Status of Women Committee on March 17th, 2010

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we will continue with our study on increasing the participation of women in non-traditional occupations.

Today we have witnesses with us, and witnesses from Moncton on video conference. The witnesses with us are Susan Russell--well known to us--executive director of the Canadian Federation of University Women; and Jacinthe Guay, Dimension Travail, liaison officer. The second group of witnesses are on video conference from Moncton, and they're from the Canadian Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs.

Thank you again for joining us. Everyone will have a 10-minute presentation. I will really try to keep you aware of how your time is going so we don't go over. Then we will hopefully have two rounds of questions: the first for seven minutes each and the second for five minutes each.

We will begin with Susan from the Canadian Federation of University Women for 10 minutes.

[Susan Russell, Executive Director, National Office, Canadian Federation of University Women]

Thank you. First off, happy St. Patrick's Day to everybody.

On behalf of the 10,000 members of the Canadian Federation of University Women, I thank you for the opportunity to present before this committee. CFUW is a non-partisan, self-funded organization of graduate women, students, and associate members in 112 clubs across the country. CFUW supports better public understanding and recognition of non-traditional work for women and encourages fostering pride in those occupations among women as well as men.

In general, widespread discrimination against women workers in male-dominated trades and occupations ranges from subtle to overt at work sites, colleges, and training centres. It is more overt in some trades than in the university or professional setting.

Most of the background for this paper came from British studies.

A 2007 Canadian study provided the following information on women in universities. At the undergraduate level, women students had reached more than parity. Fifty-eight percent of students at the undergraduate level were women. Women made up 51% at the Master's level, 45.6% at the PhD level, 41.4% of assistant professors, and 34.7% of associate professors. However, when we reach the level of full professors, only 18.8% were women, and as presidents of universities, women were the exception, at 13%.

In January 2005, then president of Harvard University, Lawrence Summers, suggested that the under-representation of women in science and engineering might be due, he said, at least in part, to inherent sex differences in cognitive abilities in math and science. Many felt that Dr. Summers' comments reflected deep-seated stereotypes about men's and women's natural abilities.

The question is whether cultural stereotypes help to diminish women's interest and performance in domains that have traditionally been dominated by men. From an early age, children are bombarded with cues that advertise which toys are appropriate for boys and which are for girls, and they soon develop different beliefs about their own competencies in certain fields. Many studies have shown that gender socialization leads girls to devalue math and science more so than do boys. What needs to happen to make sure that more women enter what are currently male-dominated careers is to educate the parents, teachers, and counsellors so that girls will be encouraged to take up these fields.

Gender differences in attitudes and beliefs appear to develop in early adolescence. Girls often experience low confidence of success in mathematics. In one study, twice as many men as women chose majors with a moderate level of mathematics, such as architecture, business, and economics. Men were four times as likely to pursue majors with high mathematical content, such as pure science, physics, engineering, and mathematics. At the same time, women, on average, scored lower on important standardized tests, thus constraining opportunities to receive advanced placements in math-related fields, which often leads to the fact that they end up in lower-paid jobs.

Socialization influences women's interest in and perception of different activities. Even where teachers, parents, and peers are supportive and the individual wants to pursue a career in a male-dominated profession, repeated exposure to stereotypes can negatively affect career aspirations. Some women may successfully buffer themselves from the experience, but they eventually get tired of trying to succeed in an area where they are expected to fail, must repeatedly disprove the cultural stereotype, or deal with an inflexible workplace, and they decide to opt for another career choice.

Several things need to happen. At interview, it is important to ensure that the interviewer does not allow stereotypes and bias to influence his ability to judge the real merit of the candidate. Once the candidate is hired, the workplace must be one where the woman can receive the respect due to her for her qualifications. Co-workers need to be encouraged to be both collegial and supportive.

Finally, it is found that when there are few women in a field, that field is seen as essentially male-dominated. As more women enter the field, greater numbers of other women are encouraged to join that field, and there is more support and more networking, and so on. Women students need to be assured that when they graduate, they will be hired on the same basis that men are hired and that the workplace they enter will value their contributions.

