The results of the government\u2019s independent review into youth unemployment, published at the end of May, were shocking, showing that nearly one million young people aged 16 to 23 are not in either education, employment or training.<\/p>\n
In his initial report, Alan Milburn, who carried out the review, laid the blame on schools, government and other bodies responsible for training and employment, which he said had created a broken system.<\/p>\n
According to the Office for National Statistics figures from February, 957,000 young people were out of work in the UK between October and December last year.<\/p>\n
Youth unemployment affects all corners of society and every industry, said the report. And the architecture profession has also suffered, experiencing growing problems around training early-career architects.<\/p>\n
AJ100 practice JTP received an astonishing 2,600 applicants for nine Part 1 positions last year, many of whom had struggled to find a professional placement the previous year despite \u2018being talented individuals\u2019 in the firm\u2019s words.<\/p>\n
That is a success ratio of 289:1 \u2013 a number far higher than the still sky-high 140:1 ratio for law and medicine graduates seeking vacancies, as highlighted in The Guardian\u00a0and\u00a0The Telegraph\u00a0last year.<\/p>\n
\n\u2018AI is increasingly undertaking Part 1 work\u2019<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
The AJ understands JTP isn\u2019t the only architect attracting huge numbers of desperate applicants. Several other practices have had similar experiences, with their Part 1 places well oversubscribed.<\/p>\n
AtkinsRealis told the AJ it had witnessed a \u2018high volume of applications for our 2026 early careers programmes and while we\u2019re not able to share numbers for any specific roles or schemes, AtkinsR\u00e9alis supports over 700 early careers professionals each year through our graduate, apprenticeship and industry placements.\u2019<\/p>\n
What is to blame? AI, but only partially.<\/p>\n
Paul Chappell of 9b careers<\/a>, like others the AJ spoke to, believes AI is partially to blame. \u2018AI is increasingly undertaking work that has traditionally formed part of the Part 1 architectural assistant role, further reducing opportunities at entry level,\u2019 says Chappell, whose recruitment firm allows practices to advertise Part 1 year-out placements for free.<\/p>\n
An AJ poll<\/a> last year showed that jobs such as writing minutes, competition bids, and Photoshopping material options were increasingly being given to AI at both small practices and members of the AJ100.<\/p>\n
At the same time, practices have been squeezed by rising overheads, minimum wage and national insurance increases, construction costs, delayed project timelines, falling fees, and rising ARB and RIBA membership fees.<\/p>\n
\n\u2018Without conscious intent, Part 1s are becoming less financially attractive to employ\u2019<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
This means practices are increasingly reconsidering hiring Part 1s. For instance, many Part 1s now earn only slightly less than a Part 2 following a 12 per cent increase in the London Living Wage. As JTP<\/a> managing partner Marcus Adams points out, this means Part 2s \u2018with their greater experience, may represent better value to practices\u2019.<\/p>\n
And he warns: \u2018Without conscious intent, Part 1s are becoming less financially attractive to employ. We need to be mindful of this, while also recognising that individuals should be fairly rewarded for the roles they undertake.\u2019<\/p>\n
Chappell agrees, adding: \u2018Employing and training Part 1 architectural assistants is becoming less of a priority for many businesses. Increasingly, practices are focusing on recruiting Part 2 assistants who can make a greater immediate contribution to projects and are more likely to remain with the practice for several years, making the investment in training and development easier to justify from a commercial perspective.\u2019<\/p>\n
Better paid alternatives?<\/p>\n
On the other hand, architecture is simultaneously leaking talent to other sectors, such as IT, where graduate salaries are far higher, while unqualified teenagers can earn more than a Part 1 architect.<\/p>\n
Del Hossain, an associate professor at UCL and director at Adrem Careers<\/a>, says: \u2018The average RIBA part 1 salary in Manchester is approximately \u00a324,500. A part 2 earns on average \u00a325,000\u2013\u00a330,000 in Manchester, while in London it is around \u00a328,000\u2013\u00a334,000.<\/p>\n
\u2018The National Living Wage for anyone aged 21 and over from April 2026 is \u00a312.71 per hour, which annualised over a standard 37.5-hour week, is \u00a324,784. A Part 1 architect in Manchester therefore earns on a par with the adult national living wage. A Part 2 earns only marginally above it.\u2019<\/p>\n
Hossain also points out that at \u00a325,000, student loan repayments kick in, meaning a chunk of Part 2 architects in Manchester will begin repaying debt \u2018from their first pay cheque\u2019.<\/p>\n
He adds: \u2018For someone with five to seven years of education and over \u00a3100,000 of debt, this is not a market inefficiency; it is a structural failure.\u2019<\/p>\n
The harsh economic reality facing students is being seen by many in the education sector. Speaking at a RIBA presidential hustings debate last week (1 June), candidate and academic Duncan Baker-Brown said he was \u2018painfully aware\u2019 of the crisis. \u2018Our students can\u2019t afford to do what we love to do,\u2019 he said, noting that the rising cost of living has forced all of his full-time master\u2019s students into part-time jobs just to get by.<\/p>\n
The long-term risks<\/p>\n
Tamsyn Curley, director at recruitment agency Place<\/a>, says the current challenges around Part 1 recruitment are \u2018real\u2019 and require \u2018an honest conversation\u2019.<\/p>\n
She tells the AJ: \u2018RIBA\u2019s training framework has always relied on a simple accord: practices get affordable developing talent, students get hands-on experience they can\u2019t get in a lecture theatre. That accord is starting to get unpicked, and the profession will need to address it asap.\u2019<\/p>\n
But she adds: \u2018On the bright side, this could be the push the industry needs to do things differently \u2013 maybe smaller practices sharing a junior between them, more flexible project-based roles, closer ties between universities and live practice. There are some genuinely exciting models worth exploring.\u2019<\/p>\n
\n\u2018The ARB\u2019s current education review is the perfect moment to rethink\u2019<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
ARB\u2019s reforms will remove the existing Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3 structure. Under the shake-up, the old Part 1 will not be needed. For instance, students who have completed a landscape architecture or \u2018similar\u2019 undergraduate degree can go on to take a postgraduate-level architecture qualification that meets the ARB\u2019s prescribed Academic Outcomes \u2013 equivalent to the old Part 2.<\/p>\n
So, while the new regime is about competency, the need for Part 1s to gain work experience could be diminished, or at least not be necessary in the same way as for yesterday and today\u2019s architects.<\/p>\n
As Curley argues: \u2018The ARB\u2019s current education review is the perfect moment to rethink what counts as valid experience and bring the rules in line with how architecture actually works today.<\/p>\n
\u2018Practices that get ahead of this and keep investing in junior talent, even in new ways, will be the ones people want to work for. And as a specialist architecture and built environment recruitment consultancy with strong relationships across all types of practice, we\u2019re ideally placed to help make those connections happen.\u2019<\/p>\n