Most of the trades that were specifically mentioned were Red Seal trades. Interestingly, these activities occurred without the benefit of an HRSDC Essential Skills Profile existing for the trade.

Nine projects either used the HRSDC website to find an appropriate Essential Skills Profile for their project, while one project used the National Occupational Analysis (NOA) to develop its competencies list.

Largely, projects did not focus on individual trades and many targeted “all trades.” In some cases, projects were included in the database which could have an impact on the trades, but which were not developed specifically for the trades. For example, TOWES is well suited to be used by the trades, but the trades were not its principal target group.

f. Partnerships and funding

Determining who the project partners were was more difficult for information gathered through the Internet than through our online survey. Generally, project descriptions did not list partners. In some cases, partners were not part of the initial funding proposal but were involved in the project itself. However, there is no systematic way to determine this, especially with the older projects.

Labour unions were the partner most often mentioned in projects. This reflects the trades’ involvement in training and skills development. However, it also may reflect labour unions’ eligibility for government funding in comparison with the general restriction for employers receiving funding. Employers received only half as many mentions as labour unions as project partners.

We had expected that sector councils and community colleges would be more involved in Essential Skills projects. However, it seems that for the trades, the union plays the most active role.