Regarding pay equity, when women are hired, it is important that their work be valued and that they be paid the same as men in that workplace. Currently, women earn 71¢ for every dollar that men earn. This means that after university they take longer to pay off their debts, contribute less to EI, and receive lower pensions in the end.

In the workplace, women need appropriate facilities on site, for example, washrooms.

Child care is important for women who are mothers so that they can compete in the workplace on an equal basis with men. Women can be mothers and yet not have a partner available to look after the children.

Access to flexible work patterns would be helpful when women need to care for dependants.

The following are solutions.

There needs to be a coordinated effort to increase women's participation in male-dominated domains. Threat-free environments would be helpful. Parents, teachers, counsellors, and the public need education about the role of social context in shaping women's performance in male-dominated areas.

If women are to stay in a male-dominated workplace, that workplace needs to be women-friendly and offer fair opportunities for advancement on career paths. Women's increased entry at the undergraduate and college levels indicates positive change. Society needs to allow itself to hire women in non-traditional roles, on an equal basis with men, and provide them with the support and protection needed to keep them there.

I'm finished.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I was going to say that you have one minute. Are you finished? If you have anything to finish, you have a minute.

[Susan Russell]

I'm finished.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Oh, good. Thank you very much, Ms. Russell.

Now we will hear from Madame Guay.

[Jacinthe Guay, Liaison Officer, Dimension Travail]

Good afternoon. My name is Jacinthe Guay, and I am from Dimension Travail. We are honoured to be invited to appear before the committee, and we thank you for the opportunity. I am very happy to be here.

Our approach is more hands-on. We work directly with women, supporting them in their job search and providing guidance. We are also responsible for coordinating the Table lavalloise des femmes dans les métiers non traditionnels for women in non-traditional jobs in Laval. The round table brings together a number of key stakeholders in Laval, including the Laval school board, Service Canada, Collège Montmorency, the CCQ and Emploi-Québec.

First of all, I want to tell you about some of our projects, which, I believe, met certain needs and provided us with a lot of information about women.

The first project is Option gagnante, a full-time seven-week project to provide guidance to unemployed women. The projects gives women the opportunity to explore all trades without discrimination.

Through workshops on materials handling, and visits to job sites and training schools, a number of women discovered they had an interest in non-traditional jobs, which they did not expect.

It is important to note that women rarely choose non-traditional jobs as their first career choice. Only women who are intrinsically motivated, who are encouraged by friends and family and who are exposed to a parent model in the job who can provide them with information choose a non-traditional job.

Many of our clients instead choose these jobs as a second career choice. They are often women who have decided to explore their interests and their ability to leave unstable low-paying employment, to follow their dream and to take training that will help them qualify for gainful employment.

We also have a support group for female students in non-traditional jobs, as well as female workers in non-traditional jobs. The group provides a place outside work where they can get together, meet other women—as women are often alone in their teams—and share ideas and strategies for improving their work lives.

We also work to raise public awareness. As Ms. Russell mentioned, everything starts at a young age. Everything we teach children is already separated between boys and girls. Girls are given a model to follow and, unfortunately, we think that it harms them in the long run.

In the course of working with women, we realized that many of them were interested in and had the skills required for a non-traditional job, but that the actual conditions of the job were not in line with their family situation.

Non-traditional jobs work based on the ideal worker model. That ideal worker does not exist. It is someone who is available at all times to work alternating shifts, for example, starting work very early in the morning when day care centres are not yet open or doing overtime hours when necessary. For most women, that is not possible. Despite their manual skills or their interest in a non-traditional job, many women are not able to consider it as an option.

We also noted that, in both training and work settings, women are isolated and may have to deal with discrimination or harassment. Reverse harassment is no more helpful to women. It consists of giving them extra benefits that are not given to other workers. It contributes to isolating female workers even more and further promotes bias.

