37 10

Construction Millwright and Industrial 7311 75,900 23 5

Mechanic

Electrician (construction) 7241 72,390 52 27

Bricklayer 7281 18,885 21 4

Machinist 7231 52,075 33 13

Sheet Metal Worker 7261 21,320 28 8

TOTAL 321 106

hundred and six of the 321 employers who 

completed a survey in the 2006 updated their 

information in 2008. This updated information was used to assess consistency between 

the previous study and present day costs/

charge out rates.

The following table presents the number of 

employers who originally completed a survey 

in 2006, as well as the number of employers 

who completed a follow-up survey in 2008.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 63

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Trends in Work Hours

Data relating to work hours was compared for 

organizations that completed both the 2006 

and 2008 ROTI surveys. The following table 

presents the average number of work hours 

Question Variable 2006 2008 % Change

Average Average 2006 to 2008

5a Weekly Hours apprentices 41 41 0.00% 

5b Weekly Hours journeypersons 41 41 0.00%

6a Days Worked per week apprentices 5 5 0.00%

6b Days Worked per week journeypersons 5 5 0.00%

7a Holiday weeks apprentices 2 2 0.00%

7b Training weeks apprentices 7 7 0.00%

7c Other reasons apprentices 1 0 -100.00%

7d Holiday weeks journeypersons 3 3 0.00%

7e Training weeks journeypersons 1 1 0.00%

7f Other reasons journeypersons 1 0 -100.00%

in 2006 and 2008 for those who responded to 

both surveys.

Because the changes reported are small, no 

change was imputed to respondents who 

completed a survey in 2006, but not in 2008.

Trends in Benefits

Data relating to benefits was compared 

for organizations that completed both the 

2006 and 2008 ROTI surveys. The following 

table presents the averages for questions 

dealing with benefits in 2006 and 2008 for 

responders to both surveys.

Although charge-out hours have only slightly 

increased in some trades, charge-out rates in 

other trades have increased substantially from 

just under 14% to just under 19%.

Question Variable 2006 2008 % Change

Average Average 2006 to 2008

AQ9B2JP Journeyperson weekly charge out hours 38 38 0.00%

AQ9B21APP 1st year apprentice weekly charge out hours 28 31 10.71%

AQ9B22APP 2nd year apprentice weekly charge out hours 30 32 6.67%

AQ9B23APP 3rd year apprentice weekly charge out hours 33 35 6.06%

AQ9B24APP 4th year apprentice weekly charge out hours 35 36 2.86%

AQ9B3JP Journeyperson charge out rate $63.67 $73.76 15.85%

AQ9B31APP 1st year apprentice charge out rate $50.60 $59.98 18.54%

AQ9B32APP 2nd year apprentice charge out rate $53.14 $61.71 16.13%

AQ9B33APP 3rd year apprentice charge out rate $55.88 $63.7 13.99%

AQ9B34APP 4th year apprentice charge out rate $58.71 $67.73 15.36%
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

64 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGTrends in Cos

Data relating to costs was compared for 

organizations that completed both the 2006 

and 2008 ROTI surveys. The following table 

presents the averages for questions dealing 

with costs in 2006 and 2008 for responders to 

both surveys. 

Wages have increased, but not as dramatically as the charge-out rates. With respect to 

opportunity costs, use of journeypersons’ time 

supervising apprentices has remained fairly 

consistent with slightly less supervisory time 

for first and second year apprentices. Apprentice use of chargeable time has decreased 

since 2006, on average, particularly for second 

and third-year apprentices. Wastage costs 

have gone up since 2006. Finally, disbursements have increased since 2006, particularly 

for equipment and other cash.

Question Variable 2006 2008 % Change

Average Average 2006 to 2008

Hourly Wage Costs

AQ8A_JP_D Journeyperson hourly wage $25.29 29.84 17.99%

AQ8A_1APP_D 1st year apprentice hourly wage $13.23 14.22 7.48%

AQ8A_2APP_D 2nd year apprentice hourly wage $15.76 17.21 9.20%

AQ8A_3APP_D 3rd year apprentice hourly wage $18.37 20.44 11.27%

AQ8A_4APP_D 4th year apprentice hourly wage $21.06 24.44 16.05%

Opportunity Costs

AQ12A_1APP 1st year apprentice use of journeyperson time 29.10 25.21 -13.37%

AQ12A_2APP 2nd year apprentice use of journeyperson time 21.32 20.35 -4.55%

AQ12A_3APP 3rd year apprentice use of journeyperson time 14.71 15.22 3.47%

AQ12A_4APP 4th year apprentice use of journeyperson time 9.60 9.84 2.50%

Q12B_1APP 1st year apprentice use of chargeable time 36.24 35.16 -2.98%

Q12B_2APP 2nd year apprentice use of chargeable time 41.23 33.62 -18.46%

Q12B_3APP 3rd year apprentice use of chargeable time 49.50 46.30 -6.46%

Q12B_4APP 4th year apprentice use of chargeable time 42.70 45.65 6.91%

Lost Productivity From Major Assets (Per cent saying “Yes” must be at least 40 per cent for inclusion)

Q14A Does the organization use major assets 24.70% 13.08% na

with apprentices
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 65

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Question Variable 2006 2008 % Change

Average Average 2006 to 2008

Wastage

Q15A Do apprentices waste material that 64% 64.5% 0.78%

cannot be charged

AQ15B_1APP 1st year apprentice uncharged material wastage$4,143.77 $6,460.05 55.90%

AQ15B_2APP 2nd year apprentice uncharged material wastage$3,851.57 $4,242.31 10.14%

AQ15B_3APP 3rd year apprentice uncharged material wastage$2,342.20 $4,392.86 87.55%

AQ15B_4APP 4th year apprentice uncharged material wastage$1,300.25 $2,070.00 59.20%

Disbursements

AQ17A Registration $268.72 $265.03 -1.37%

AQ17B Top up EI $626.34 $658.79 5.18%

AQ17C Health $424.48 $270.30 -36.32%

AQ17D Wages while in school $4,878.29 $3,420.05 -29.89%

AQ17E Tuition $551.93 $543.47 -1.53%

AQ17F Tools $394.06 $447.02 13.44%

AQ17G Scholarships

AQ17H Equipment $711.33 $1,907.61 168.18%

AQ17I Vehicle $475.30 $592.02 24.56%

AQ17J Continuing ed $621.55 $969.94 56.05%

AQ17K Skills competitions $956.14 $1,623.72 69.82%

AQ17L Other cash $971.94 $2,351.88 141.98%

computed Total disbursements $10,880.09 $13,049.82 19.94%

Operating Costs

AQ21 Total staff costs $615.94 $830.68 34.86%
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

66 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGAppendix C

Cost-Benefit Methodology

This appendix presents a detailed description 

of the model methodology that is the basis for 

the cost-benefit analysis for each trade.

