Contemporary transformations in the world of work are placing skills under a dual pressure. On the one hand, technological, ecological and demographic transitions are transforming jobs, accelerating the obsolescence of certain know-how and reshaping expected skills. On the other hand, career paths are becoming less linear: mobility, career changes, repositioning and disruptions in professional trajectories are becoming more frequent.
These two dynamics lead to the same conclusion: professional skills can no longer be seen as an initial asset, stabilised at the point of entry into employment. They must instead be understood as evolving over time: their adaptation has become a central issue in securing career paths, for individuals, businesses and society as a whole.
In a report published in May 2026 (ILO, 2026), the ILO identifies lifelong learning as a strategic priority for supporting transformations in the world of work. Beyond preserving workers’ employability and productivity, continuous learning contributes to promoting decent work, stimulating innovation, strengthening the resilience of societies and supporting sustainable growth. Lifelong learning is therefore not only an individual lever for professional development; it is also a foundation for social inclusion.
The idea that workers should be able to learn throughout their professional lives is not new. It has already been highlighted in several major institutional reports, notably the OECD’s 2021 annual report Training for Life (OECD, 2021). The thesis put forward by the ILO is therefore not simply about the need for training, but about equal access to learning systems: to open up genuine professional opportunities and secure career paths, learning systems must be not only robust, but above all inclusive. Otherwise, they risk reinforcing inequalities between workers rather than reducing them.
Training systems must be robust, but above all inclusive
The ILO therefore shifts the perspective. The issue is not simply to state that workers need to be trained, or that more training is needed, but to ensure that all categories of workers have access to training. Current transitions, whether ecological, demographic or digital, affect every sector of activity. The ecological transition is redefining production systems, regulatory standards and certain professional practices, while digital technologies are changing the way work is carried out, both in industrial sectors and in service activities. Demographic change is transforming social needs, particularly in care, support services and personal services. These developments are creating new skills needs, but also new risks of exclusion for workers who receive the least support.
The ILO thus highlights persistent inequalities between formal and informal workers in access to continuing vocational training. Workers with low levels of formal education, those in informal employment or those working in small businesses are more likely to learn “on the job” and have only limited access to formally organised learning activities. By contrast, formal workers are more likely to access structured training, financed by their employer and officially recognised.
According to the report’s findings, this gap between categories of workers highlights the need for learning systems that better reflect the ways in which individuals acquire skills throughout their working lives. For the international organisation, continuing training systems remain too fragmented and underfunded given the strategic priority they should represent: without more robust and more inclusive systems, digital, ecological and demographic transformations risk exacerbating social and professional inequalities.
While this observation cannot be mechanically transposed to the French case, where the distinction between formal and informal work does not structure the analysis of vocational training in the same terms*, it nevertheless invites us to shift the focus to a related issue: inequalities in access to training according to qualification level, socio-professional category, employment status or company size.
Access to lifelong learning in France
In France, the 2018 reform strengthened several levers of lifelong learning. The expanded use of the Personal Training Account (Compte personnel de formation, CPF) facilitated the financing of individual training projects. The creation or mobilisation of career transition schemes such as Pro-A, Transco and the Professional Transition Project aimed to support professional transitions, as did career development counselling. Finally, the Skills Investment Plan contributed to the training of jobseekers (A. Louvet, 2025).
However, access to these training opportunities remains highly unequal. According to INSEE data (Bentoudja, Rosa, Schianchi, 2024), relayed by the Observatoire des inégalités (2024), vocational training mainly benefits the most qualified, thereby increasing inequalities in career paths. Adults who left initial education with a qualification below the baccalaureate level were three times less likely to have undertaken vocational training in 2022 than those with at least a bachelor’s degree or equivalent level of higher education (60% vs. 20%).
Similarly, senior managers are trained twice as often as manual workers (68% vs. 33%). People on permanent contracts are also better off than those on precarious contracts (49% vs. 34%), as are employees in large companies compared with those in small businesses (62% vs. 32%). The 2023 Employer Training Survey (EFE) confirms this trend: under the skills development plan, only 13% of employees in companies with fewer than 11 employees received employer-initiated training. The share of employees trained reaches 54% in companies with 50 to 249 employees, and 75% in companies with more than 2,000 employees (France compétences, 2025).
Thus, according to the Observatoire des inégalités, vocational training tends to raise the qualification level and productivity of those who are already best equipped, thereby increasing inequalities of opportunity over the course of professional trajectories.
The French case therefore illustrates the tension identified by the ILO. Even when a training system is dense and supported by numerous schemes, its effectiveness cannot be measured solely by the volume of training available. It must also be assessed by its ability to reach all categories of workers, make pathways easier to navigate, and ensure that learning is recognised and valued.
Making lifelong learning a genuine lever for inclusion: the ILO’s recommendations
According to the ILO, the first priority is to develop lifelong learning strategies that do not focus solely on isolated skills, such as technical skills, but rather on the acquisition of diverse combinations of skills: green, digital, socio-cognitive skills — such as teamwork and problem-solving — as well as manual skills. This “portfolio” of skills supports the emergence of well-rounded worker profiles, adapted to local labour markets.
The inclusiveness of lifelong learning systems should also be assessed through the recognition of skills that create social value. Skills associated with the care sector, which are in high demand in ageing societies, often remain undervalued. An inclusive system would provide greater recognition, and better pay, for these skills, which are often held by less qualified workers.
Finally, the ILO underlines the central role of employers’ organisations and trade unions in broadening access to lifelong learning.
In conclusion, the ILO report invites us to move beyond a purely quantitative view of lifelong learning provision and to focus instead on building more inclusive training pathways, in order to guarantee the adaptation of professional skills for all workers. This means identifying skills that are being reshaped, targeting the least-covered groups, recognising learning that takes place in work situations and strengthening social dialogue around training priorities.
From this perspective, KYU supports professional branches and federations in their forward-looking work on employment and skills, in implementing lifelong vocational training pathways, and in developing their certification strategies.
*Note: informal work refers to jobs without an employment contract and without social or regulatory protection, as opposed to formal work.
