Gendered skill gap

Women face multiple employment-related constraints

The latest data on the National Apprenticeship Promotion Scheme (NAPS) points to a familiar problem in India’s labour market: Women are entering the workforce in greater numbers, but their access to skilled and better-paying occupations remains limited. Women account for 29.5 per cent of the 1.35 million apprentices engaged under the NAPS in 2026-27 so far. This is a substantial improvement over the 11.8 per cent in 2018-19 and 22.5 per cent in 2024-25, although it is below the 32.4 per cent recorded in 2025-26. The more revealing numbers, however, are by trade. Women account for only 6 per cent of electricians and 2.6 per cent of fitters, and trades such as welding, diesel mechanics, and lineman have had no women apprentices. The government has sought to address this through apprenticeship fairs and stakeholder consultations, and by encouraging women to enter a wider range of sectors. The NAPS provides structured, industry-linked, on-the-job training, with the government covering 25 per cent of the prescribed minimum stipend, subject to a ceiling of ₹1,500 a month under NAPS-2. Yet the persistence of occupational segregation suggests that mobilisation alone will not suffice.

 

This matters because the challenge facing women is no longer simply whether they participate in economic activities but the quality and sustainability of that participation. The female labour force participation rate among women aged 15 years and above has risen to 40 per cent. This is encouraging, but employment statistics can conceal substantial differences in economic security and agency. In rural India, 32.9 per cent of female workers are helpers in household enterprises, while only 9.3 per cent are in regular wage or salaried employment. Such work counts as employment but may not provide an independent income. The high incidence of self-employment also raises concerns about whether it reflects genuine opportunities or constrained choices, and whether it allows women to accumulate skills, assets and earnings. In the age group 15-59, among those who had received formal vocational or technical training, only 51.4 per cent of women were employed, compared with 83.3 per cent of men. Thus, training alone clearly does not guarantee employment. The transition from training to work depends on accessible vacancies, safe mobility, workplace conditions, employer attitudes and family responsibilities. Occupational segregation compounds the problem. If women are channelled into a narrow range of services or low-skilled occupations while remaining absent from technical trades, their opportunities for higher productivity and earnings remain restricted.

 

However, constraints for women are not entirely workplace-related. Women aged 15-59 spend an average of 140 minutes a day on unpaid caregiving, compared with 74 minutes for men. Time poverty can push women towards work that is close to home, flexible or home-based, even when better opportunities exist elsewhere. The result can be interrupted careers and weaker lifetime earnings. Concern about safety and harassment further affects women’s willingness and ability to take up jobs involving travel, shifts or male-dominated workplaces. Digital exclusion adds another barrier. Policy must consequently move beyond counting female entrants. Apprenticeship programmes should track women’s participation across occupations, completion and placement rates, wages and progression after training. Expanding childcare, safe transport, affordable accommodation and effective workplace-grievance mechanisms is equally important.