Comment:

Table 11 indicates that the gains made by women in terms of their relative numbers in various Manpower programs over the past few years have been inconsistent but mainly in the upward direction. These gains are offset by the decline in the total number of trainees of both sexes. Although the numbers are up again for 1977, current government cutbacks are likely to result in future declines in the total numbers of trainees.

Moreover, the relative percentage of women in skill training programs appears to be consistent with the increase in participation rates for women, although not with unemployment rates. The relative number of immigrant women in language training programs appears to have kept pace with their increasing proportions in the immigrant population. This may be deceptive and the entire language training program may be seriously under-serving both male and female trainees.

It should be noted that the increase in total numbers of trainees from 1975 to 1977 was accomplished largely through an increase in numbers of apprenticeship trainees. All other types of institutional trainees declined. This increase for apprenticeship programs was approximately 16%. Of the spaces added to the program, women received about 7% of the additional numbers; an improvement over 2% but not by much.

What is not clear is why we have so many women in BTSD programs. These are mainly academic upgrading programs. The statistics on the relative educational attainment levels for men and women (refer to Unit IV of this report) indicate that women are more likely to have completed Grade 10, more likely to have at least partial grade 11-13, and less likely to have gone on to post-secondary education. Since Grade 10 represents the upper limit for BTSD programs and since most occupational/vocational training takes place at the post-secondary level, we would expect to find women in smaller proportions in the BTSD or academic programs and in greater proportions in the skill training or occupational programs. Since this is not so, other factors must be involved which supercede levels of schooling already attained. Some might be:

• the occupational programs women traditionally enter require higher academic levels than those men traditionally enter.

• men may have easier access to those occupational programs which require little academic background (eg. apprenticeship).

• men may be hired directly into a job without the prerequisite educational background required for either the occupational training program or for the position itself. Then they would receive training through the Industrial programs of Manpower.

• women are more likely than men to have been out of the labour force and not using their "academic" skills. When they try to re-enter they must first pass a Grade 10 entrance level exam (which few employed persons could pass). If they cannot pass this test, they must make up the academic work even if it has little bearing on the occupational training. Men may have indirect means for by-passing this entrance requirement which are not obvious at this time.

• women's lack of self-confidence and inexperience about learning-on-the-job (rather than knowing everything in advance) may mean that they prefer to "play it safe" by starting in an academic program first to "get used to being out of the house and back at school". Men may be more willing to plunge straight into occupational training or employment.