aboriginal 2004 employment

Aboriginal People in Canada’sLabour Market: Work andUnemployment, Today and Tomorrow

by

Michael Mendelson

March 2004

Aboriginal People in Canada’sLabour Market: Work and

Unemployment, Today and Tomorrow

by

Michael Mendelson

March 2004

The Caledon Institute of Social Policy gratefully acknowledges the financial support of Human Resourcesand Skills Development Canada (HRSD), Aboriginal Relations Office for this study. The views expressedin this report are entirely the author’s, who is also responsible for any errors or omissions.

Copyright © 2004 by The Caledon Institute of Social Policy

ISBN 1-55382-090-8

Published by:

The Caledon Institute of Social Policy1600 Scott Street, Suite 620Ottawa, Ontario, CanadaK1Y 4N7Phone: (613) 729-3340Fax: (613) 729-3896E-mail: [email protected]: www.caledoninst.org

Table of Contents

Introduction 1Defining the Aboriginal Canadian population 1Organization of the report 3

Demographics of the Aboriginal Identity Population 3Working age population 11Summary observations 16

Unemployment and Participation Rates 18Unemployment rates 18Participation rates 22Summary observations 27

Geography of Labour Markets for Aboriginal Peoples 28Regions 28Cities 29Rural and urban 31Summary observations 32

Future of Labour Markets for Aboriginal Peoples 33Provinces 35Summary observations 38

Policy Implications 38Invest in children now 38Setting a clear policy goal 39The geographical reality 39Services off reserve 40Further research 41

References 42

Caledon Institute of Social Policy 1

Introduction

Employment is the cornerstone of par-ticipation in modern Canadian society. Employ-ment is not only a source of income: It is alsothe basis for self-respect and autonomy.

For Canada as a whole, employmentlevels have improved in the last decade, althoughunemployment still remains stubbornly higheven during relatively good economic times.Unfortunately, whether in good times or bad,employment among Aboriginal people in Canadaremains lower, and unemployment rates higher,than those of the population in general. Buthas the situation of Aboriginal Canadians beenimproving or otherwise in the labour marketover the last several years? Has progress beenmade recently?

This report analyzes two main indicatorsof labour market activity – unemployment andparticipation rates – to see how Aboriginal peo-ple have been doing in Canada’s labour market,especially in comparison to the general popula-tion. This report is a sequel to the CaledonInstitute’s 1999 study, Aboriginal People inCanada’s Labour Market, and shares thesame basic objective, namely “to draw a clearerpicture of labour markets in Canada as theyaffect Aboriginal peoples in different regionsand to review the consequences of this picturefor public policy” [Mendelson and Battle 1999:7]. Our earlier study was based on data fromthe 1996 Census; this report is based on datafrom the 2001 Census.

Aboriginal employment should be ofconcern not only to Aboriginal Canadians andto those interested in social equity. Aboriginalsuccess in Canada’s labour market is, or shouldbe, of great interest to all Canadians. Ourinterest stems not only from the value we placeon equitable treatment of all our residents: It

is also rooted in self-interest. Canada cannothave a high quality of life if there is a significantminority forming an impoverished underclass.Moreover, as we shall see in this paper, Abori-ginal entrants into the labour market will beabsolutely vital in filling labour demand require-ments over the next decades, especially inwestern Canada. To a larger extent than isgenerally recognized, Canada’s future prosper-ity depends upon how successful we are inachieving equitable results in our labour mar-kets for Aboriginal Canadians.

Canada needs a lively and continuingdialogue among Aboriginal organizations, gov-ernments of all levels, and private and publicorganizations about how Aboriginal peoplecan achieve equity in our labour markets. Thisdialogue would be greatly assisted by a solidfactual basis built upon the best data available.This report is an attempt both to stimulate sucha debate and to provide essential informa-tion for an informed discussion.

Defining the Aboriginal Canadian popula-tion

As discussed in our previous report,there are two types of data describing Abori-ginal people in Canada.

One type of data concerns people whoreport an Aboriginal ancestry, called ‘theAboriginal origin population.’ The Aboriginalorigin population is important for several rea-sons, among them its comparison with variousethnic groups in Canada.

The second type of data refers to ‘theAboriginal identity population.’ These are per-sons who identify themselves as Aboriginal,or who report themselves as Treaty Indian or

2 Caledon Institute of Social Policy

Registered Indian under the Indian Act, or whoare members of a First Nation.

