Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the distribution of learning and training opportunities in
the Finnish workforce. It will concentrate on the sectors of the workforce that lack these opportunities.
Design/methodology/approach – The Working Conditions Barometer (WCB) data from 2008, 2009 and
2010 are used (N 3,326) in this investigation. The focus of the study is to examine those employees whose
learning and training opportunities fail to match the positive visions of the current “super professional hype”.
The problems associated with the workforce training margin are considered as a part of the so-called work
process debate.
Findings – Findings suggest that age, gender, type of industry and socioeconomic status have an
independent influence on an individual’s presence in the training margin: women, older employees, employees
in manufacturing and the private service sector and manual workers have a greater risk than others do. The
relative differences between the social classes are still prevalent: incapacity and marginalization are primarily
working class problems.
Practical implications – The workers should collectively demand certain benefits more forcefully, even
when working under fixed-term contracts. Employers should be pressured to organise development
opportunities and training for the fixed-term employees, including the type of training that not only benefits
an employee in that one company but also the employees’ working life in general. Employers should be
persuaded to organise the type of training that improves the chances of a fixed-term or otherwise powerless
employee to find a new, perhaps better and more secure job.
Originality/value – Because the percentage of response to the WCB is exceptionally high, 80 per cent on
average, the information obtained from the random sample can be generalised to represent all of the working
wage earners in Finland and in a European context as well.