A Skills Shortage Plagues British Defense

On a visit to a Royal Air Force base, I met a military logistics driver, Jack. Jack joined young and received training in specialist defense logistics skills now in short supply. After his post was outsourced, Jack remained, with the reduced wages subsidized by his military pension. His son, eager to follow in his father’s footsteps, found the job financially untenable without that pension subsidy. Outsourcing was a false economy, generating a skills gap that is now becoming acute as Jack’s generation retires.

Historically, the defense industry has driven innovation, fostering advances that have shaped both military capabilities and broader societal and technological progress. Consider the pivotal roles of radar, semiconductor chips, and AI. In the 1990s, the now-defunct Royal Signals and Radar Establishment engaged in joint projects with industry to improve materials for semiconductors and optical instruments, critical technologies with far-reaching impact on defense and civilian technology. However, many defense training colleges and science and technology research organizations have since disappeared or been rationalized following decades of cuts to research and development programs.

Today, the U.K. defense sector faces science, technology, engineering, and math expertise shortages, with the British armed forces and industry struggling to recruit at the levels necessary to sustain growth and innovation. The U.K. defense sector faces an aging workforce and competition within a highly constrained labor pool.

Without developing and retaining science, technology, engineering, and math skills, neither  industry, nor the armed forces, can meet the challenges of the present. The U.K. government is finalizing its Strategic Defence Review and renewing the Defence Industrial Strategy with a focus on innovation and human capital. With European powers now compelled to expand their defense industries and lessen their dependence on a United States determined to reduce its European commitments, the U.K. government’s next steps will be vital to the nation’s future security and prosperity.

 

 

The Roots of the Problem

The current challenges in defense skills and workforce development can be traced back to structural changes initiated in the post-Cold War era, particularly following the “Options for Change” review in 1990, which marked a significant shift in the size and focus of the United Kingdom’s armed forces and defense industry. Jack, the defense logistics driver,  lost his original job in the military as part of this restructuring.

Options for Change resulted in a reduction of approximately 56,000 personnel across all three services by the mid-1990s, which had a knock-on effect in defense skills and workforce development. It was obvious at the time that the then-Thatcher government was not thinking very much about the impact on workforce and skills: When Tam Dalyell MP asked about losses in research and development “We have obligations to skilled people. Can we honor them?” the then-secretary of state for defense made it clear that such considerations depended solely on “how much we can afford and what research and development is justified”.

The focus of successive, mostly Conservative-led, defense reviews on procurement through competition and the free market, combined with a naive approach to the Ministry of Defence’s  industrial partnerships, has had serious consequences. The attempt to transform industrial partnerships into “a normal commercial relationship as much as any other major customer of industry enjoys” has led to a hollowed-out defense workforce lacking long-term strategic foresight, contributing to the skills shortage the United Kingdom faces today.

Recruitment and Retention Challenges

The defense sector has historically been a “grow your own,” ecosystem with military colleges and in-service training fostering expensive technical skills that, when cut, bled into the broader defense industry. However, the reduction in overall defense spending and personnel numbers has not only diminished the capacity for internal skills development but also weakened the sector’s ability to retain talent. Studies indicate that the impact of these cuts was severe, with approximately 80 percent of personnel leaving defense businesses not being reabsorbed elsewhere in the defense industrial base.

Over the past three decades, industry has been able to poach talent from the U.K. armed forces and civil service whose morale has been weakened by growing pay gaps and government instability. The history of U.K. technology policy, focused on contracting and buying from the private sector, meant that defense research and development has been predominantly performed by industry.

Today, the defense enterprise is impacted by the need to increase science, technology, engineering, and math graduates in the U.K. economy as a whole and increased competition with the civilian sector. The reality is that as the sector increasingly relies on dual-use technologies, it must compete more directly with civilian industries for skilled workers.

As a squadron commander in the Royal Air Force, I watched as we hemorrhaged B-certified aircraft engineers. I expected to lose some to defense contractors but, I found myself competing with unlikely adversaries: Amazon logistics hubs. Our engineers, trained to maintain military aircraft, were being lured away by the promise of higher salaries in robotics engineering. The economy-wide demand for less exquisite science, technology, engineering, and math skills created compensation gap we couldn’t bridge.

Moreover, in the face of budget pressures, research and development has tended to see a steady decline in its share of the defense budget, with industry expected to pick up more of the slack. Past governments’ underinvestment in research and development has limited industry’s ability to align research with defense needs and market opportunities. This has made this sector more difficult to access for science and technology graduates and researchers. Likewise, dual-use requires more joined-up coordination on research and development across government, particularly for aspects of defense like space and cyber capabilities.

The complacency of the past is no longer feasible. The United Kingdom can no longer rely on an unplanned labor market to provide the skills needed for its defense and ought to recognize how tightly interconnected the problems and opportunities facing the services and industry often are.

