Abstract EN:

1) first period (1950-1970): predominance of governmental services: national education system, vocational training for adults, fpa. Second period (1970-1990): expansion of apprenticeship and continuous training. 2)due to the lack of a personnel policy and the deficiencies of the construction policy, the successive years of trained personnel do not correspond to any background outline or standard. 3) four separate systems are at hand (the school, apprenticeship, the professional training system for adults, the continuous training) instead if a comprehensive training system for the construction and public work sector. A specific institutional framework is available for each of them. 4) one does notice the permanence of the skills, the ever lasting discourse, the defiance towards theoretical teaching and the introduction of new degrees, and the paradoxal strong attachment to the profession by some of the manpower that would not want to leave it despite all the economical difficulties of the sector. 5) the particularly slow pace of change can be explained by the permanence of the technical working procedures and the important role that the sharing of a common training background (and of some categories of diplomas) plays in the social identification process of this profession. 6) one can conclude that a different phasing applies to the history of training systems, with periods stretched over longer cycles as political or economical historical cycles.