The Aboriginal identity population is themore relevant population for questions of equity,opportunity and discrimination, as well as forplanning programs to provide specialized ser-vices meant mainly for Aboriginal peoples. Thosewho have an Aboriginal ancestry but do notidentify themselves as Aboriginal are much lesslikely to seek out programs targeted especiallyfor Aboriginal people and are also less likely toshare the same experience in the labour marketas persons who identify themselves primarily asAboriginals. Consequently, this report is aboutthe Aboriginal identity population.

The first survey of the Aboriginal iden-tity population was undertaken in 1991, as apost-Census survey to provide data for the RoyalCommission on Aboriginal Peoples. The 1996Census also included Aboriginal identity, as hasthe 2001 Census. Thus it might appear that wenow have a decade and a half of data. Unfor-tunately, there are severe limitations to the data,which make Census-to-Census comparisonstricky and less than fully reliable.

First, self-identification as an Aboriginalis to some extent subjective. As we shall see,more people in Canada are choosing to identifythemselves as Aboriginal, so that the populationsover each Census period do not represent thesame group of people subject to change justdue to birth and death. Instead, the Aboriginalidentity population is a widening pool, growingin each of the Censuses since 1991. This isundoubtedly a good thing, since it reflectsincreased pride and lessened reluctance toidentify as an Aboriginal person, but from a sta-tistical perspective it means that year-to-yearcomparisons must be treated with caution.

Second, in each Census there were somereserves that were under-enumerated, and the

pattern is not necessarily identical in all years.This under-enumeration is not corrected in thisdata, so it consequently underreports – espe-cially for First Nations on reserve – likely byroughly about 30,000 to 35,000 people [Statis-tics Canada 2003], although not necessarily thesame underreporting in each Census.

Finally, Statistics Canada has not madedata from the 1991 Aboriginal People’s surveywidely available, as this was the first surveyof this type and is not considered consistentenough with later surveys to provide meaningfulcomparisons. Thus in this report we usereferences to the 1991 data sparingly, andeven then these comparisons should be treatedas, at best, rough approximations. Most of thetime series data will be reported only for the1996 and 2001 surveys.

Statistics Canada’s Aboriginal identitypopulation estimates are gathered from the20 percent sample of the Census, based on amore detailed questionnaire than used for theoverall Census. For purposes of comparisonto the total population, it is best to use consis-tent data. Therefore this report uses the 20percent sample, rather than the 100 percentpopulation count from the Census, for compara-tive data about the total population. Ordinarily,the difference between a 20 percent sampleand a 100 percent population count in a largesurvey such as the Census would be trivial –not even noticeable to the second or thirddecimal place. However, the Census’ 20 per-cent sample covers only people living in pri-vate dwellings and excludes all those living incollective dwellings, such as nursing homes,student residences, hospitals and prisons. Thedifference in total population is about 500,000.As we must use the 20 percent sample forthe Aboriginal identity population, we also usethe smaller population counts for the popula-tion as a whole, but this implies that some ofthe total population counts may appear smaller


than usual to those familiar with the generalpopulation data for Canada.

Nevertheless, even taking into accountall these limitations, the Census survey data isthe most accurate information available. Thisdata allows us to present a reasonably reli-able portrayal of the labour market status ofAboriginal people in Canada, one sufficientlyrobust to provide a sound empirical basis forpolicy formulation and analysis.

In respect of data sources, all 1996 and2001 data in this report is derived from tabu-lations of the 1996 and 2001 Census data.Most of the data is freely available to all usersover the Internet on Statistics Canada’s website.All 1991 data on the Aboriginal populationis from Statistics Canada’s publication School-ing, Work and Related Activities, Income,Expenses and Mobility [Statistics Canada1993].

Throughout the paper when referringto ‘provinces’ we mean both provinces and ter-ritories.

Organization of the report

The paper is organized in five sections.First, we review the demographics of theAboriginal identity population, both for allages and for the working age population. Thecentral labour market indicators – unemploy-ment and participation rates – are discussedin the second section. The third section ana-lyzes the geography of the labour market forAboriginal peoples. The fourth section looksinto the future, to assess some of the labourmarket challenges for Aboriginal people overthe next few decades. Finally, the fifth sectiondiscusses some of the public policy implica-tions of the findings in the preceding sections.

