Training for Whom?

by Aisla Thomson

Wait a minute. The Bridging Program for Women--the demonstration project developed by CCLOW in 1983 to provide women with the necessary supports, life skills, and options for going on to further education, jobs, and better lives--is offering training to men?!

Since the introduction of the National Training Act in 1982, CCLOW has monitored the situation of women's training in Canada. We have witnessed the amount of dollars allocated to training decline steadily. We have protested the sharp decrease in the protested the sharp decrease in the number of women receiving training, literacy instruction, and upgrading. We have advocated for pay and employment equity, and for greater access for women to trades and technology. More recently we have watched the erosion of social programs and the dramatic shift in the direction of government policy and a re-definition of the "most in need".

Now our fears around the backlash against women and the competition for scarce dollars have come to pass. Women's programming has been deemed expendable: a frill in a healthy economy, a loadstone in a recession.

The Bridging Program for Women is a successful model of training that has been adapted and applied to a range of situations including pre-trades and pre-technology training for women. Women Interested in Successful Employment (WISE) operates in two communities in Newfoundland and has a long waiting list of women wanting to access its services. The purpose of the bridging program model was to compensate for the situational, systemic, and dispositional barriers that women face, with the ultimate goal of making women economically self-sufficient.

The shift in the focus of training to those who are recently unemployed and still receiving unemployment insurance benefits has had a detrimental effect on marginalized people in Canada, especially women. Training dollars are being directed towards those in society who have the greatest potential to "make it"; that is, people who already have skills, who have university degrees or training, people who have already had the advantages of work experience. This change in focus has meant that re-entrants and new entrants to the labour force, immigrants, persons with disabilities, the under educated, and the underemployed are disregarded.

It is exactly these people that bridging programs were designed to serve. Bridging programs for women recognize that women need positive, supportive, safe, and women- centered programming and environments in which to develop their full potential. Adding men to the program will negate the very principles and premises upon which the bridging program is based. Furthermore, courses dealing with technology must be woman-positive and for women only.

If the full human resource potential of women is going to be realized, then the necessary supports and enabling structures and policies must be put into place. This is necessary in both public institutions and the private sector. Employers must be encouraged to place more emphasis on- the-job training for women, and to train women as much for their potential as their current skill level. Training for women must be viewed as an investment rather than a risk.

As demonstrated through the articles in this special issue on women's training in Canada, there is still a long way to go before the need for bridging programs and woman-positive programming disappears. Despite gains we have made in terms of legislation around pay and employment equity, there is still work to be done to ensure equity in education and training.

Aisla Thomson is the Executive Director of CCLOW.