Overall Approach

To the maximum extent possible, the results of 

the model are meant to be an accurate reflection of the survey findings for each trade. The 

model is intended to produce results of a “typical firm” based on the survey findings. A cash 

flow model was used where a typical firm hires 

one apprentice in each year and generates a 

net benefit or cost for each apprentice year. 

These calculations are based on survey 

responses by firms who presently employ 

apprentices in each trade area. The mean (or 

average) values for variables are calculated 

and used in subsequent calculations.

The model is organized on a trade-by-trade 

and year-by-year basis. The covered years 

for each trade are based on the average 

responses to the question “How long does it 

usually take for an apprentice to actually complete his or her apprenticeship?” For 15 of the 

16 trades the answer to this question rounded 

to four years. For hairstylist, the answer was 

two years. 

Figure C.1

Model Calculations for Costs and Benefits

Calculation Hypothesized Relationship to

apprentice years

BENEFITS

Attributed Revenue Charge out rate x charge out hours Charge out rates and hours increase

by year of apprenticeship

COSTS 

Wages and benefits Wage x mark-up for statutory benefits Wages increase by year of 

apprenticeship

Journeyperson time Per cent of time that is not chargeable Journeyperson time declines as year 

to the customer x journeyperson of apprenticeship increases

charge out revenue

Wastage Total wastage allocated over year Wastage costs decrease by year of 

of apprenticeship apprenticeship

Disbursements Cash disbursements to support No theoretical relationship specified

training and other benefits allocated 

across the years

Administration Staff costs for entire sample/ Constant costs per apprenticeship

number of apprentices in sample
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 67

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

For each year, the following net benefit calculations were made:

Benefit = Charge out rate x Charge out hours

Cost = Wages and benefits + Opportunity 

costs + Disbursements + Administration costs

Opportunity costs = Journeyperson time + 

Wastage

Net benefit = Benefit – Cost

Figure C.1 reviews the specific calculations 

that were undertaken and the hypothesized 

relationships to apprentice years for the benefit and cost components.

Data Issues

Alternative Methods to Use of Means

As an apprentice accumulates human capital 

over time, this accumulation will be reflected 

in higher productivity, which, in turn, generates more revenue and higher wages. This 

hypothesis was tested and verified for the 

entire data set and within specific cases. Yet 

in a few cases, the mean values did not reflect 

this. Therefore, alternative measures were 

used to preserve the integrity of the findings 

and to ensure that they were reflective of a 

typical firm. 

Although individual cases may be logically 

consistent with a human capital approach, 

the averages may not reflect that pattern. The 

main reason is that the logic was not maintained in that the number of responses for 

each apprentice year varies between the cases. 

For instance, there were 53 responses from 

firms who employ Bricklayers. The breakdown 

of the number of apprentices employed for 

each year of the apprenticeship is as follows:

– 1st year 64

– 2nd year 54

– 3rd year 44

– 4th year 18

This pattern is fairly typical and is associated 

with the fact that the completion rates for 

apprentices approaches only 50 per cent. The 

implication is that there are different samples 

for each year, each with its own distribution. 

The point of the modeling exercise is simply to 

provide a picture of a “typical firm”. Inasmuch 

as the theoretical relationship was maintained 

for the entire sample and within specific cases, 

a model result that did not maintain these 

relationships would not be “typical”.

In these cases, therefore, the hypothesized 

relationship was imposed on the data through 

one of three methods:

•	 Mode: the most frequent number of 

responses was used if it followed the 

expected pattern.

•	 Median: the mid-point of the distribution 

was used if the mode was inadequate.

•	 Interpolation: if neither the mode nor 

median produced the hypothesized result, 

a data point was interpolated as the midpoint between the prior apprentice year 

and the forthcoming apprentice year. For 

example, a 2nd year interpolation would be 

the mid point between the 1st year apprentice value and the 3rd year apprentice 

value.
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

68 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGThresholds for Inclusi

A second data issue was simply a matter of 

setting minimum thresholds for responses 

prior to including a variable. Once again, the 

objective was to present a “typical firm”. A 

lack of data on any one element of the model 

is an indication that the element is not typical 

of firms that hire apprentices. These thresholds affected the inclusion of various costs.

A minimum threshold of 40 per cent of 

responses was established for including 

journeyperson time, lost productive time of 

major assets, and wastage costs. Using this 

threshold, the measure of journeyperson time 

was included for all trades and the wastage measure was used in all except cases for 

Boilermaker, Partsperson, and Electrical Power 

Line & Cable Worker. However, the number 

of responses for each trade related to the lost 

productive time of major assets was insufficient to meet the 40 per cent threshold for 

inclusion. 

With respect to disbursements, the survey provided respondents with a list of 13 different 

cost items. Only those disbursements where a 

minimum of 5 respondents indicated that they 

provided disbursements in those areas were 

included. Clearly, there is an element of arbitrariness in these rules, but imposing no rules 

would not lead to an accurate depiction of the 

common practices of apprentice hiring firms.

Pricing to Market

The model was intended to demonstrate the 

actual cash flow cost and benefit to apprentice hiring firms. As such, it was important that 

the apprentice was priced to the market based 

on responses around average charge out rates 

and charge out hours for each year of apprenticeship. In the vast majority of cases, respondents indicated how they priced apprentices 

and journeypersons to the market, except 

trades for Cook, and Partsperson in which a 

100% mark-up rate used.

Administration

The survey questioned employers about 

their costs to administer their apprenticeship 

program. These costs varied considerably and 

the survey did not ask how the costs varied 

per year. As such, the reported administration 

costs were totaled and divided by the total 

number of apprentices for each trade. This 

value was allocated as a fixed per apprentice 

cost of administration
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 69

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

An Illustrative Example: Automotive Service Technician

For illustrative purposes, the following table presents the calculations that were undertaken for 

the Automotive Service Technician trade. The total number of responses was 159 and these companies employ 433 apprentices.

