ATER

IF THERE'S one news
story that can depress me
instantly, it’s dhe one that
tells us, yet again, that
women still carn only two-
thirds of what men earn.

The latest news from StatsCan
on male/female earning power
revealed that more women broke
into the top-income occupations
in the late 80s,

And women did make some
progress in narrowing the wage
gap.

Bul the 1991 census shows that
the bottom line for mosi women is
still bleak: in 1990, women work:
ing Full time and year-round still
earned on average only two-thirds
of what men did, and made up
three-quarters of the workers in
the lowest-paying jobs,‘

The census proved once again
that you'll definitely be penalized
financially if you want to work
with children — the lowest-paid

- occupation was childcare workers
who carn $13,518 annually.

Given that women did not make
significant progress in narrowing
the wage gap in the last decade —

‘in 1990, we earned 67.4% of what
men did, compared with 63.8% in
1980 — the outlook is not sunny.

At the rate we’re moving, it will
take cight decades to close the
wage gap.

NMIAIL

Until these wage gap reports
reappear, you can find yourself
feeling somewhat optimistic aboul
things.

Hey, many of us are aware that
women now mak half of med-
icine and Jaw classes at many
universities in this country.

We read more and more about
successful female entrepreneurs
and politicians (although the
number of women in the House of
Commons is still dismally tow),

But female doctors, lawyers and
‘engineers represent a minority.

Mast women are still struggling
because of the wage gap.

Before you trot it out, let me
say that 1 accept the argument
that realistically, a secretary can-
not expect (oO earn as much as a
surgeor.

That surgeon put in years of
training and probably has to make
a living under considerable stress,

But women are penalized finan.
cially — mostly by male deci-
sion-makers — for being in cer-
tain occupations.

No person on this planet can
deny that if physiotherapists and
bank tellers were mostly men,
they’d be paid more.

Not only does our society still
undervalue women’s work, it con-
tinues to penalize women who
have children and either need to,
Or want to, work outside the
home,

If government and business
really supported families — by
supporting decent childcare for
those who need it and helping
those who want to stay at home
and raise children — then kids
would get a better siart and the
authorities would need to spend
less time and moncy rounding up
criminals,

Any woman who leaves a job to
have a child today is taking oc-
cupaticnal and financial risks
unkiiown to men,

The majority of women still
don’t have the inclination, time or
maybe even the courage to begia
to change their financial destiny.

As I witnessed in one of my
jobs, there’s no way a secretary
with a high school education (who

BOX

‘Gag law challenges
independent groups

» Dear Editor:
'- Federal. government House
Leader Harvie Andre is one very
-. confused man.

He is the minister responsible

for introducing an electoral gag
’ Jaw into the House of Commons.

This law would make it illegal
for citizens to spend more than
‘$1,000 independently on adver-
tisements to support or oppose a
political party or candidate during
federal elections.

Until now, the Ottawa political
elite haye been telling Canadians
that this draconian faw. was need-
ed to stop elections from “being
bought.”’

However, Andre recently
dismissed this justification as a
“myth.”

In fact, on Feb. 23 he testified
before the Special Committee on
Electoral Reform that: ‘There is
no evidence that I see anywhere to
suggest’ that the person who
spends the most is likely to win ...
it’s a myth ... that implies an clec-
-torate who are not as bright as we
know them to be.”

Why does Harvie Andre really

- want this gag law?

During the same testimony he
said, “I! certainly recognize there
are real benefits to me and to
everybody else in the system in
having limits ... the third parties,
can’t come in.”

We ‘citizens are the “third par-
ties.”

ical parties should be able to
spend $9 million during elections
but citizens’ groups and individu-
als should be limited to $1,000 —
effectively silenced.

it seems clear that the real pur-_
pose of this law is to force citizens

to channel their political spending

through parties rather than speak-
ing out independently.

Citizens who oppose this blatant
attack on the right to free speech
should urge their MPs to oppose
this gag law.

Your readers may find out their
MP’s name and telephone number
by calling Elections Canada at J-
800-267-8683.

Let’s stop the politicians before
they stop us.

David Somerville, president
National Citizens’ Coalition

unr,

still penalizing wot

cam’teven afford to insure her
car) is going to go to the boss and
ask for a wage that will allow her
to be free of constant financial
worry.