The Valley of Death: Bridging the Gap Between Research, Development, and Deployment

In the realm of research and development and critical technologies, a persistent “Valley of Death” continues to impede progress. This refers to the struggle to transition innovations from research to practical application, particularly in advanced engineering and manufacturing. The challenge is exacerbated by a chronic lack of early-stage research and development investment and a shortage of skilled engineers and scientists, which hinders the development of key defense capabilities and means innovations languish in the lab. As the U.K. government prepares for the upcoming Strategic Defence Review, widely considered to be one of the most consequential in a generation, significant questions arise regarding the alignment of defense research and development funding with the ambitious goals likely to be outlined. The gap between early-stage research and development investment and integration into Ministry of Defence capabilities is exacerbated by bureaucracy and processes geared towards larger, established primes rather than small and medium-sized enterprises and startups. The Ministry of Defence faces the challenge of keeping pace with rapid technological advancements, struggling to balance the need for agile procurement and development practices with the imperative of providing consistent, long-term funding for industry stability. Furthermore, the absence of streamlined funding and effective promotion leads to a fragmented research landscape, where duplication of efforts is common and alignment with strategic objectives can be compromised.

Sustaining Demand for Skilled Workers

The Ministry of Defence should recognize its pivotal role in sustaining demand for skilled science, technology, engineering, and math workers, and can never again assume a simple customer-business relationship with industry. Large-scale, long-term, multi-national initiatives like the Global Combat Air Programme and AUKUS for submarine delivery offer enduring employment opportunities, helping retain skilled workers in the sector. These programs not only provide job security but also attract new talent and open up global opportunities for work. A salutary example is the failure of submarine manufacturing in the United Kingdom to maintain a skilled workforce across projects, which led to a loss of workers (from 13,000 to 3,000), major project delays, and cost overruns between the Vanguard class and the beginning of the Astute class program. Long-term projects with strategic workforce planning are essential for fostering critical skills, preventing skill fade, and encouraging the development of the workforce of the future.

Rigid Career Paths and Missed Opportunities

The U.K. defense sector’s science, technology and engineering workforce challenges mirror a broader issue faced by military organizations across Europe and the United States. Traditionally, these institutions have favored a “grow your own” culture, prioritizing rank-based rather than skill-based assessments of competence. In the United Kingdom, this approach has left the sector struggling to ensure the flexibility and flow needed to adapt to the rapid pace of technological change and emerging threats. Skilled personnel face unique challenges: in the case of cyber, for example, specialists require costly, highly sought-after training, but they may also face limited traditional promotion opportunities in the armed forces, making the private sector an attractive alternative where they can get both greater remuneration and advancement.

However, the success of initiatives like the 2013 Cyber Reserve program in the United Kingdom demonstrates the potential of embracing more flexible career models. This is a lateral entry program for mid-career cyber professionals to become “specialist” reserves in the U.K. armed forces. The cyber reservists worked alongside regular counterparts and supported the training and upskilling of regular personnel.

To address these challenges, the Ministry of Defence should adopt a more individualized approach to workforce management, focusing on “zig-zag” careers that allow fluid movement between military
and industry roles. This shift requires reorganizing career management around skills groups and competencies rather than traditional rank structures, enabling greater flexibility in job appointments and career progression.

By reducing bureaucratic barriers to lateral entry and specialist reserves, and developing new narratives to explain these changes, the defense sector can attract and retain skilled personnel more effectively. Implementing alternative ranking systems or insignia for specialist roles could ease the integration of lateral entrants, while expanding successful models like the cyber lateral entry schemes to other science, technology, engineering, and math areas such as acquisitions, engineering, and medicine could provide valuable expertise across the entire defense ecosystem.

This may also require a step change in how we think about physical requirements in defense. Skilled personnel are not niche extras that can be quickly de-commissioned because they fail to fulfill age or medical requirements. It is commonplace to recognize that the battlespace now extends beyond physical domains, but the implications of this for workforce planning have not yet been fully accepted and absorbed. Many personnel do not need to meet the highest standards of combat fitness to contribute to a nation’s defense.

Defense as an Engine for Social Mobility

Across Europe, the defense sector is facing a growing challenge: inclusion or rather attracting and retaining a skilled workforce from increasingly diverse societies. I know from my own experience as working-class black man from east London how powerful the military can be as an engine for social mobility. In the United Kingdom, the government has explicitly identified the defense industry as a key driver of economic growth and opportunities. However, realizing this potential requires a fundamental shift in recruitment strategies and a commitment to inclusivity. While diversity framings and initiatives may be under strain in the United States today, the 1944 and post-9/11 GI Bills continue to provide educational benefits to service personnel, veterans, and reservists, demonstrating the potential of defense policies to foster social mobility and skills development, at a scale unmatched in much of Europe.