Figure C.2

Stepwise Calculation – Automotive Service Technician

Notes:

In cases where means produce counterintuitive results, either the median (code 1), mode (code 2) or interpolation 

(code 3) was used.

Bold represents those numbers that are transferred to Exhibit 3.1 in Section 3.

WORK HOURS

Step 1 Establish Parameters for Hours Worked Every Year 

Line Question Variable Computation Value Code

1 5a Weekly Hours apprentices Mean 40

2 5b Weekly Hours journeypersons Mean 40

3 6a Days Worked per week apprentices Mean 5

4 6b Days Worked per week journeypersons Mean 5

5 7a Holiday weeks apprentices Mean 2

6 7c Training weeks apprentices Mean 6

7 7e Other reasons apprentices Mean 0

8 7b Holiday weeks journeypersons Mean 3

9 7d Training weeks journeypersons Mean 0

10 7f Other reasons journeypersons Mean 0

11 Computed Yearly weeks apprentices 52 - (Line 5 + Line 6 + Line 7) 44

12 Computed Yearly weeks journeypersons 52 - (Line 8 + Line 9 + Line 10) 49
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

70 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGFigure C

Stepwise Calculation – Automotive Service Technician

(Continued)

BENEFITS

Step 2 Financial Benefit Per Apprentice Based on Charge Out Responses

Line Question Variable Computation Value Code

13 9b2jp Journeyperson weekly charge out hours Mean 39

14 Tradesperson weekly charge out hours Mean na

15 9b21app 1st year apprentice weekly charge out hours Mean 25

16 9b22app 2nd year apprentice weekly charge out hours Mean 29

17 9b23app 3rd year apprentice weekly charge out hours Mean 34

18 9b24app 4th year apprentice weekly charge Mean 37 3

19 5th year apprentice weekly charge out hours Mean na

20 9b3jp Journeyperson charge out rate Mean $82.46 1

21 Tradesperson weekly charge out rate Mean na 1

22 9b31app 1st year apprentice charge out rate Mean $74.78

23 9b32app 2nd year apprentice charge out rate Mean $75.92

24 9b33app 3rd year apprentice charge out rate Mean $77.63 1

25 9b34app 4th year apprentice charge out rate Mean $79.95 1

26 5th year apprentice charge out rate Mean na

27 Computed Journeyperson weekly charge out revenue Line 13 x Line 20 $3,218.91

28 Computed Tradesperson weekly charge out revenue Line 14 x Line 21 na

29 Computed 1st year apprentice weekly charge out revenue Line 15 x Line 22 $1,869.92

30 Computed 2nd year apprentice weekly charge out revenue Line 16 x Line 23 $2,191.77

31 Computed 3rd year apprentice weekly charge out revenue Line 17 x Line 24 $2,645.25

32 Computed 4th year apprentice weekly charge out revenue Line 18 x Line 25 $2,950.76

33 Computed 5th year apprentice weekly charge out revenue Line 19 x Line 26 na

34 Computed Journeyperson yearly charge out revenue Line 27 x Line 12 $156,268.62

35 Computed Tradesperson yearly charge out revenue Line 28 x Line 12 na

36 Computed 1st year apprentice yearly charge out revenue Line 29 x Line 11 $81,927.82

37 Computed 2nd year apprentice yearly charge out revenue Line 30 x Line 11 $96,029.04

38 Computed 3rd year apprentice yearly charge out revenue Line 31 x Line 11 $115,897.79

39 Computed 4th year apprentice yearly charge out revenue Line 32 x Line 11 $129,283.39

40 Computed 5th year apprentice yearly charge out revenue Line 33 x Line 11 na 
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 71

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure C.2

Stepwise Calculation – Automotive Service Technician

(Continued)

COSTS

Step 3 Hourly Wage Rates

Line Question Variable Computation Value Code

41 8a_jp Journeyperson hourly wage Mean $26.33

42 Tradesperson hourly wage Mean na 3

43 8a_1app 1st year apprentice hourly wage Mean $13.03

44 8a_2app 2nd year apprentice hourly wage Mean $15.21

45 8a_3app 3rd year apprentice hourly wage Mean $18.05

46 8a_4app 4th year apprentice hourly wage Mean $21.33

47 5th year apprentice hourly wage Mean na

48 8a_per_jp Journeyperson markup statutory benefits % Mean per cent 14.4

49 Tradesperson markup statutory benefits % Mean per cent na

50 8a_per_1app 1st year apprentice markup statutory benefits % Mean per cent 13.9

51 8a_per_2app 2nd year apprentice markup statutory benefits % Mean per cent 14.0

52 8a_per_3app 3rd year apprentice markup statutory benefits % Mean per cent 14.1

53 8a_per_4app 4th year apprentice markup statutory benefits % Mean per cent 14.2

54 5th year apprentice markup statutory benefits % Mean per cent na

55 Computed Journeyperson marked up hourly wage Line 41 x (1.Line 48) $30.12

56 Computed Tradesperson marked up hourly wage Line 42 x (1.Line 49) na

57 Computed 1st year apprentice marked up hourly wage Line 43 x (1.Line 50) $14.84

58 Computed 2nd year apprentice marked up hourly wage Line 44 x (1.Line 51) $17.34

59 Computed 3rd year apprentice marked up hourly wage Line 45 x (1.Line 52) $20.61

60 Computed 4th year apprentice marked up hourly wage Line 46 x (1.Line 53) $24.37

61 Computed 5th year apprentice marked up hourly wage Line 47 x (1.Line 54) na

Step 4 Yearly Wage Costs Per Apprentice

Line Question Variable Computation Value Code

62 Computed 1st year apprentice yearly wage cost Line 1 x Line 11 x Line 57 $26,264.79

63 Computed 2nd year apprentice yearly wage cost Line 1 x Line 11 x Line 58 $30,698.28

64 Computed 3rd year apprentice yearly wage cost Line 1 x Line 11 x Line 59 $36,480.73

65 Computed 4th year apprentice yearly wage cost Line 1 x Line 11 x Line 60 $43,136.37

66 Computed 5th year apprentice yearly wage cost Line 1 x Line 11 x Line 61 na

 
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

72 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGFigure C

Stepwise Calculation – Automotive Service Technician

(Continued)

