Status of Women Committee on April 19th, 2010

[Dr. Anne Doig]

I think doctors have always understood that there needs to be cover. If one is working where there is someone with whom one can share the load, there is that ability to take a bit of personal time away from the practice and R and R, which is not available to a solo practitioner. This is not new in medical practice. I think we have been pretty good over the years in understanding how to share coverage with each other.

What I think has changed, and Dr. Gartke alluded to this, is the fact that it's more okay to take a little more time for ourselves than it used to be. The 60-hour weeks are disappearing; we're down to 48-hour, 49-hour weeks.

[Michelle Simson, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

With due respect to time, I think an argument can be made that there are a lot of females working in various professions that either have the same number of hours or exceed that. Typically, I hear a lot of women are putting in 60-hour weeks. Is it because they're caring for people? Is it the added responsibility? They're caring for children; they're caring for their patients. They're constantly in that mode. Is that a factor, do you think?

[Dr. Kathleen Gartke]

As Dr. Gautam suggested, physicians are of a certain type, and most physicians are A-type personalities, perfectionists, hard-driven, want to get everything completed and perfectly so, which does lead to some of the 60-hour work weeks you're talking about.

I also wanted to mention that certain types of practice--and this may be why women are gravitating towards certain types of practices--lend themselves more to a communal type of practice with back-up. Certainly if we focus on where I've been focusing, on the surgical specialities, there is a special contract, or whatever you want to call it, between the patient and their surgeon. That's not as easily shared around.

[Michelle Simson, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

That's bang on. So we will go to the Bloc Québécois, Nicole Demers.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for being here this afternoon, ladies.

I am going to ask you three questions in a row, because I don't have a lot of time and I want to use it to get as many answers as possible. I will let my colleague, our expert in labour law, ask questions for Ms. Pageau and Mr. Coles.

Dr. Doig and Dr. Gartke, I would like to know whether you think that male doctors are feeling a little threatened at present. We hear voices everywhere calling for fewer women to be accepted into faculties of medicine, because, apparently, they are not admitting enough men any more.

Can you explain for me why this situation has arisen? I don't understand. It seems to me that when you are admitted into medicine it's because you have the marks you need. So the fact that there are fewer men has nothing to do with the fact that there are more women.

Why would people want to limit the number of women in faculties of medicine? That is of great interest to me, specifically because, just this morning, I was reading an article that said they want to do the same thing in the public sector. They want to remove the positive discrimination clause that encourages the hiring of more women, because, apparently, there are too many women there too. When there are too many women in a situation, do men feel they are being hurt? I don't understand.

Next, Ms. Mingarelli, I would also like to ask you a question. When Kofi Annan was United Nations Secretary General, he said that when there are more women elected to government, the situation improves. Then he gave the example of Rwanda, where the government is over 56% women and the maternal and child health situation has improved greatly in recent years. Are there other situations where the fact that there are more women leads to better distribution of wealth and various items?

Ms. Goulet, I am very surprised to learn that you did not receive your funding. The Minister had promised me personally that if you submitted your project last September you would have your funding to start your activities in February. I am very surprised that you did not receive it. I am even angry. I want to know why you didn't receive it. I would like to know how much you requested. It is a three-year project. What do you think are the reasons why you didn't get funding?

Thank you. Over to you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Dr. Doig, would you like to start?

[Dr. Anne Doig]

Thank you very much for that question.

I think the question you are asking is whether there is push-back from men about the number of women that are in medicine. You raised the question of marks as the bar to pass to entry into medical school. In the statistics I presented to you I think it was fairly clear that the number of actual female students in university is significantly higher. So the ratio between the number of female students in university and the number of female students in medicine is roughly equal. I think it is a little higher at some of the universities in Quebec that are approaching 70% female as against 30% male in medicine. But generally speaking--

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Excuse me, Dr. Doig, but that wasn't my question.

There are voices calling for it at present. There was an article in the newspaper last week in which they were calling for fewer women to be accepted into medicine. That's what I mean. I know there are more women at present. But they are calling for there to be fewer, and that's what concerns me.

[Dr. Anne Doig]

I would share your concern if people were listening to those voices. But I have no reason to believe that this is a sentiment that is held by the deans of the colleges of medicine, or by the people responsible for entry into medicine. Those people who are responsible for ensuring who gets in are not under those kinds of pressures. So this may be an opinion that you are reflecting, but not one that is held by the colleges.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

I'll send you the information.

[Dr. Kathleen Gartke]

I just wondered if I could make a comment on that.

Actually from a personal point of view, I agree with you, balance is good in many aspects of life. I think that the method of accepting students to medical school has actually been a very complex process that's been worked on over many years, with the goal, of course, of getting the best students into the school. But I think what has happened to some degree is the method of selection has perhaps gradually varied into an area that tends to favour women, because I don't think we can say that women are smarter than men.

So I hear your concern. I would hate to see it go completely the other way and have nothing but women.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

I'll send you the information, because it amazed me.