Demographics of the Aboriginal Iden-tity Population

As can be seen in Table 1, the numberof Canadians reporting Aboriginal identityincreased from 799,010 in 1996 to 976,305 in

Table 1Aboriginal identity population

in Canada, 1996 and 2001

Aboriginal identity population

total population

Aboriginal population as % of total population

1996

799,010

28,528,125

2.8

2001

976,305

29,639,035

3.3

1996-2001% change

22.2

3.9

17.6

Note: Both Aboriginal identity and total population counts exclude persons living in collective dwellings.


2001. This represents a sizeable 22.2 per-cent rise in the Aboriginal identity populationover just five years, which would be a phenom-enal rate of growth if due only to new births inthe existing 1996 Aboriginal identity population.More reasonably, ‘natural’ growth due to newbirths (less deaths) among the 1996 Aboriginaliden-tity population accounted for about 80,000to 90,000 of the increase of 177,295 in theAboriginal population. This is a growth rate ofabout 2 percent annually, which is still veryrapid. Approximately half of the increase inthe Aboriginal identity population is thereforeattributable to additional people choosing toidentify themselves as Aboriginal, as discussedabove. As well, some of the increase may bedue to more complete enumeration of reserves[Statistics Canada 2003].

The Aboriginal identity population’sshare of the total population also has grown sign-ificantly. It rose from 2.8 percent of all Canadiansin 1996 to 3.3 percent in 2001 − an increase of17.6 percent.

The Aboriginal identity population com-pared to the total population of each provinceis shown in Table 2. Ontario and all provinceseast have relatively small Aboriginal popula-tions, ranging in 2001 from 1.0 percent of thetotal population in Prince Edward Island to 1.1percent in Quebec, 1.7 percent in Ontario, 1.9percent in Nova Scotia, 2.4 percent in NewBrunswick and 3.7 percent in Newfoundlandand Labrador. The Aboriginal identity populationas a percentage of the total population is largerin the west – 4.4 percent in British Columbia,

Table 2Aboriginal identity population,

provinces and territories, 1996 and 2001

1996 2001

NfldPEINSNBQueOntManSaskAltaBCYukonNWT &Nunavut

Aboriginalpopulation

14,200 950 12,380 10,250 71,415 141,520 128,680 111,245 122,835 139,655 6,175 39,695

totalpopulation

547,160 132,855 899,970 729,625 7,045,08010,642,790 1,100,295 976,615 2,669,195 3,689,755 30,650 64,120

Aboriginalpopulation as

% of totalpopulation

2.6 0.7 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.311.711.4 4.6 3.820.161.9

Aboriginalpopulation

18,770 1,350 17,015 16,990 79,410 188,310 150,050 130,185 156,220 170,025 6,540 41,445

totalpopulation

508,080 133,385 897,565 719,715 7,125,580 11,285,550 1,103,700 963,155 2,941,150 3,868,875 28,520 63,770

Aboriginalpopulation as

% of totalpopulation

3.7 1.0 1.9 2.4 1.1 1.713.613.5 5.3 4.422.965.0


5.3 percent in Alberta and a substantial 13.5 per-cent in Saskatchewan and 13.6 percent inManitoba. Of course, the Aboriginal identitypopulation makes up a much greater proportionof the total population in the Territories – 22.9percent in Yukon and 65.0 percent in Nunavutand the Northwest Territories combined (Nunavutand the Northwest Territories are usually com-bined in this report because Nunavut did not existin 1996).

Figure 1 illustrates the percentage ofCanada’s total Aboriginal identity populationresiding in each province in 1996 and 2001.Although Aboriginal persons constitute a smallpercentage of Ontario’s total population (1.7percent in 2001), they still make up the largestAboriginal identity population of any individualprovince or territory, at 19.3 percent of Canada’sAboriginal identity population in 2001.

Figure 2 shows the Aboriginal iden-tity population regionally, as a percentage ofCanada’s total Aboriginal identity populationin 2001. As can be seen, most of the Aboriginalidentity population (62.2 percent) lives in the fourwestern provinces. Ontario comes next, with19.3 percent of the total Aboriginal identitypopulation, followed by Quebec (8.1 percent),the Atlantic provinces (5.5 percent) and the Terri-tories, at 4.9 percent. Although the Aboriginalidentity population forms a large proportion ofthe total population in the three Territories, atmore than half (52.0 percent), only 4.9 percent ofCanada’s Aboriginal population lives in theTerritories.