We believe that, in both the workplace and in training programs, women should have access to the tools, the information and the facilities they need, even if it is just a washroom, the same as every other worker.

Furthermore, our experience with employers has shown us that most of the employers that have tried to integrate women into their work teams saw a noticeable improvement in work quality. Among other things, women pay more attention to health and safety, which reduces the risk of injury. Women encourage team work and often come up with better work strategies, such as ways to reduce the physical strength needed to perform a task.

Employers who refuse to allow women on their work teams use preconceived notions to justify their decision to us. Most of the time, they do not have facts to back up their claims. When a critical mass of women is targeted in a workplace, all preconceptions go out the window, and we see excellent cooperation among men and women that draws on the strengths of each.

In some fields, we have seen a division of tasks based on gender. Take printing or silk screening, for example. A number of employers find that women are more meticulous. They give them silk-screening duties and pay them less, claiming that men, even with the same training, are more established, and they get paid more.

We see the same thing happening elsewhere too. Clients in carpentry-joinery have told us that they experience a similar division of duties, where they are put in the position of doing most of the work, while the man is established and does the work.

Why do we want to increase awareness? We mentioned stereotypes, but we also think that women need role models to identify with. The models they have in their families often have typically feminine roles. They need to see more models out in the community.

That can happen at all levels, such as in a management position. I am sure that seeing women in Parliament inspires a lot of other women.

They need a lot of information in order to make their decisions. They often have their own preconceptions and think that non-traditional jobs are jobs where workers get dirty and frequently injure themselves, when that is not the case. They also need to try out the job and use the tools, as they often lack self-confidence.

Finally, our position at Dimension Travail is that we must continue to work towards changing society's thinking by eliminating preconceived notions, to raise awareness and especially to open more doors to women. They need a chance to try out the job and carve out a place for themselves.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

That's it? Everybody is doing so well. You have another two minutes left.

Thank you very much, Madame Guay.

I would like now to move to Sue Calhoun, who is on the video screen, as you can see. She is president of the Canadian Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs.

Ms. Calhoun, can you please tell us who is with you?

[Sue Calhoun, President, Canadian Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs]

Yes.

Carolyn Hull, who is our national treasurer, is with me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Will the committee please note that Carolyn Hull is the other person there.

Would you begin your presentation, please? Again, you have 10 minutes. I'll let you know when you're running out of time.

[Sue Calhoun]

Thank you, Madam Chairman.

Good afternoon, everyone. It's a pleasure for us to be here today.

Il nous fait grand plaisir d'être avec vous cet après-midi.

I have to tell you that spring has arrived in the Maritimes.

The Canadian Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs—we call it BPW Canada—has been around since 1930. Our mission is to develop the professional and leadership potential of women in Canada through education, awareness, advocacy, and mentoring within a supportive network. Our main focus is really on women in the workforce.

BPW Canada was a founding member of our International Federation of Business and Professional Women, which has clubs in more than 90 countries around the world, and which has category 1 consultative status at the United Nations.

We are a volunteer organization that receives no government funding. My job as president of BPW Canada is a volunteer job, and to make a living I run my own company.

Over the years, our members have presented several resolutions on the issue of access for women to non-traditional jobs, and as an organization we certainly support greater access for women to what are considered non-traditional jobs.

From doing a quick review of the literature in preparation for this presentation, I think it's fair to say that for many years women have been encouraged to enter non-traditional areas of employment. During the 1970s and the 1980s, Canadian women did precisely that. As women experienced higher levels of education, as well as increased labour force participation rates, women also became a growing presence in a diverse range of male-dominated occupations. Some examples of that were veterinary practice, financial management, and law, just to mention a few.

In the 1990s, however, with the recession and pressures of economic globalization, women continued to enter male-dominated occupations, although they did it more slowly than before. I think it's fair to say that in the last couple of decades we have not seen the kinds of programs that encourage women to pursue non-traditional occupations that we had seen earlier.