Never mind that she never took
her lunch hour but did take the
initiative to learn the new com-
puter system better than anyone
cise in the office,

When L think of a woman who
overcame the odds, | think of my
friend Betty (not her real name),

She married in 1964 when she
was 19 and by 1970 she had four
children, two boys and female
twins,

After she had her first child,
she worked as a hospital recep-
tionist, but gave up work after
having her second child and
devoted her energy ta the
children.

In 1970 she realized she had to
leave a bad marriage, but her
hushand refused to give her a
divorce.

Even though her parents had
loaned them the downpayment for
their house, she left ber husband
with the family home and had to
borrow money from her brother
to move herself and her children
oul,

No landlord wanted to rent to a
single mother with four children,
so She found herself ina dump of

Whats ay wth a ear

In other words, he thinks polit- ,

Frida

Eracerieers

a house, on welfare.

Her social worker at this time,
who believed in Betty and treated
her as an equal, was horrified by
the family’s living conditions and
found them a clean, two-bedroom
apartment.

Faced with an ex-husband who
saw no reason to honor his
child-support responsibilities, Bet-
ty began working part time and
studying part time to improve her
prospects.

She found work ina youth
employment agency and through
that job met a co-worker who of-
fered to rent an acreage to Betty
ata cost she could afford,

When the owner wanted fo sell,
Betty was determined to keep a
decent home for her kids and bor-
rowed the downpayment to pure
chase it,

In 1978, on the strength of ber
experience at the employment
agency, Betty got n job ase fh.
nancial worker at (he Ministry of
Soviul Services.

Again, she overcame the odds
because the position, in theory at
least, required a university degree.

Though her income was higher
now, she still had fo Gike on son-
tract work us a carcer counsellor
to support her family.

Three years later, a position for
a rehab social worker eame up in

len workers

the ministry and Betty, the only
non-degree person interviewed,
got it.

She was still financially stressed
— there was no money for her
athletic san to play hockey and
she canned, pickled and baked to
keep the kids fed -- but she was
making progress and her friends
supported her,

{In 1988, Betty became a district
supervisor for the ministry,

Though she now has a staff
who deal with clients, she’s still as
involved as ever. oo,

It worries her when a client sets
off on a job track that will pay
only $9 un hour (hardly enough to
raise a family).

(t bugs her that there's so-tittle
career testing for women on in-
come assistance so they cat:
determine their abilities and inter-
ests,

And it angers her that the
education system is failing these
women with walling lists for
courses that are so lony they make
retraining only a dream,

Retty nude it, She overcame
odds that probably would have

“erushed most of us,

How much longer will women
have to make It In spite of the
system)

i Thats kim G of I,
she wants iia
leader of the

Federal Comenative |

Prove there is a gypsy moth problem

Open letter to Premier Harcourt:

Health Action Network Society
is appealing to you, Premier Har-
court, and to your cabinet, to
immediately cancel Pesticide Use
Permit 214-026 93-94 for spraying
BtK (Foray48B) to irradicate an
unproved gypsy moth problem.

Environmental Appeal Board
hearings were held in April re: the
legality of the issuing of this per-
mit to Agriculture Canada.

The board's mandate did not
extend to a consideration of the
toxic and health effects of this
spray on the citizens of the areas

in and around the proposed spray
boundaries. .
Because Agriculture Canada will

-not disclose the full formulation

of this spray, they are asking us
all to act on faith.

‘Unfortunately, there are too
many examples of gross mistakes
having been made by Agriculture
Canada in the past.

Over $7% of the BtK formula-
tion is called ‘‘inerts,’? and. the
company is not required to tell
anyone what these chemicals or
compounds are, as it would be a
“trade secret.’”

Surely our government leaders
are not willing to ‘“‘buy a pig in
the poke” (as the cliche goes),
when our already overburdened
health system is foundering.

In the name of integrity, don’t
let Agriculture Canada push pro-
vincial government around.

Cancel this permit until it first
can be proven that there really is a
problem, and if so, how it can be
handled using safe alternatives.

Thelma MacAdam, chair
Environmental Committee,
Health Action Network Society