OPPORTUNITY COSTS

Step 5 Journeyperson Time

Line Question Variable Computation Value Code

67 12a_1app 1st year apprentice use of Mean per cent 27.10

journeyperson time

68 12a_2app 2nd year apprentice use of Mean per cent 22.59

journeyperson time

69 12a_3app 3rd year apprentice use of Mean per cent 16.90

journeyperson time

70 12a_4app 4th year apprentice use of Mean per cent 11.99

journeyperson time

71 5th year apprentice use of Mean per cent na

journeyperson time

72 12b_1app 1st year apprentice use of Mean per cent 19.01

chargeable time

73 12b_2app 2nd year apprentice use of Mean per cent 23.83

chargeable time

74 12b_3app 3rd year apprentice use of Mean per cent 22.59

chargeable time

75 12b_4app 4th year apprentice use of Mean per cent 31.03

chargeable time

76 5th year apprentice use of Mean per cent na

chargeable time

77 Computed 1st year apprentice use of Line 34 x (Line 67% x (100%-Line 72%)) $34,304.71

chargeable time

78 Computed 2nd year apprentice use of Line 34 x (Line 68% x (100%-Line 73%)) $26,890.31

chargeable time

79 Computed 3rd year apprentice use of Line 34 x (Line 69% x (100%-Line 74%)) $20,442.07

chargeable time

80 Computed 4th year apprentice use of Line 34 x (Line 70% x (100%-Line 75%)) $12,921.84

chargeable time

81 Computed 5th year apprentice use of Line 34 x (Line 71% x (100%-Line 76%)) na

chargeable time

 
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 73

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure C.2

Stepwise Calculation – Automotive Service Technician

(Continued)

OPPORTUNITY COSTS

Step 6 Lost Productivity From Major Assets (Per cent responding “Yes” must be at least 40 per cent for inclusion)

Line Question Variable Computation Value Code

82 14a Does the organization have Per cent responding yes 9.5%

major assets

83 17aii Lease cost of asset 1 Mean na

84 17bii Lease cost of asset 2 Mean na

85 17cii Lease cost of asset 3 Mean na

86 17dii Lease cost of asset 4 Mean na

87 17eii Lease cost of asset 5 Mean na

88 17aiii Percent used unproductively asset 1 Mean na

89 17biii Percent used unproductively asset 2 Mean na

90 17ciii Percent used unproductively asset 3 Mean na

91 17diii Percent used unproductively asset 4 Mean na

92 17eiii Percent used unproductively asset 5 Mean na

93 Computed Lost productivity in asset 1 Line 83 x Line 88 na

94 Computed Lost productivity in asset 2 Line 84 x Line 89 na

95 Computed Lost productivity in asset 3 Line 85 x Line 90 na

96 Computed Lost productivity in asset 4 Line 86 x Line 91 na

97 Computed Lost productivity in asset 5 Line 87 x Line 92 na

98 Computed Total lost productivity Sum(Line 93 to Line 97) na

Step 7 Wastage (Per cent responding “Yes” must be at least 40 per cent for inclusion)

Line Question Variable Computation Value Code

99 15a Do apprentices waste material Per cent responding yes 54%

that cannot be charged

100 15b_1app 1st year apprentice uncharged Mean $4,755.01

material wastage

101 15b_2app 2nd year apprentice uncharged Mean $3,102.86

material wastage

102 15b_3app 3rd year apprentice uncharged Mean $2,229.89

material wastage

103 15b_4app 4th year apprentice uncharged Mean $1,120.19

material wastage

104 5th year apprentice uncharged Mean na

material wastage

 
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

74 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGFigure C

Stepwise Calculation – Automotive Service Technician

(Continued)

DISBURSEMENTS

Step 8 Disbursements (Number responding “Yes” must be at least 5 for inclusion)

Line Question Variable Computation Value Code

105 17a Registration Mean $259.64

106 17b Top up EI Mean $433.03

107 17c Health Mean $326.84

108 17d Wages while in school Mean $1,465.27

109 17e Tuition Mean $451.96

110 17f Tools Mean $445.02

111 17g Scholarships Mean

112 17h Equipment Mean

113 17i Vehicle Mean

114 17j Continuing ed Mean $622.80

115 17k Skills competitions Mean

116 17l Other cash Mean $579.50

117 

118 Computed Total disbursements Sum(Line 105 to Line 117) $4,584.07

119 18_1app 1st year apprentice share of disbursements Adjusted mean %, sum must = 100% 36.7%

120 18_2app 2nd year apprentice share of disbursements Adjusted mean %, sum must = 100% 23.3%

121 18_3app 3rd year apprentice share of disbursements Adjusted mean %, sum must = 100% 22.4%

122 18_4app 4th year apprentice share of disbursements Adjusted mean %, sum must = 100% 17.7%

123 5th year apprentice share of disbursements Adjusted mean %, sum must = 100% na

124 Computed 1st year apprentice dollar disbursement Line 119 x Line 118 $1,682.35

125 Computed 2nd year apprentice dollar disbursement Line 120 x Line 118 $1,068.09

126 Computed 3rd year apprentice dollar disbursement Line 121 x Line 118 $1,026.83

127 Computed 4th year apprentice dollar disbursement Line 122 x Line 118 $811.38

128 Computed 5th year apprentice dollar disbursement Line 123 x Line 118 na

PROGRAM OPERATING COSTS 

Step 9 Operating costs (Number responding “Yes” must be at least 5 for inclusion)

Line Question Variable Computation Value Code

129 21 Total staff costs Sum for sample $237,670.21

130 Computed Per apprentice staff admin costs Line 129/total apprentices $536.50
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 75

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Appendix D: 

Detailed Cost-Benefit Results by Region

Automotive Services Technician

Figure D.1

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Automotive Service Technician – Overall (n=159)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 81,927.82 $ 96,029.04 $ 115,897.79 $ 129,283.39 $ 423,138.04

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 26,273.13 $ 30,747.62 $ 36,583.27 $ 43,316.66 $ 136,920.68 