Statistics Canada's Women in Canada report, for example, reported that the majority of employed women in 2004 continued to work in occupations in which women have traditionally been concentrated. In 2004, for example, 67% of all employed women were working in teaching, nursing and related health occupations, clerical or other administrative positions, and sales and service occupations. The situation in 2004 was approximately the same as in 1996, so things over that decade did not increase that much.

The 2006 Statistics Canada report also noted that women had increased their representation in several professional occupations in recent years, in particular as doctors and dentists, business and financial professionals, and in managerial positions. There are some statistics in my report, which you will hopefully read.

I'd like to address the question of why women should be actively encouraged to go into non-traditional fields. It's more than a matter of fairness, justice, or equal opportunity.

First, many researchers believe that a well-trained labour force is the only way that Canada will achieve and maintain a competitive advantage in today's global business market, thus providing training has been advocated by many as sound social policy for competitiveness.

When we talk about competing globally, we inevitably talk about innovation, about developing new knowledge and new technologies, and about using the new knowledge and new technologies to produce new products, services, and processes. What's needed is scientists; what's needed is people skilled in information and communications technologies. Women are woefully under-represented in both. Even though the ITC sector is crying out for more workers, women for the most part are still not going into IT.

If we look at the skilled trades, women are even more under-represented. There is already a major shortage of skilled trades workers in Canada, and with the looming demographic crunch, the situation will only get worse.

So women are an untapped resource in many sectors. Gender limitations mean that employers draw on a much smaller pool of talent. The irony is that women may offer advantages in some of these jobs, as my colleague Madame Guay just said. As an example, in IT, companies are starting to realize that to be successful they need more than the techie types, more than the geeks. They need the communicators, employees who can actually talk to the customer to build the bridge between what the customer needs and what the technology can do, and women are actually very good at doing that.

Secondly, when we talk about the wage gap in Canada, a good part of the wage gap is due to the fact that women are still largely concentrated in the so-called female occupations. As women move into what have traditionally been male occupations, and assuming that they are paid the same as their male counterparts, the wage gap should begin to close.

Thirdly, from the government’s point of view, when women are more fully employed and better paid, they are paying more taxes. They are contributing more to the economy, which in turn means that governments have more money and they can provide more social and economic benefits to all citizens.

So what needs to be done?

The federal government needs to be more proactive in encouraging women to pursue non-traditional jobs. I know that Canada’s economic action plan, for example, included an investment of $40 million a year in a new apprenticeship completion grant to encourage apprentices to complete their program. I think it's a good initiative, but when I went on the website and looked at the video, I saw almost no women in that video. My conclusion is either that the government isn’t interested in encouraging women in particular to pursue the trades through this program or that it doesn’t know much about marketing.

Secondly, the federal government needs to be a model employer in both recruitment and workplace support—for example, in the Canadian Armed Forces, in the RCMP, in the federal institutions. It needs to implement very proactive workplace programs to prevent and punish workplace harassment. While labour and education are provincial jurisdictions, the federal government can set standards for diversity and add incentives for contractors doing business with the federal government.

Thirdly, the federal government should offer and promote training in non-traditional fields through the employment insurance program, followed up with robust placement programs.

The federal government should continue to support initiatives in the private and non-profit sector to encourage women to pursue non-traditional jobs. One example that I know was funded in the last fiscal year was a project by the Canadian Advanced Technology Alliance, Women in Technology, which received $400,000 to attract young women to consider a career in the technology sector. That kind of support needs to continue.

It’s clear that there is not one thing that we can suggest that will result in more women going into non-traditional occupations. Rather, there needs to be a multi-pronged approach where government actively encourages and puts programs and supports in place to make it happen.

But on the employer side, acceptance of women in non-traditional jobs is still an issue, as my colleague alluded to. There can be resistance from co-workers, some bad behaviours, escalating to the point of actual harassment in some cases. That needs to be stopped. The federal government needs to take an active role in educating the workforce, especially companies wanting to do business with the federal government, that this kind of behaviour is no longer acceptable.

Employers must be encouraged to see the value of hiring more women in non-traditional jobs and maybe provided with incentives to do so. And women themselves must be encouraged, provided with incentives, have role models, and see success stories.

