Any shortfall in income, as compared to expenses, must be covered by provincial and municipal welfare assistance. Since 80% of female trainees are classed as having no dependents and 40% are married, we can assume that the majority will receive either $10 or $60 per week. For a 30-hour training week, this amounts to 33¢ and $2.00 per hour. This is hardly in keeping with the position expressed by Jean Marchand in the House of Commons on March 3, 1967, when he stated that:

"Manpower training is work and should be rewarded accordingly." The CEIC defines the head of the household as automatically being the husband in a husband-wife family. In such families the wife is always a dependent even if she supports her own children or if her husband is unemployed and she is the primary earner. Women who live with a man, even though not married, run the risk of being classed as dependent trainees, in the same manner as a wife. This is a major inconsistency when compared with the definition used by the Census of Canada (1976). This survey defined the head of the household as being either a man or a woman, in all types of family units, and the decision about who is assigned the status of head is made by the family members themselves. The only qualification is that the person designated must be 15 years of age or older.

(b) Manpower allowances were integrated with U.I. benefits at the same time. Now, a trainee who is eligible for both training allowance and U.I. benefits is entitled to the higher of these two amounts. Since Manpower pays both sexes at the same rate and since the average U.I. benefit paid to women in 1977 was $138 and to men was $180, women will be short-changed on this arrangement.

(c) The third change is still in the planning stage and involves integrating manpower allowances and U.I. benefits into the federal-provincial Social Security plan and providing support incomes to family units rather than to individuals. The 1977 Manpower review states:

"Income maintenance schemes should seek to cover those in need without undermining the basic incentive to work or distorting programs, such as training, which have other primary objectives. It is our intention that trainees will receive from the training program such reimbursements for expenses and incentives as may be necessary but will no longer receive income maintenance payments as such from this source."^l

How women will be affected by such changes is not predictable but it seems imperative that CCLOW have some input to the discussions involved.

^1. CEIC, "The Canada Manpower Training Program: A policy review, 1977" (Ottawa: CEIC, 1977), p. 22.