Journeyperson Time $ 34,304.71 $ 26,890.31 $ 20,442.07 $ 12,921.84 $ 94,558.92 

Wastage $ 4,755.01 $ 3,102.86 $ 2,229.89 $ 1,120.19 $ 11,207.95 

Disbursements $ 1,682.35 $ 1,068.09 $ 1,026.83 $ 811.38 $ 4,588.65 

Administration $ 684.93 $ 684.93 $ 684.93 $ 684.93 $ 2,739.71 

Total $ 67,700.12 $ 62,493.81 $ 60,966.99 $ 58,854.99 $ 250,015.91 

Net Benefit $ 14,227.70 $ 33,535.23 $ 54,930.81 $ 70,428.39 $ 173,122.13

Figure D.2

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Automotive Service Technician – West (n=66)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 86,567.94 $103,191.68 $117,694.36 $136,021.51 $443,475.49

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 36,283.33 $ 36,283.33 $ 42,764.24 $ 50,298.28 $165,629.18 

Journeyperson Time $ 36,947.39 $ 28,291.92 $ 20,431.25 $ 13,586.87 $ 99,257.43 

Wastage $ 5,598.50 $ 3,623.38 $ 2,486.92 $ 1,201.12 $ 12,909.92 

Disbursements $ 1,491.05 $ 913.86 $ 787.60 $ 577.19 $ 3,769.71 

Administration $ 378.63 $ 378.63 $ 378.63 $ 378.63 $ 1,514.53 

Total $ 80,698.91 $ 69,491.12 $ 66,848.64 $ 66,042.10 $283,080.77

Net Benefit $ 5,869.03 $ 33,700.56 $ 50,845.72 $ 69,979.41 $160,394.72
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

76 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGFigure D

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Automotive Service Technician – Ontario (n=43)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 72,143.01 $ 95,667.48 $116,312.30 $ 133,923.20 $418,046.00

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 24,872.22 $ 29,079.16 $ 35,588.72 $ 43,321.11 $132,861.21 

Journeyperson Time $ 41,867.39 $ 30,582.52 $ 25,091.88 $ 11,635.24 $109,177.03 

Wastage $ 5,748.27 $ 3,973.24 $ 2,592.55 $ 978.91 $ 13,292.96 

Disbursements $ 541.55 $ 212.05 $ 235.66 $ 194.91 $ 1,184.16 

Administration $ 782.25 $ 782.25 $ 782.25 $ 782.25 $ 3,128.98 

Total $ 73,811.68 $ 64,629.21 $ 64,291.05 $ 56,912.41 $259,644.35

Net Benefit $ (1,668.67) $ 31,038.28 $ 52,021.25 $ 77,010.79 $158,401.65

Figure D.4

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Automotive Service Technician – Quebec (n=48)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 81,115.80 $ 90,934.63 $110,215.40 $ 122,828.88 $405,094.71

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 23,251.02 $ 26,787.02 $ 31,484.86 $ 36,621.90 $118,144.79 

Journeyperson Time $ 26,634.82 $ 23,462.59 $ 18,618.76 $ 13,753.87 $ 82,470.04 

Wastage $ 2,728.52 $ 1,651.41 $ 1,477.87 $ 1,048.41 $ 6,906.21 

Disbursements $ 1,207.85 $ 607.14 $ 640.40 $ 375.44 $ 2,830.84 

Administration $ 588.45 $ 588.45 $ 588.45 $ 588.45 $ 2,353.79 

Total $ 54,410.66 $ 53,096.61 $ 52,810.33 $ 52,388.06 $212,705.67

Net Benefit $ 26,705.13 $ 37,838.02 $ 57,405.07 $ 70,440.82 $192,389.04

Because of the small sample size of employers in Atlantic Canada, the analysis of costs & benefits for Automotive Service Technician in this region was not performed and presented.
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 77

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic

Figure D.5

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic – Overall (n=118)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $65,018.57 $ 83,084.99 $ 91,520.04 $ 104,977.74 $ 344,601.34

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $30,048.87 $ 36,929.08 $ 44,994.05 $ 54,012.59 $ 165,984.60 

Journeyperson Time $24,079.34 $ 18,351.46 $ 9,603.29 $ 5,549.45 $ 57,583.55 

Wastage $ 2,858.10 $ 2,234.46 $ 1,531.62 $ 1,127.89 $ 7,752.08 

Disbursements $ 1,872.66 $ 1,536.91 $ 1,389.75 $ 1,288.34 $ 6,087.66 

Administration $ 663.03 $ 663.03 $ 663.03 $ 663.03 $ 2,652.13 

Total $59,522.01 $ 59,714.94 $ 58,181.75 $ 62,641.31 $ 240,060.01

Net Benefit $ 5,496.56 $ 23,370.04 $ 33,338.30 $ 42,336.43 $ 104,541.33

Figure D.6

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic – West (n=45)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $72,983.30 $ 91,600.09 $ 110,740.50 $ 120,256.66 $ 395,580.55

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $31,427.27 $ 39,005.43 $ 47,671.39 $ 57,111.68 $ 175,215.77 

Journeyperson Time $22,009.10 $ 17,881.31 $ 13,731.03 $ 4,617.03 $ 58,238.47 

Wastage $ 3,017.54 $ 2,376.66 $ 1,722.93 $ 1,330.61 $ 8,447.74 

Disbursements $ 1,439.28 $ 1,073.53 $ 1,498.60 $ 1,340.43 $ 5,351.85 

Administration $ 756.38 $ 756.38 $ 756.38 $ 756.38 $ 3,025.51 

Total $58,649.57 $ 61,093.32 $ 65,380.32 $ 65,156.13 $ 250,279.34

Net Benefit $14,333.73 $ 30,506.77 $ 45,360.18 $ 55,100.52 $ 145,301.21
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

78 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGFigure D

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic – Ontario (n=43)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $53,817.02 $ 81,022.34 $ 75,537.94 $ 104,724.46 $ 315,101.76

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $28,501.93 $ 36,274.57 $ 44,543.76 $ 53,689.28 $ 163,009.54 

Journeyperson Time $33,188.87 $ 21,476.41 $ 10,183.65 $ 8,883.20 $ 73,732.13 

Wastage $ 2,066.36 $ 1,615.26 $ 1,117.29 $ 789.53 $ 5,588.44 

Disbursements $ 1,561.99 $ 1,306.53 $ 886.83 $ 547.43 $ 4,302.78 

Administration $ 587.73 $ 587.73 $ 587.73 $ 587.73 $ 2,350.92 

Total $65,906.89 $ 61,260.50 $ 57,319.27 $ 64,497.16 $ 248,983.82

Net Benefit $ (12,089.87) $ 19,761.84 $ 18,218.67 $ 40,227.30 $ 66,117.95

Figure D.8

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic – Quebec (n=13)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 68,973.54 $ 75,720.25 $ 98,129.48 $ 98,931.06 $ 341,754.33