We thank you again for the opportunity to be here today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much, Ms. Calhoun. You actually have 30 seconds left, so there you go. Everyone has been really great in terms of their timing.

Now we will begin our seven-minute question round. I'd like to explain this a little bit. Those seven minutes are for questions and answers. If you want to get a lot of questions in and a lot of response and interactivity, I think we would like to make sure that everybody gets to be as succinct as they can.

I will begin this round with Michelle Simson, for seven minutes.

[Michelle Simson, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Madam Chair, would it be acceptable if I ask the question and get all three to respond?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

You can do whatever you like, yes.

[Michelle Simson, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, everyone. I really appreciate your appearing before the committee as witnesses. I went on all three of your websites and you actually appear to be doing such wonderful work.

Having done as much research as was possible, because this is a new committee for me, my one observation is that this is a rather complex issue. There have to be two strategies, one long term and one short term. In as succinct a way as you can, so I can get in some questions, for the short term, in addition to any funding that can be directed at trying to correct this inequity, what's your feeling in terms of state-driven intervention in terms of legislation to mandate that a certain criteria be met by companies in the short term for the workers we have now, the women who are graduating from university, say, or who are unemployed right now?

[Jacinthe Guay]

If you permit, I will answer this question in French.

We think that, in the short term, the Employment Equity Act and the Pay Equity Act need to be reinforced so that employers respect the rules and so that a women with the same skills as a man receives the same working conditions and pay. That is the short-term solution.

At the same time, of course, I think these women need support outside their workplace. There again, reverse discrimination harms them more than it helps. Favouritism in the workplace will not solve anything. I really believe these women need support, a place where they can meet with other women in non-traditional jobs.

[Michelle Simson, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Ms. Russell.

[Susan Russell]

I agree that it's a very complicated issue. I feel from the treatment I've been through this past week that there's a lot of overt and covert discrimination in both groups, and even at interviews people may find that they do not get hired simply because they are women. There seems to be a need to have to prove themselves. I spoke to one woman and she said she got tired of 20 years of having to prove that she could do the job as well as a guy. And I'm not sure how you legislate that.

[Michelle Simson, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

So you don't see that as just short-term strategy?

[Susan Russell]

For the short term, I think women need support, they need child care, they need places where they can go, they need mentors, that sort of thing.

[Michelle Simson, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Okay, thank you.

Ms. Calhoun.

[Sue Calhoun]

It definitely is a complicated issue. There's no doubt about that. We in the non-profits tend to be hampered by the fact that there's not a lot of research going on these days. For example, Status of Women used to fund research into these kinds of issues, and we haven't been seeing that as we did in the past. A lot of non-profit organizations, like BPW Canada, used to rely on that kind of research.

Legislating in the short term...you're right that it's a complicated issue, which is why I said it really needs a multi-pronged approach. Better enforcement of the Employment Equity Act definitely would make a difference, I think, from an employer's point of view, and also from women's points of view. So I'm not convinced that coming in with new legislation in the short term would necessarily be the answer.

[Michelle Simson, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

It was touched on that educators could be part of the problem. I was reading a study that says in grades seven through twelve, in the maths and sciences, teachers were eight times more inclined to call on the boys in class than the girls. That gets very discouraging. Is there something we could introduce in our education system, not unlike civics classes, and get everyone exposed? We know gender stereotyping occurs very early in life. There are many things that impact that, not just education, but home life, cultural background. Is that something we could look at long term? I know it's not immediate, but there has to be a bit of a cultural change I think here.

[Jacinthe Guay]

Right now, in Quebec, there is only one guidance counsellor for a school with approximately 2,000 students. Clearly, that is not enough to inform students of all their potential career choices. Another long-term strategy would be to diversify extracurricular options.

[Michelle Simson, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I'm talking, though, about starting as early as public school, because I think the train's already off the track by the time you get into high school.

Is that something that could work?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Do you mean primary school?