Aperçu

Résumé (français)

Veuillez noter que les résumés n'apparaissent que dans la langue de la publication et peuvent ne pas avoir de traduction.

Résumé (anglais)

The aim of this paper is to provide evidence on on-the-job training that occurs in the workplace and explore whether there are differentiated training experiences of workers based on workplace characteristics, employment status and personal characteristics. The objective is to examine the extent of on-the-job training and its determinants. We also explore reasons for workers to decline training. We focus on the incidence and the intensity of on-the-job training. The incidence refers to whether the worker received on-the-job training, and the intensity refers to the number of days the worker received on-the-job training. Industry, human capital, and collective agreement characteristics are included as control variables. The unit of analysis is the individual worker. The analysis uses Statistics Canada’s Workplace and Employee Survey (WES) 1999 data. Results show that in 1999 only 30% of workers received on-the-job training. Among those receiving training, average days of training is about 7 days per worker. Computer software and professional training are the most common topics of on-the-job training. Workers receive on-the-job training mostly from their supervisor, followed by co- workers. Multivariate analysis shows that small workplaces and those that have introduced innovation in the workplace provide on-the-job training. This is particularly the case for those small workplaces that have introduced innovation in the workplace. Neither implementing new information technology nor competition experienced by the workplace affects on-the-job training. In addition, there is not a strong differentiated on-the-job training experience of core and peripheral workers. Only, temporary full-time workers have lower incidence of on-the-job training as compared to regular full-time workers. There are no significant differences between women and men, Visible Minorities and Whites, Aboriginals and Whites, and immigrants and Canadian-born workers receiving on-the-job training. In terms of the intensity of on-the-job training, none of the workplace size, implementing new information technology, innovation introduces in the workplace or competition experienced by the workplace affect time spent on on-the-job training. Employment status of working regular full-time or in a non-standard employment does not affect on-the-job training. In terms of the ascriptive characteristics of workers, gender and ethnicity are significant factors but immigrant status is not. In particular, females receive fewer days of training compared to male workers, and Aboriginals receive longer days of training compared to Whites. Considering various methods of learning, workers give on-the-job training as the most helpful method. In 1999, nine percent of workers declined training when offered by the employer. Close to half of these workers gave being too busy with their job duties as their reason. Only 4% of those declined training gave family responsibilities as their reason for declining. With the shrinking labour force, skills of those presently employed must be continuously developed and upgraded in order that they can contribute to the productivity and competitiveness of the Canadian economy now and into the future. Our results show that workplaces in Canada are under-investing in on-the-job training they provide to their workers.