Currently in the United Kingdom, the defense sector can struggle to connect with underrepresented groups, focusing recruitment efforts on traditional strongholds and overlooking the talent pools within inner cities. Recent surveys have found that over half of U.K. 14 to 24-year-olds think the British Army is not currently recruiting, and only 19 percent recognize the science, technology, engineering, and math opportunities available, although 34 percent would consider such roles if made aware of them.

This is a critical oversight, especially in diverse urban centers like London with large populations and some of the highest rates of childhood poverty and disadvantage, including youth unemployment, in the United Kingdom. Failing to engage with these diverse populations not only limits the talent pool but also risks worsening negative perceptions of the defense sector among younger generations.

The United Kingdom’s current representation statistics highlight the urgency of this issue: people from ethnic minorities (excluding white minorities) currently make up 11.7 percent of U.K. Regular Forces and just 6.6 percent of the U.K. Reserve Forces, against a comparable figure of 18.3 percent of the whole U.K. population. Meanwhile, 11.9 percent of U.K. Regular Forces and 15.9 percent of U.K. Reserve Forces are female versus 51 percent of the whole U.K. population, and only slow progress is being made in reducing this gender disparity.

One of my past mentees was a young black rail engineer from north London. He shared with me how his friends perceived engineering as a “white person’s job.” Going to work in his coveralls drew derision, although this did not dent his pride in his work. It is essential to break down these barriers of perception, and show how rewarding science, technology, engineering, and math roles can be, to draw on all the talent in our societies.

Prioritizing Skills, Knowledge, and Continuous Learning

Several key steps can be taken to improve social mobility and broaden access to defense careers. This can start with basic and cost-effective forms of wrap-around support that promote access to employment and education, such as financial assistance for people seeking opportunities outside their immediate area through relocation assistance and bursaries.

Disadvantaged young people often apply to lower-level training programs or lack the necessary grades for high-level programs. Therefore, contextual admissions for training programs like apprenticeships or college courses are crucial. These admissions should recognize the varying challenges faced by young people during their schooling and acknowledge that different science, technology, engineering, and math roles require different levels of skills and knowledge. For example, one key skill that employers in defense currently struggle to recruit for is welding.

To effectively build on improved access at entry level, the defense sector should embrace continuous learning, reskilling and upskilling, which enables three key benefits: ensuring that skills can develop with the pace of technological change; enhancing the career offer to those starting out; and giving the opportunity for those from disadvantaged backgrounds to get a leg up once they are in employment.

Conclusion

The present moment, when the threats against the United Kingdom and Europe are front of mind for the public to an extent unparalleled in many years, provides an essential opportunity to reverse the skills dynamics that are holding the defense enterprise back. The public needs to be made more aware of the military and hybrid threats the United Kingdom and Europe faces, educating citizens about the stakes in international conflicts and the potential costs of failing to deter aggressors.

To do so, a whole-of-society approach is needed, one that actively engages with inner-city communities and younger age groups to address the specific barriers that prevent individuals from considering defense sector careers. The U.K. defense sector can do far more to reach into schools and local communities, highlighting science, technology, engineering, and math opportunities and addressing the misgivings about defense that some do share. What is required is an inclusive case for defense that highlights the opportunities as well as what is at stake, because the defense sector simply cannot afford to be perceived as the reserve of one ideological or population segment.

While the U.K. and European defense sectors grapples with significant recruitment and retention shortfalls, there are lessons that can be learned. Science, technology, engineering, and math fields have faced similar criticism to the defense industry for being unrepresentative and male-dominated and ultimately failing to bring people along, but counter-narratives and popular initiatives have emerged to engage women and disadvantaged groups in science, technology, engineering, and math careers, something the Ministry of Defence should learn from.

The U.K. defense sector stands at a critical juncture. Lingering complacency regarding science, technology, engineering, and math skills is no longer an option in an era defined by rapid technological change and intensifying global competition. To rebuild the foundation in these circumstances, a more joined-up, long-term lens is essential.

The forthcoming Defence Industrial Strategy provides a timely intervention point for a shift in approach: prioritizing collaboration across government, industry, and academia to embrace “zig-zag” careers, supporting continuous learning, streamlining research and development funding, and embracing skills-based career pathways. By fostering a system that encourages innovation and inclusivity, the defense sector can cultivate the resilient, adaptable science, technology, engineering, and math workforce necessary to maintain its technological edge and ensure industrial resilience. This approach will not only help address the U.K. skills shortage in science, technology, engineering, and math fields but also strengthen the connection between society and defense, ultimately contributing to a more robust and representative national security framework.

 

 

Calvin Bailey is the Labour member of the U.K. Parliament for Leyton and Wanstead. He is a member of the Defence Select Committee and chair of All-Party Parliamentary Group for the Armed Forces community. Prior to his political career, Bailey served 25 years in the Royal Air Force, achieving the rank of wing commander and earning an MBE for his work. This article is based on the author’s submission to the Defence Industrial Strategy, with research assistance from Alessandra Barrow.

Image: Duncan Colin Campbell via U.K. Ministry of Defence (Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0).