At the same time, the more education a woman has, the less likely that she will be satisfied with her employment. This leads to the suspicion that the more we provide education and training to the already well-educated, the higher the level of dissatisfaction and the higher the demand for better jobs and more training. The same is true of men. But those who don't have a high level of education are more inclined to become unemployed through job loss, rather than through quitting; and once unemployed, they find it hard to get back into either the educational or the employment system.

This poses a dilemma. Less than Grade 8 education is too little and leads to unemployment through job loss, poverty, non-participation, and inadequate requests for more training. More than Grade 12 education leads to higher participation in both the labour force and learning activities, higher job dissatisfaction, greater likelihood of unemployment through job leaving, and greater demand for more training. Since the system has already stated that it prefers to re-train those who can benefit the most in the shortest period of time, the educated get more education and training and the under-educated get less.

This opens up a gap between the have's and the have-not's. If this gap widens to a point that it becomes unbridgeable, we will end up with a public education system which serves only the middle and upper income groups of adults. Such a system will probably be fully accessible, highly flexible and totally responsive to the learning needs of the educated woman.

But the women who most need education and training will be out of luck, and will be forced to fall back on the medical and social welfare systems for support and treatment.