Figure 3 shows the distribution of theAboriginal identity population by area of resi-dence – reserve, rural, small urban and largeurban. ‘Small urban centre’ is a town or city with


an urban core population of at least 10,000, butless than 100,000. ‘Large urban centre’ is a citywith an urban core of at least 100,000. Therewas substantial growth in terms of absolute num-bers for all area sizes between 1996 and 2001.Of course, some of this growth is due to addi-tional reporting of Aboriginal identity.

Figures 4 and 5 show the percentagedistribution of the Aboriginal identity populationin each area of residence in 1996 and 2001,respectively. Large urban centres make up agrowing percentage of the total Aboriginal pop-ulation − 27.6 percent in 1996 and 28.7 percentin 2001. However, the reserve-based Aboriginalidentity population’s share (29.2 percent in1996 and 29.3 percent in 2001) and that ofsmall urban centres (21.7 percent in 1996 and21.9 percent in 2001) are pretty much stable.Only rural populations are declining as a share ofthe total Aboriginal identity population − from21.5 percent in 1996 to 20.1 percent in 2001.

Thus the common perception of ‘massivemigration off the reserves and into the cities’ ismyth and does not reflect reality. It would bemore accurate to say that there has been a smallshift out of rural areas into larger cities, but inthe context of a growing population so that noarea is actually declining in absolute − as opposedto percentage − terms. In fact, the growth inthe proportion of the Aboriginal identity popu-lation living in large urban centres is quite small,increasing by only 1.1 percentage points from1996 to 2001.

Among the Aboriginal identity groups,North American Indians predominate, as isshown in Figure 6. In 1996, the North Ameri-can Indian identity group made up 529,040 or66 percent of the total population, Métis204,115 or 26 percent, Inuit 40,220 or 5 per-cent and ‘other (including multiple identity) or notavailable’ 25,640 or 3 percent. In 2001, theNorth American Indian identity group made


up 608,850 or 61 percent of the total population,Métis 292,305 or 32 percent, Inuit 45,075 or4 percent and ‘other (including multiple identity)or not available’ 30,080 or 3 percent. Fromthese data, it appears that much of the ‘roll-on’of additional people identifying themselves in2001 as Aboriginal (while not choosing to do soin 1996) is likely among the Métis identity group.

There were 14 cities in Canada withAboriginal identity populations greater than 5,000in 2001. The largest Aboriginal identity popula-tion in any city is in Winnipeg, with 55,755 per-sons in 2001 identifying themselves as Aboriginal.Edmonton and Vancouver also had very largeAboriginal populations, of 40,935 and 36,855respectively. Table 3 gives the Aboriginal iden-tity populations of the 14 cities in 1996 and

2001, along with the percentage change in popu-lation over this five-year period.

Figure 7 illustrates the growth of theAboriginal identity population in each of the 14cities between 1996 and 2001. Four cities’ rate ofgrowth outpaced the overall 22 percent aver-age increase – Sudbury (59.7 percent), Calgary(44 percent), Hamilton (33 percent) and Victoria(32.5 percent). The Aboriginal identity populationgrew much slower than the average in Montreal(11.3 percent), Thunder Bay (11.9 percent), Regina(15.3 percent), Ottawa-Hull (16.2 percent), andVancouver (18.4 percent). In the other cities –Toronto, London, Winnipeg, Saskatoon andEdmonton − the Aboriginal population has grownmore or less the same as the overall 22 percentaverage.

Table 3Aboriginal identity population in cities, 1996 and 2001

Montreal

Ottawa-Hull

Toronto

Hamilton

London

Sudbury

Thunder Bay

Winnipeg

Regina

Saskatoon

Calgary

Edmonton

Vancouver

Victoria

1996

9,960

11,605

16,095

5,460

4,380

4,625

7,330

45,750

13,605

16,160

15,195

32,825

31,140

6,565

2001

11,085

13,485

20,300

7,265

5,646

7,385

8,200

55,755

15,690

20,275

21,910

40,935

36,855

8,700

1996-2001% change

11.3

16.2

26.1

33.1

28.9

59.7

11.9

21.9

15.3

25.5

44.2

24.7

18.4

32.5

Note: Census Metropolitan Areas with Aboriginal populations more than 5,000 in 2001.