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 31,885.16 $ 39,885.55 $ 48,774.84 $ 56,720.86 $ 177,266.41 

Journeyperson Time $ 10,160.04 $ 12,119.53 $ 2,546.57 $ 2,347.89 $ 27,174.04 

Wastage $ - 

Disbursements $ - 

Administration $ 113.33 $ 113.33 $ 113.33 $ 113.33 $ 453.33 

Total $ 42,158.53 $ 52,118.42 $ 51,434.74 $ 59,182.09 $ 204,893.78

Net Benefit $ 26,815.01 $ 23,601.84 $ 46,694.73 $ 39,748.97 $ 136,860.55
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 79

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure D.9

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic – Atlantic (n=17)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 56,841.55 $ 60,081.48 $ 71,290.16 $ 85,822.15 $ 274,035.34

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 26,940.11 $ 28,154.95 $ 32,636.04 $ 40,654.66 $ 128,385.76 

Journeyperson Time $ 21,769.45 $ 16,410.56 $ 8,708.47 $ 4,000.57 $ 50,889.05 

Wastage $ 4,777.16 $ 3,646.29 $ 2,183.33 $ 1,447.88 $ 12,054.66 

Disbursements $ 428.34 $ 327.04 $ 327.19 $ 278.20 $ 1,360.77 

Administration $ 881.52 $ 881.52 $ 881.52 $ 881.52 $ 3,526.09 

Total $ 54,796.58 $ 49,420.37 $ 44,736.55 $ 47,262.82 $ 196,216.32

Net Benefit $ 2,044.97 $ 10,661.11 $ 26,553.61 $ 38,559.33 $ 77,819.02

Construction Electrician

Figure D.10

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Construction Electrician – Overall (n=166)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 60,447.51 $66,721.49 $77,827.35 $ 88,051.58 $ 293,047.93

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 29,056.83 $35,396.78 $42,191.38 $ 50,219.16 $ 156,864.16 

Journeyperson Time $ 11,879.41 $ 8,321.64 $ 6,282.19 $ 3,573.05 $ 30,056.29 

Wastage $ 2,492.91 $ 1,345.44 $ 925.57 $ 819.03 $ 5,582.94 

Disbursements $ 987.91 $ 704.12 $ 693.39 $ 701.23 $ 3,086.66 

Administration $ 305.14 $ 305.14 $ 305.14 $ 305.14 $ 1,220.58 

Total $ 44,722.21 $46,073.12 $50,397.67 $ 55,617.62 $ 196,810.62

Net Benefit $ 15,725.30 $20,648.37 $27,429.68 $ 32,433.96 $ 96,237.30
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

80 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGFigure D.

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Construction Electrician – West (n=67)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 56,384.24 $67,145.80 $79,298.64 $ 91,036.35 $ 293,865.03

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 31,402.23 $37,994.37 $44,874.04 $ 52,456.38 $ 166,727.02 

Journeyperson Time $ 10,415.00 $ 7,025.79 $ 4,730.58 $ 2,176.40 $ 24,347.77 

Wastage $ 1,307.75 $ 930.32 $ 741.94 $ 578.83 $ 3,558.84 

Disbursements $ 898.91 $ 570.60 $ 610.03 $ 675.98 $ 2,755.52 

Administration $ 292.26 $ 292.26 $ 292.26 $ 292.26 $ 1,169.04 

Total $ 44,316.16 $46,813.35 $51,248.84 $ 56,179.84 $ 198,558.18

Net Benefit $ 12,068.09 $20,332.45 $28,049.81 $ 34,856.51 $ 95,306.85

Figure D.12

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Construction Electrician – Ontario (n=50)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 61,790.73 $66,233.50 $75,489.03 $ 84,994.46 $ 288,507.72

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 27,132.87 $33,758.97 $41,005.83 $ 49,405.73 $ 151,303.41 

Journeyperson Time $ 14,786.49 $10,976.00 $ 7,448.02 $ 4,826.51 $ 38,037.02 

Wastage $ 1,543.76 $ 795.01 $ 546.78 $ 494.18 $ 3,379.72 

Disbursements $ 1,047.55 $ 566.24 $ 664.66 $ 711.85 $ 2,990.29 

Administration $ 438.87 $ 438.87 $ 438.87 $ 438.87 $ 1,755.49 

Total $ 44,949.54 $46,535.09 $50,104.16 $ 55,877.13 $ 197,465.93

Net Benefit $ 16,841.19 $19,698.40 $25,384.87 $ 29,117.32 $ 91,041.79
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 81

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure D.13

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Construction Electrician – Quebec (n=20)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 78,669.08 $79,896.10 $99,873.07 $ 109,201.24 $ 367,639.48

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 33,299.70 $40,310.48 $47,885.14 $ 57,562.60 $ 179,057.92 

Journeyperson Time $ 11,962.62 $ 9,656.02 $11,538.03 $ 7,334.28 $ 40,490.96 

Wastage $ - 

Disbursements $ - 

Administration $ 102.94 $ 102.94 $ 102.94 $ 102.94 $ 411.76 

Total $ 45,365.26 $50,069.44 $59,526.11 $ 64,999.83 $ 219,960.64

Net Benefit $ 33,303.82 $29,826.65 $40,346.96 $ 44,201.41 $ 147,678.84

Figure D.14

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Construction Electrician – Atlantic (n=29)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 52,860.33 $57,609.19 $63,493.06 $ 75,626.30 $ 249,588.88

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 23,153.73 $27,531.54 $32,589.81 $ 39,930.69 $ 123,205.77 

Journeyperson Time $ 10,248.56 $ 6,042.27 $ 4,875.29 $ 2,918.59 $ 24,084.72 

Wastage $ 6,735.92 $ 3,339.86 $ 2,054.36 $ 1,935.09 $ 14,065.23 

Disbursements $ 65.25 $ 68.97 $ 66.74 $ 52.10 $ 253.07 

Administration $ 149.99 $ 149.99 $ 149.99 $ 149.99 $ 599.97 

Total $ 40,353.45 $37,132.64 $39,736.19 $ 44,986.47 $ 162,208.76

Net Benefit $ 12,506.88 $20,476.55 $23,756.87 $ 30,639.83 $ 87,380.13
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

