In recent decades, labor force participation has changed little among California adults in their primary working years—ages 25–54, or “prime age,” as commonly defined in analyses of labor markets. This overall trend, however, masks notable changes by gender: 75% of prime-age women were in the labor force in 2022, up from 71% in 1992. The pattern is opposite for men, with participation falling to 88% in 2022 from 92% in 1992. While the gender gap in participation is still a topic of concern, so is the deterioration among men.

When we examine differences by education level among prime-age men, some explanations emerge. Among men with a bachelor’s degree, participation has been unchanged since 1992; it has fallen for men with less educational attainment—especially among those with a high school education only. Although more men have earned four-year degrees over this time, the declining labor force participation of men without degrees is substantial enough to drive the overall decline among prime-age men.

We convened a group of policy experts, practitioners, and advocates for a conversation to better understand these labor market trends among men with less educational attainment, the factors underlying the trends, and the potential levers available to state policymakers to address them. The discussion revealed important insights into barriers and opportunities.

• Men with less education struggle to find stable, remunerative careers. This challenge is heightened in sectors that are evolving due to technology, international trade, and automation.
• The route through traditional education has obstacles. Some men face difficulties accessing, financing, navigating, and completing traditional higher education pathways. Similar barriers to nondegree licensing, apprenticeships, and union membership can also limit opportunities.
• A criminal history adds barriers and complexities. Men with a criminal record face layered barriers to joining the workforce when they also have less education, including explicit or implicit bans from certain opportunities. Training programs are not always effective or easy to navigate, and people often must begin with earning a GED. Furthermore, incarceration can worsen gaps in digital access and skill, which are key components in today’s labor market.
• Some training programs are rigid. Rigid program requirements and accountability create barriers to entry and completion; some participants noted that administrative burdens can be demoralizing for students. Many students also have difficulty finding stable careers even after completion, sometimes returning to training programs and repeating a similar cycle.
• Workforce training investments need to address the whole person. People are often training and searching for a new job while trying to cover basic needs. Programs could boost participation—and completion—by offering services such as counseling, career navigation, and administrative support; however, noncredit divisions at community colleges lack funding to expand and provide these necessary student supports.
• A lifecycle, holistic approach to understanding barriers is essential. Near-term solutions to support the current workforce are important, but structural reforms would create longer-lasting improvement. Challenges that occur throughout the educational pipeline need to be addressed, including the lack of career learning in K–12 and the accumulation of a criminal record and/or incarceration while still in school.

The complex issues affecting labor force participation for men without a college degree are not unique; these issues reflect broader challenges faced by many groups. Indeed, many of the policy recommendations put forth by our workshop practitioners could be broadly targeted. Policies to expand nondegree and noncredit programs, improve student services, and support pathways into nontraditional fields—such as education and healthcare, for men—could improve access to meaningful economic opportunity.

California’s population continues to age, and the labor market continues to transform due to forces like technology. In light of these changes, understanding the levers that best boost participation among men and other groups could offset workforce declines while supporting individual mobility.