Figure 8 shows the Aboriginal identitypopulation as a percentage of the total populationin the 14 cities in 1996 and 2001. The Abori-ginal identity population grew as a proportionof the total population in most of the westerncities. There were four cities in which the Abori-ginal population was 5 percent or more of thegeneral population in 2001 – Saskatoon (9.1 per-cent), Winnipeg (8.4 percent), Regina (8.3 per-cent) and Thunder Bay (6.8 percent).

Working age population

Table 4 shows the basic demographics ofthe working age (here defined as 15 through 64)Aboriginal identity population and total popula-tion. Between 1996 and 2001, the working ageAboriginal identity population grew slightly morethan that of the total Aboriginal identity popula-

tion, at 25.0 percent compared to 22.2 percent.The work ing age population in Canada as awhole also grew slightly more rapidly than thatof the population of all ages, by 4.8 percentcompared to 4 percent. The Aboriginal identityworking age population represented 3.0 percentof the total Canadian working age labour forcein 2001, up from 2.5 percent in 1996.

The distribution of the Aboriginal iden-tity population has aged a little since 1996.Figure 9 compares the age profile of the Abo-riginal identity population in 1996 and 2001.The age distribution has shifted a little to theright, with a slightly higher percentage of theidentity population 35 years of age or older.

Table 5 shows the total Aboriginal iden-tity population for children (0-14), workingage (15-64) and older people (65 and over).There was a shift of two percentage points from


Table 4Aboriginal identity working age population

(15 to 64) in Canada, 1996 and 2001

1996

490,280

19,349,150

2.5

2001

612,670

20,276,505

3.0

1996-2000% change

25.0

4.8

19.2

Aboriginal working age population

total working age population

Aboriginal working age population as % of total


Table 5Aboriginal identity population,by age group, 1996 and 2001

0-14

15-64

65+

1996

280,415

490,280

28,315

2001

323,955

612,670

39,680

1996-2001% change

16

25

40

% oftotal 1996

35

61

4

% oftotal 2001

33

63

4


children (which fell from 35.1 percent of the totalAboriginal identity population in 1996 to 33percent in 2001) to the working age population(which rose from 61.4 percent to 62.8 percent,respectively).

The identity groups have only slightlydifferent age distributions, as can be seen inFigure 10. The Métis population is slightly olderand the Inuit population slightly younger, withthe North American Indian population in between.

As might be expected, the distribution ofarea of residence of the working age Aboriginalidentity population is close to that of the Abori-ginal identity population as a whole. However,there is a slightly larger presence of the workingage population in large urban centres and acommensurate smaller percentage on reserve,as shown in Figure 11. This is a not unexpectedconsequence of working age people going towhere there are jobs.

Figure 12 shows the numerical changein the Aboriginal identity working age popu-lation from 1996 to 2001 in each province,and Figure 13 gives the percentage change. Thebiggest increases in absolute numbers were inOntario and all the western provinces, withOntario leading the provinces. The biggestpercentage changes, however, were in NewBrunswick and the other Atlantic provinces –although these still have relatively small Abo-riginal identity working age populations.

The demographics of the working agepopulation are otherwise more or less the sameas those for the total Aboriginal identity popu-lation, so we need not elaborate them here.

Because of its strong relationship tolabour markets, we are especially interestedin the education of the Aboriginal identitypopulation. Table 6 compares educationalattainment in 2001 for the Aboriginal identity


population 15 years of age and older and thetotal population 15 and older.

Whereas fewer than one-third (31.3percent) of all Canadians have less than highschool graduation, almost one-half (48.8percent) of the Aboriginal identity populationdid not graduate from high school. Only 9.9percent of the Aboriginal identity populationgraduated from high school, as opposed to14.1 percent of the population overall. About12.1 percent of the Aboriginal identity popula-tion had a trades certificate or diploma, andanother 12 percent graduated from a college. Amere 4 percent of the Aboriginal identity pop-ulation had a university degree, as opposed to15.4 percent of all Canadians. Only in tradescertificates and diplomas is the Aboriginal iden-tity population achieving better than the rate ofcourse completion among the total population.