82 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGAppendix E

Detailed Cost-Benefit Results by Employer Size

Automotive Services Technician

Figure E.1

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Automotive Service Technician – Overall (n=159)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 81,927.82 $ 96,029.04 $ 115,897.79 $129,283.39 $ 423,138.04

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 26,273.13 $ 30,747.62 $ 36,583.27 $ 43,316.66 $ 136,920.68 

Journeyperson Time $ 34,304.71 $ 26,890.31 $ 20,442.07 $ 12,921.84 $ 94,558.92 

Wastage $ 4,755.01 $ 3,102.86 $ 2,229.89 $ 1,120.19 $ 11,207.95 

Disbursements $ 1,682.35 $ 1,068.09 $ 1,026.83 $ 811.38 $ 4,588.65 

Administration $ 536.50 $ 536.50 $ 536.50 $ 536.50 $ 2,146.01 

Total $ 67,551.70 $ 62,345.38 $ 60,818.56 $ 58,706.57 $ 249,422.20

Net Benefit $ 14,376.12 $ 33,683.66 $ 55,079.23 $ 70,576.82 $ 173,715.83

Figure E.2

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Automotive Service Technician – <10 employees (n=81)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 71,332.31 $ 80,745.40 $ 94,914.83 $101,043.58 $ 348,036.11

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 24,164.48 $ 28,520.02 $ 34,243.20 $ 40,538.83 $ 127,466.53 

Journeyperson Time $ 28,785.84 $ 24,141.32 $ 17,435.13 $ 9,366.68 $ 79,728.97 

Wastage $ 4,837.39 $ 3,087.85 $ 2,239.83 $ 1,165.76 $ 11,330.83 

Disbursements $ 1,059.80 $ 359.95 $ 373.14 $ 180.07 $ 1,972.96 

Administration $ 573.02 $ 573.02 $ 573.02 $ 573.02 $ 2,292.07 

Total $ 59,420.53 $ 56,682.16 $ 54,864.31 $ 51,824.36 $ 222,791.36

Net Benefit $ 11,911.78 $ 24,063.24 $ 40,050.51 $ 49,219.22 $ 125,244.75
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 83

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure E.3

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Automotive Service Technician – 10 to 19 employees (n=32)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 83,158.21 $ 95,944.23 $ 130,796.68 $166,082.50 $ 475,981.62

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 30,951.04 $ 36,122.43 $ 42,458.84 $ 50,688.51 $ 160,220.81 

Journeyperson Time $ 25,158.81 $ 27,533.98 $ 21,024.96 $ 14,885.70 $ 88,603.44 

Wastage $ 8,422.99 $ 5,867.10 $ 4,043.15 $ 1,519.05 $ 19,852.30 

Disbursements $ 567.28 $ 480.36 $ 457.49 $ 361.41 $ 1,866.54 

Administration $ 83.81 $ 83.81 $ 83.81 $ 83.81 $ 335.23 

Total $ 65,183.93 $ 70,087.67 $ 68,068.24 $ 67,538.49 $ 270,878.33

Net Benefit $ 17,974.28 $ 25,856.55 $ 62,728.44 $ 98,544.02 $ 205,103.29

Figure E.4

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Automotive Service Technician – 20+ employees (n=46)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 97,015.99 $116,830.77 $ 137,527.82 $146,274.02 $ 497,648.60

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 28,396.79 $ 32,517.89 $ 38,360.62 $ 44,753.75 $ 144,029.06 

Journeyperson Time $ 38,192.98 $ 28,346.49 $ 21,708.49 $ 15,042.58 $ 103,290.53 

Wastage $ 1,397.84 $ 810.07 $ 665.01 $ 676.61 $ 3,549.53 

Disbursements $ 908.42 $ 742.83 $ 649.38 $ 579.59 $ 2,880.22 

Administration $ 851.19 $ 851.19 $ 851.19 $ 851.19 $ 3,404.77 

Total $ 69,747.22 $ 63,268.47 $ 62,234.70 $ 61,903.72 $ 257,154.11

Net Benefit $ 27,268.77 $ 53,562.30 $ 75,293.12 $ 84,370.30 $ 240,494.49
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

84 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGRefrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechan

Figure E.5

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic – Overall (n=118)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 52,133.61 $ 71,936.56 $ 78,185.40 $ 94,278.52 $ 296,534.10

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 28,342.06 $ 34,708.26 $ 42,175.75 $ 50,218.01 $ 155,444.09 

Journeyperson Time $ 28,371.07 $ 21,883.59 $ 12,438.00 $ 6,633.84 $ 69,326.50 

Wastage $ 3,109.39 $ 2,519.03 $ 1,605.48 $ 1,147.97 $ 8,381.88 

Disbursements $ 1,190.78 $ 1,208.83 $ 757.58 $ 577.76 $ 3,734.95 

Administration $ 744.11 $ 744.11 $ 744.11 $ 744.11 $ 2,976.46 

Total $ 61,757.42 $ 61,063.83 $ 57,720.93 $ 59,321.70 $ 239,863.88

Net Benefit $ (9,623.81) $ 10,872.73 $ 20,464.47 $ 34,956.83 $ 56,670.22

Figure E.6

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic – <10 (n=62)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 52,133.61 $ 71,936.56 $ 78,185.40 $ 94,278.52 $296,534.10

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 28,342.06 $ 34,708.26 $ 42,175.75 $ 50,218.01 $155,444.09 

Journeyperson Time $ 28,371.07 $ 21,883.59 $ 12,438.00 $ 6,633.84 $ 69,326.50 

Wastage $ 3,109.39 $ 2,519.03 $ 1,605.48 $ 1,147.97 $ 8,381.88 

Disbursements $ 1,190.78 $ 1,208.83 $ 757.58 $ 577.76 $ 3,734.95 

Administration $ 744.11 $ 744.11 $ 744.11 $ 744.11 $ 2,976.46 

Total $ 61,757.42 $ 61,063.83 $ 57,720.93 $ 59,321.70 $239,863.88

Net Benefit $ (9,623.81) $ 10,872.73 $ 20,464.47 $ 34,956.83 $ 56,670.22
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 85

