BWF CEO: We are united against ‘dumbing down’ of apprenticeships 

“There are a couple of things that have pushed everybody together,” explains Helen Hewitt, CEO of BWF, who has led the coalition’s response to the government’s proposals.

“Following Grenfell, there were several groups that were created under the Industry Competence Steering Group, looking at the competence of individuals within the built environment.

“Under the reforms following the Building Safety Act, there was a call from Dame Judith Hackitt for a universal shift in culture, and part of that is to make sure that any individual working within construction actually has the right competence to do the job.”

According to Hewitt, the industry’s efforts over the past five years – mapping competence frameworks as part of the Super Sector Programme overseen by Sector Lead Group 10 (SLG 10) – are now being undermined by Skills England’s approach to new apprenticeship assessment plans.

“When we first saw the assessment plan for carpentry and joinery, it was very clear from day one that it was going to dilute the qualification,” she says.

“That was in direct conflict with the work that the ‘Super Sector’ is doing under the Building Safety Act.”

Under the current system, apprentices in trades such as carpentry and joinery must demonstrate competence against roughly 70 skills and knowledge criteria before they can complete their end-point assessment.

The proposed reforms, Hewitt says, would see that assessment reduced to 30%-40% of the overall qualification.

“Would you want to go to a doctor and know that they’ve only learned half of what they need to know?” she asks.

The changes, she argues, would effectively shorten apprenticeship programmes, lower standards, and make it harder to prove on-site competence, ultimately undermining existing systems such as the CSCS card scheme.

“We’re about to break a system that has been developed by the industry for many years to ensure we can check competence,” she warns. “For us, it’s really disappointing.”

The letter from the coalition urged a halt to the reforms and called for genuine engagement with employers and professional bodies.

“The British Woodworking Federation couldn’t fight this on its own,” Hewitt says. “It needed to be across the board.

“That is why we’ve all united, because we all use apprenticeships. We want to make sure we increase the skill set of individuals in construction.”

Hewitt adds that the coalition’s frustration has been compounded by what it sees as a lack of consultation and collaboration with industry.

“We’ve experienced first-hand a less-than-meaningful consultation process,” she says.

“It’s been forced upon us – timelines, assessment plans – and it became apparent that we needed to collectively unite as an industry.”

In response to the open letter, a Skills England spokesperson told CM People: “We have listened to concerns from the construction industry. This was a pilot and changes to the apprenticeship were paused subject to further consultation.

“We seek to deliver apprenticeships that have the rigour and quality employers need, with the proportionate, timely and efficient assessment required.

“The majority of apprenticeships will not be deliverable in eight months, but those that can will deliver benefits for both employers and trainees.

“We value the views of the construction sector, who we want to work with to get this right.”

However, Hewitt insists that there has been “zero” response from ministers directly to the industry leaders backing the letter.

“Not one response, which is really shocking,” she says. “They’re saying they’ve put the carpentry and joinery assessment plan on hold because they listened to industry, but there has been no response to any organisations in the coalition.

“I find it so disappointing and sad that our government is continuing to forge ahead.”

She also believes the government’s narrative of “gold standard” apprenticeships is contradicted by the proposed reforms.

“[Prime minister] Keir Starmer announced at the Labour conference that he’s investing in a gold standard,” Hewitt says.

“I’m not sure how we can categorise a reduced apprenticeship assessment process as a gold standard.”

Beyond the political and policy disputes, Hewitt warns of a chilling effect on employers’ willingness to take on apprentices.

“There are many members who have held off taking on apprentices at the start of this year because they don’t trust in the new reform process,” she explains.

“One has specifically gone as far as to say they’ve put a complete halt on engaging and bringing on new apprentices within their business.”

For apprentices already in training or about to start, she says, the reforms risk devaluing their qualifications and their confidence.

“I think it’s very sad for any apprentice who is currently embarking on an apprenticeship,” she says. “Employers will not see apprenticeships as a valued route to employment and competence.

“Ultimately, this is about making sure individuals feel proud and ensuring they have got the necessary skillset to go into the industries they want to work in.”

Hewitt also warns that the ripple effects could undermine efforts to improve building quality and safety nationwide.

“We are trying to build 1.5 million homes, and make sure the homes we live in are safe and built of quality,” she says.

“But how are we going to do that if someone has been assessed on only a small portion of what they’re expected to demonstrate within an apprenticeship?”

Despite the lack of government engagement so far, Hewitt says the coalition remains determined to continue its work on competence frameworks and national occupational standards – even if it means reassessing how the industry approaches apprenticeships in future.

“We will continue to develop our competence frameworks,” she said. “But when it comes to apprenticeships, we’re caught between the devil and the deep blue sea.

“If these reforms go ahead, then as an industry we’re going to have to make a decision: do we take on apprenticeships or do we not?”

As the debate continues, the coalition’s message remains clear: competence, safety and quality must not be sacrificed for speed or cost.

“[Government ministers are] telling themselves they’re employer-led and listening to industry, but they’re not engaging with experts – less so now than they ever have done,” Hewitt concludes.

“I think they’re going to get themselves into real problems if they don’t listen to what employers are telling them.”