[Dr. Janet Dollin, Past President, Federation of Medical Women of Canada]

The other point to your question I would like to add is the advantage to the men who are in medicine who are gaining from the balance perspective the women are talking about. I would like to say that we are happy to work with our male colleagues, and we want them to take parental leave and want them to take flexible time and want them to work fewer hours, and they're happy to be agreeing that that's probably the better way to go for life balance.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Thank you.

Ms. Mingarelli.

[Giovanna Mingarelli]

Good afternoon, Ms. Demers. Thank you for your question.

I would ask that Nancy answer the question, if possible.

[Nancy Peckford]

There have in fact been positive changes in the system.

As well, a lot of research is being done in the Scandinavian countries.

What we know is that once there is a critical mass,

that is, over 30%,

public policy outcomes and the focus of debate in legislatures changes. It's both a cultural thing--the culture of the legislature is more conducive to issues that women care about--and there also tends to be more collaboration.

Some of this research is still preliminary, and much of it has been done in Scandinavian countries, where in fact there have been increased numbers of women in legislatures for quite some time. I think the Rwandan example is still one that's being studied. Equal Voice recognizes that women come to the table with all kinds of opinions and approaches.

That said, there appears to be a trend that underscores that legislatures tend to become more collaborative and that public policy outcomes tend to focus more on issues women care about.

That is what we know now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I'll let Madame Goulet have a minute to answer the question.

[Nathalie Goulet]

Last year, we were told, in Quebec, that occupational diversification for women was one of the leading objectives in the invitation to submit proposals that year under the Women's Program by the Women's Community Program.

After three or four tries, we submitted an application for a Women's Partnership Fund project, which did not produce results. We worked on that project for two years. We were not given a reason, we were not given justification, in the letter we received, rejecting our project.

I would like to say that this was a project that met the program objectives. It was not a collective rights project, it was an umbrella training project on women's rights in the workplace, focusing on non-traditional jobs. We also wanted to provide tools for nearly 100 companies in Quebec, and we wanted to work on the project with our member groups that provide employability services for women and that are spread out all across Quebec.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Finish your sentence and then I'll have to stop.

[Nathalie Goulet]

As well, we have been retained by Emploi-Québec to carry out a coordinated action strategy, which we have just described for you. We are going to continue to do it, but unfortunately without federal funding at the moment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Merci.

We now have the Conservatives and Madame Boucher.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Good afternoon, everyone. I hope you are well.

What we are hearing is very interesting. For several weeks, we have been studying the issue of non-traditional jobs for women. We have heard about a lot of things. One of them is education. Often, the image of women in non-traditional jobs is not sold well, even in the academic community. When we travel around Quebec, in the cégeps, we see that it is not being sold to our young women. We might say it is not attractive or we are selling it badly. Last week, we met with women in mining. That seemed very interesting. We wondered how it could be that we don't hear more about that.

I have two daughters, aged 21 and 22. When I talk to them about non-traditional jobs, they always have the same image, a woman in construction or mechanics and pipefitting, as if these were the only two jobs and there were no others.

I would like to ask the question for pretty much everybody. If we want there to be women in non-traditional jobs, it's a question of education. Is there a way to do it? Could the government or governments, because there are several levels of government, work together to find positive ways of attracting women into non-traditional jobs, by making them attractive? In medicine, you have to study chemistry and physics. We know that women don't find that very... Most girls have a lot of difficulty with anything non-emotional. How would you sell it? That is one of my first questions.

I would also like to ask male doctors whether they feel that people are resistant to there being women in non-traditional jobs. I put the question to either the men or the women, or both. Is there also resistance in the unions? We have heard women say that unions were not open to them entering non-traditional jobs. Those are my two main questions.

I would like to ask the CIAFT representatives whether we could see the letter. I was involved in that case and I want to know. I would very much like you to tell me about that rejection. I learned about it this morning and I would like to understand it to.

[Josh Coles, National Representative, Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada]

Madame Boucher, that's an excellent question regarding how we can go out and proactively get more female students into non-traditional occupations. I'd like to refer to our report in regard to construction.

In Saskatchewan we literally had to go out and do house calls. You literally have to use your networks of friends and associates to proactively find students and explain to them what you or the college is offering, and explain to them that construction, for example, isn't as bad as it once was but has become a lot better and that there are barriers that both of you can get through together. You need to physically make contact with these people. So instead of waiting for students to come to you, we have found—in the west, at least—that colleges will work alongside us in proactively going out to get the people. We have found that it's this kind of labour-intensive recruiting that pays dividends.

[Dr. Kathleen Gartke]

I was just going to say in terms of medicine and the literature on medicine that it's very clear that what we lack in some areas are mentors and role models. I don't necessarily have a program to recommend for how they can be used, but there's no doubt that this seems to be one of the big inhibiting factors in a lot of areas of medicine.

I think this goes to what that gentleman just said, that it's about bringing people in contact with someone who can perhaps erase some of the misconceptions and reassure them about the fears they may have, whether they're properly grounded or not. It's about being able to answer those questions.

I think we need more matching of role models and mentors with mentees.