Fine. I understand. I see that no study focuses specifically on that aspect. So it will be less interesting, in my opinion.
In terms of the targeted initiative for older workers, it is supposed to help workers from 55 to 64 years of age by providing a range of employment-oriented activities, such as training that is tailored to meet their needs.
In my riding, the Centre d'aide et de recherche d'emploi Montmagny-L'Islet has developed the Cible-55 program, which is supported in large part by the federal government. They do not provide specialized training. They do not teach welders how to use new computerized welding equipment, for example. The employees at the organization sit down with people who may not have prepared a resumé or gone to an interview in 25 years. So they offer to go through it all with them so that it will not be so hard later.
They get annual funding that is not indexed and they live under the constant threat of being told that their jobs will not exist next year. I do not understand that. People who lose their jobs after 25 or 30 years at the same place need someone to support them as they return to the workforce, by showing them, for example, how to write a resumé and how to express themselves in an interview.
Given that the need is not going to go away, why is the organization not offered three-year funding, at least? It could then have some assurance that it would be able to operate properly.