An essential and employability skills curriculum was developed as a way to provide a pretraining assessment for potential labourers and heavy equipment operators. This curriculum was successfully piloted in Winnipeg, an urban centre, in April 2006 and then re-piloted in Fisher River, Manitoba, a rural community. This report discusses the modifications necessary when delivering programs such as this, in rural versus urban areas.
The selection of participants was approached very differently in this pilot. Unlike the urban pilot, an information session was not required. The potential applicant pool is significantly smaller in a rural centre and is therefore more manageable. The representatives of the communities of Fisher River Cree Nation and Peguis First Nation agreed to identify participants. A revised version of the urban flyer was distributed to local agencies that support training in the community. These representatives administered the same suitability survey for anyone interested in the program. The criteria used for the selection of participants in the rural community were less rigorous than the urban program. For example, many of the applicants did not have a valid driver’s licence but did have experience operating equipment. Eight applicants were selected in total, and one person opted out of the program, leaving seven participants that did complete.
In acknowledgement of the recommendations based on the urban pilot, the program was changed from 10 days to 5 days. The program instructors and content remained the same. Penny Sinclair, the Fisher River Transition Program Coordinator, facilitated the labour market and job search portion of the program. The adult males in this program were a bit shy about seeking help with finding work. It seemed critical that Penny, as a local and someone they could trust, be available to them on a casual basis and one on one. The availability of jobs to apply for is inherently another consideration in a rural delivery. Many of the participants were only interested in employment opportunities close to home.
One factor to consider, in the delivery of a program in a rural setting, is the need for flexibility in the timing of the delivery. Community events may require the rescheduling of classes. The program was largely successful because of the encouragement of local persons in the recruitment of participants. Many participants had prior workplace experiences, in construction, which had failed. It could be that this has left the isolated job seekers sceptical of external opportunities.