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure E.7

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic – 10 to 19 employees (n=62)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 70,114.97 $ 92,146.09 $ 96,186.38 $122,137.88 $380,585.31

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 30,598.45 $ 37,623.97 $ 46,272.72 $ 58,279.26 $172,774.40 

Journeyperson Time $ 21,742.70 $ 20,397.56 $ 10,934.79 $ 4,670.24 $ 57,745.30 

Wastage $ 2,066.36 $ 1,615.26 $ 1,117.29 $ 789.53 $ 5,588.44 

Disbursements $ 891.22 $ 271.90 $ 362.53 $ 385.19 $ 1,910.83 

Administration $ 732.74 $ 732.74 $ 732.74 $ 732.74 $ 2,930.96 

Total $ 56,031.47 $ 60,641.43 $ 59,420.08 $ 64,856.96 $240,949.93

Net Benefit $ 14,083.50 $ 31,504.66 $ 36,766.31 $ 57,280.92 $139,635.38

Figure E.8

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Mechanic – 20+ (n=32)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 85,071.16 $ 91,546.81 $100,491.75 $112,793.90 $389,903.63

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 33,190.40 $ 33,190.40 $ 49,644.90 $ 58,298.99 $174,324.68 

Journeyperson Time $ 15,621.46 $ 12,776.07 $ 5,362.96 $ 4,981.69 $ 38,742.19 

Wastage $ 3,406.71 $ 2,638.47 $ 1,846.94 $ 1,274.55 $ 9,166.67 

Disbursements $ 585.88 $ 650.17 $ 771.48 $ 633.19 $ 2,640.73 

Administration $ 578.55 $ 578.55 $ 578.55 $ 578.55 $ 2,314.19 

Total $ 53,383.00 $ 49,833.65 $ 58,204.82 $ 65,766.97 $227,188.45

Net Benefit $ 31,688.16 $ 41,713.16 $ 42,286.93 $ 47,026.93 $162,715.18
APPRENTICESHIP WORKS

86 | The Return on Training Investment for Skilled Trades Employers in Canada—Phase II Final Report

www.caF-FCA.ORGConstruction Electrici

Figure E.9

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Construction Electrician – Overall (n=166)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 60,447.51 $ 65,794.80 $ 76,682.83 $ 86,675.77 $289,600.91

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 29,164.61 $ 35,524.03 $ 42,334.22 $ 50,393.98 $157,416.83 

Journeyperson Time $ 12,064.64 $ 8,358.17 $ 6,299.26 $ 3,583.10 $ 30,305.17 

Wastage $ 2,520.50 $ 1,360.49 $ 936.08 $ 819.03 $ 5,636.09 

Disbursements $ 1,396.53 $ 1,051.84 $ 1,027.30 $ 976.89 $ 4,452.56 

Administration $ 305.14 $ 305.14 $ 305.14 $ 305.14 $ 1,220.58 

Total $ 45,451.42 $ 46,599.67 $ 50,902.01 $ 56,078.13 $199,031.23

Net Benefit $ 14,996.09 $ 19,195.13 $ 25,780.82 $ 30,597.64 $ 90,569.68

Figure E.10

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Construction Electrician – <10 (n=87)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 53,943.16 $ 60,386.42 $ 73,417.98 $ 85,882.65 $273,630.21

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 26,814.14 $ 32,913.46 $ 39,463.62 $ 47,320.46 $146,511.67 

Journeyperson Time $ 13,330.70 $ 8,604.54 $ 6,475.17 $ 2,933.38 $ 31,343.80 

Wastage $ 1,451.14 $ 938.85 $ 684.32 $ 559.55 $ 3,633.86 

Disbursements $ 807.18 $ 505.33 $ 470.29 $ 532.28 $ 2,315.08 

Administration $ 601.43 $ 601.43 $ 601.43 $ 601.43 $ 2,405.72 

Total $ 43,004.59 $ 43,563.60 $ 47,694.84 $ 51,947.10 $186,210.14

Net Benefit $ 10,938.57 $ 16,822.82 $ 25,723.14 $ 33,935.55 $ 87,420.07
Canadian Apprenticeship Forum–Forum canadien sur l’apprentissage | 87

APPRENTICESHIP WORKS www.caF-FCA.O

Figure E.11

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Construction Electrician – 10 to 19 (n=32)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 68,344.33 $ 74,241.50 $ 82,146.32 $ 94,367.66 $ 319,099.82

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 29,916.62 $ 35,790.67 $ 42,122.48 $ 49,942.13 $ 157,771.90 

Journeyperson Time $ 6,239.21 $ 5,940.25 $ 2,787.32 $ 2,565.30 $ 17,532.07 

Wastage $ 753.22 $ 444.30 $ 263.67 $ 298.04 $ 1,759.23 

Disbursements $ 411.97 $ 281.24 $ 278.41 $ 247.32 $ 1,218.95 

Administration $ 177.04 $ 177.04 $ 177.04 $ 177.04 $ 708.16 

Total $ 37,498.05 $ 42,633.50 $ 45,628.93 $ 53,229.83 $ 178,990.31

Net Benefit $ 30,846.27 $ 31,608.01 $ 36,517.39 $ 41,137.84 $ 140,109.51

Figure E.12

Per Apprentice Costs and Benefits by Year of Apprenticeship –

Construction Electrician – 20+ (n=47)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

Benefits 

Attributed Revenue $ 66,293.66 $ 70,921.33 $ 80,692.74 $ 86,199.07 $ 304,106.81

Costs 

Wages and Benefits $ 32,705.67 $ 39,788.79 $ 47,344.93 $ 55,788.93 $ 175,628.33 

Journeyperson Time $ 13,061.41 $ 9,799.92 $ 7,913.06 $ 4,762.15 $ 35,536.54 

Wastage $ 7,524.46 $ 3,535.98 $ 2,350.75 $ 2,138.25 $ 15,549.44 

Disbursements $ 528.52 $ 401.74 $ 449.85 $ 433.81 $ 1,813.92 

Administration $ 280.45 $ 280.45 $ 280.45 $ 280.45 $ 1,121.81 

Total $ 54,100.51 $ 53,806.88 $ 58,339.05 $ 63,403.60 $ 229,650.04

Net Benefit $ 12,193.15 $ 17,114.45 $ 22,353.70 $ 22,795.47 $ 74,456.76