Table 6 also shows the gap between theeducational attainment of the Aboriginal identitypopulation and the overall population by calcu-lating the ratio between the formr and the latter.The higher the result above 100, the more thatthe Aboriginal identity population is overrepre-sented in an education category, whereas thelower the result below 100, the more it is under-represented. The Aboriginal identity populationfigures disproportionately in the lowest edu-cational category, at a ratio of 154, and alsoamong those who graduated from a trade school(112). The Aboriginal identity population is mostunderrepresented in the highest educationallevel shown, university graduation, with a ratio of29, followed by university certificate or diplomabelow bachelor’s degree (56), high school gradu-ation (70) and college graduation (77).


Table 7 shows, for each jurisdiction, thepercentage of the Aboriginal identity population15 years of age and over and the total population15 years of age and over with less than a highschool certificate, and compares the two by cal-culating the ratio of the former to the latter. East-ern relative rates are better (i.e., lower) thanthose in the west.

The lower educational attainment of theAboriginal identity population might be partly anartefact of its age distribution compared to thetotal population. As the Aboriginal identitypopulation is much younger, there will be more15 to 17 year olds who have not yet completedhigh school. Among persons 15 to 24 in theAboriginal identity population, 65 percent hadnot completed high school certification in 2001,compared to just 35 percent of those aged 25to 44. This indicates that at least some of thedifferences between the Aboriginal identitypopulation and the total population are due toage distribution.

Among the 45 to 64 age group in theAboriginal identity population, 46 percent hadnot completed high school, and the figurerises to almost 80 percent among those 65and older. As we would hope and expect, thispattern shows that the increased commitmentto education for the Aboriginal identity popula-tion is paying off in educational results. On theother hand, there remains a long way to go −recalling that, for many of the older age groupamong the Aboriginal identity population, for-mal education was often actively discouragedand simply not obtainable beyond the mostrudimentary levels.

Summary observations

1. The growth rate of the Aboriginal identitypopulation between 1996 and 2001 washigh, at about 2 percent annually due to‘natural’ growth and about the same

Table 6Educational attainment of Aboriginal

identity population and population 15 and over, 2001

Less than high school graduation certificate

High school graduation certificate only

Trades certificate or diploma

College certificate or diploma

University certificate or diploma below bachelor’s degree

University degree

Aboriginalidentity

population(%)

48.0

9.9

12.1

11.6

1.4

4.4

totalpopulation

(%)

31.3

14.1

10.9

15.0

2.5

15.4

ratio ofAboriginal to

total population

154

70

112

77

56

29


amount again due to ‘roll-on’ of additionalpeople identifying themselves as Abori-ginal who did not do so in the 1996 Cen-sus. Fully 62 percent of the Aboriginalidentity population lives in the west andthe north, with the Prairie provinces hav-ing the largest Aboriginal identity pop-ulation as a percentage of their totalpopulation (other than the Territories).The North American Indian identity groupmade up 61 percent of the total Aborigi-nal identity population in 2001, followedby Métis at 32 percent, Inuit at 4 percentand ‘other (including multiple identity)or not available’ at 3 percent.

2. Contrary to myth, there is no evidence ofmass migration off reserves and into cit-ies. In fact, all areas (reserve, rural,towns, cities) have experienced growthin their Aboriginal identity populations,

with the largest growth in absolute num-bers on both reserves and cities. Largeurban centres increased their proportionof the Aboriginal identity population byonly 1.1 percentage points between 1996(27.6 percent of the total) and 2001 (28.7percent). Reserves still account for thelargest share of the Aboriginal identitypopulation of all areas, at 29.1 percent in1996 and 29.3 percent in 2001.

3. There are now 14 cities with Aboriginalidentity populations over 5,000. Winnipeghas by far the largest urban Aboriginalidentity population, at over 55,000 persons.Thunder Bay, Winnipeg, Regina andSaskatoon have the highest proportionsof their population that is Aboriginal, atmore than 5 percent. Sudbury, Calgary,Hamilton and Victoria have the most rap-idly growing Aboriginal populations.

