Thank you. I have to say that I agree with the first speaker on many points.
I'm honoured to have been invited to appear before this committee to be a witness on the economic security of women in Canada. Thank you for the invitation. I would particularly like to thank the gentlemen who are on this committee for serving and for fighting for the rights of women. It seems like this is a problem that we women have worked on—mostly as volunteer work—for a very long time. It is just not possible to right all of these problems without the engagement of men. Thank you for being here.
My name is Catherine Mavriplis, and I'm a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Ottawa. I also hold the NSERC chair for women in science and engineering for Ontario, and I'm representing the five chairs across the country today, as well, in my comments. I've also spoken to many of our stakeholders and other participants in our programs, and to my friends and colleagues in other non-science and engineering arenas to create my comments today.
I was told that you might be interested in a description of what my career path has been in science and engineering, as an example of the lives of women in these fields. I'll start with that, and then make some comments on the economic security of women and ways in which we can improve the situation. There is much to cover. I read all the comments from the previous witnesses, so I'm going to try to add things that perhaps you've not heard before.
I grew up in Montreal and obtained a bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering from McGill University. I really, really, really wanted to work in industry. I kept looking in the newspaper for jobs, and all I could see were these girl Friday ads and HVAC engineering. I had no idea what those things were and what they could do for me. I figured that if I went to work in industry, I would probably just get swallowed up by the men there and be an insignificant person in a big company, so I decided to get a higher degree. That's what a lot of women do. They get more education and more pieces of paper, thinking that it will help them to establish themselves.
After obtaining a Ph.D. in aerospace engineering from one of the top institutions in the world, I interviewed and received a job offer from the Boeing aerospace company at 15% less pay than my almost identical classmate. I was told there was absolutely nothing I could do about it; that was just the way it was. I did see that there was a class action suit against Boeing by some women a number of years later, and I thought that was kind of interesting. I didn't have the fortitude to do something like that, but it was vindication, perhaps, for what I'd experienced.
I decided to go into academia, thinking it would be flexible for having kids—I have four children. Unfortunately, I did this in the U.S., and I ended up with zero maternity leave. I had to plan for all of my children to be born during the summer so I could go without pay and come back to work, which is hard to do. Luckily, I was able to keep my job. I did work as a professor. I did become unemployed for two years. I have worked part time for three years. I returned to Canada nine years ago, and making that transition was difficult after being unemployed.
I offer you this glimpse of my path as an example of many women who I have met over my 37 years in the engineering community. I've created and helped organize workshops for over 1,500 doctoral women in science and engineering, and I've run activities for about 6,000 women—mostly women, but also men—to promote diversity in technical fields.
The elements of my story are not uncommon to the past or the present. People are still experiencing these things. Women are opting for postgraduate degrees to gain more credentials. They have non-linear career paths. They have periods of unemployment or part-time employment. They have a large share of unrecognized, unpaid, family-related work and responsibility. They have wage gaps and a lack of paths to career-building.
Many of us who succeed in this male-dominated field feel like we're on a treadmill. We feel that we have to be superwomen, and at the same time be ladylike and not offend sensibilities. There needs to be a critical mass of women in these fields. Engineers Canada has proposed a 30 by 30 initiative in which 30% of newly licensed engineers would be women by 2030, but some of us wonder why that goal is not 50%. Within our group—and perhaps we're conditioned by being in a male-dominated group—there are people who are radical about going to fifty-fifty, and there are the other people who say that we shouldn't ask for too much. Again, it's this perception of women in society that we're very wary about as well.
What does all of this have to do with economic security? STEM jobs are key to economic security for women. Statistics show that STEM jobs are more permanent, and offer full-time and well-paid employment.
Furthermore, the demand for qualified science and engineering workers is increasing, yet we hear of industry going to other countries to fill these positions. I really don't understand why we don't train the people who are here to fill those jobs.
Women hold only a fraction of those jobs. The statistics are improving, but at a very slow rate. In some fields, such as medicine or life sciences, parity has been or is close to being reached, but then again, we hear of salary levels dropping as more women join the field. The government is one area where parity has been achieved and this is a good result. This is a result of fair and transparent practices and it's a good way to achieve equity, although some say that maybe it's the low wages that keep the more competitive men out of this area.
Generally, women tend to fare better at large organizations where a set of rules are in place. There have been some studies of women in large organizations versus more organic, perhaps groovy, start-up places. In the end, women do better in the large organizations because there's less of a “bro culture” and there are more checks and balances, let's say.
In the face of unemployment, many women go into entrepreneurship, but it's very difficult for them. They often lack financial know-how and they lack access to capital. At the University of Ottawa, we've run a women in entrepreneurship mentoring program for the last two years and that has instantly increased the participation of women in this area.
What can we do about it? I will go to some recommendations. My first recommendation is to lead by example. We've seen some wonderful things happen in the past couple of years. First of all, the balanced cabinet of Prime Minister Trudeau was something that was heard around the world. Certainly, when I visit other countries, that's the first thing they ask me about. The Ontario Securities Commission's comply or explain disclosure policy is also something that we're keen on. The B.C. government added computer programming to the school curriculum in 2016. These are bold measures and we applaud them. We also want to say that we're in support of Minister Duncan's recent decision to get after universities for the Canada research chair targets.
With little time left, the last thing I will say is that we're hosting the next Gender Summit this year in Montreal and I hope we will put on as good a performance as the Europeans. At these European-organized events, we see male politicians and university administrators debate the issues and we learn about their countries' national programs for gender equity. What will Canada have to show by this November?