Table 7Aboriginal identity population and total population 15 and older with less

than high school graduation, by province and territory, 2001

Aboriginalidentity

population(%)

42.437.435.437.331.729.738.239.430.628.024.735.250.3

totalpopulation

(%)

43.642.240.843.151.642.356.052.647.643.637.455.760.4

ratio ofAboriginal to

total population

103113115115163143147134156155152158120



4. Only three in ten of all Canadians aged15 and older had less than high schoolgraduation in 2001, in contrast to almostone-half of the Aboriginal identity popu-lation in the same age group. A mere 4 per-cent of the Aboriginal identity populationhad a university degree, compared to 15percent overall. The Aboriginal identitypopulation achieved better results at col-leges, with 12 percent graduating com-pared to 15 percent of the total population(a ratio of 77 percent of the overall popu-lation). Comparing Aboriginal educationalattainment to that of the total population,the gap is lower in the East and higher inthe west and north.

Unemployment and ParticipationRates

Unemployment rates

Table 8 shows the unemployment ratefor the Aboriginal identity population com-pared to the total population in 1991, 1996and 2001. One-quarter of the Aboriginal labourforce was unemployed in both 1991 and 1996,compared to 10 percent of the total population.The third column shows the Aboriginal unem-ployment rate index, calculated by dividing theAboriginal jobless rate by the overall joblessrate. The results were 238 in 1996 and 240 in1991, indicating that Aboriginal unemploymentremained at just under two-and-a-half timesthe total rate.

There is a good news/bad news story for2001. The good news is that the unemploymentrate for Aboriginal people fell by one-fifth, from24.0 percent in 1996 to 19.1 percent in 2001.This is especially good news given the size-able (122,390 or 22 percent) increase in the

number of Aboriginal identity working agepersons.

Of course, some of this change may bean artefact of the ‘roll-on’ of people whomight have been employed in 1996 but didnot choose at that time to identify themselvesas Aboriginal. However, even if we make theextremely unlikely assumption that the entire80,000 people who are newly identifyingthemselves as Aboriginal are of working ageand are fully employed, the unemploymentrate among the remainder would be 24 per-cent.

As it is certain that some of the 80,000‘new identifiers’ are not of working age orare either unemployed or not in the work-force, the unemployment rate of the remainingAboriginal identity population (i.e., the cohortwho were in the 1996 Census as part of theAboriginal identity population) was certainlybelow 24 percent in 2001. Thus there hasbeen unambiguous improvement in this mostimportant indicator of labour market activityfor Aboriginal people − the jobless rate. Not-withstanding the various qualifiers that wemust include in further discussion, this is goodnews. Progress is possible and the situationis not just getting worse every year.

The bad news is that relative unem-ployment rates of Aboriginal people was a bitworse in 2000 than in 1991 and 1996 over two-and-a-half times that of the total population.This means that we have not made progressin five years in improving the labour marketposition of Aboriginal peoples relative to thegeneral population. So the good news is thatthings have not gotten much worse relativeto the general population despite a largeincrease in the Aboriginal identity workingage population, but neither have they gottenbetter.


Table 8Aboriginal and total unemployment rates, 1991-2001

1991

1996

2001

Aboriginalunemployment

rate (%)

24.5

24.0

19.1

totalunemployment

rate (%)

10.2

10.1

7.4

relativeunemployment

rate

240

238

258

Figure 14 shows unemployment ratesamong the provinces for the Aboriginal iden-tity population. Unemployment rates rangefrom 14.7 percent in Ontario and Alberta to33.5 percent in Newfoundland. However, thispattern largely reflects the prevailing unem-ployment rates for the population at large.

Figure 15 gives unemployment rates ofAboriginal people relative to those of the pop-ulation in total (‘relative unemployment rates’are the Aboriginal identity population unem-ployment rates divided by total populationunemployment rates). A rather different, andmore familiar, pattern emerges. Relative unem-ployment increases from east to west, hits itspeak in Saskatchewan and then decreases aswe move further west and then north. Table9 shows relative rates in 1991, 1996 and 2001.There was some improvement from 1991 to2001 in the relative unemployment rates inAtlantic Canada and the Prairie provinces, butthese gains were offset by deterioration inOntario, Quebec and New Brunswick.

Figure 16 shows 2001 unemploymentrates among the Aboriginal identity populationin 14 major cities (those with Aboriginal iden-tity populations of more than 5,000). Thejobless rates range from a low of 7.3 percentin Ottawa-Hull to a high of 22.7 percent inThunder Bay. Although Regina and Saskatoonare, as with most of the data presented inthis report, among the worst of the cities inrespect of Aboriginal unemployment, Winnipegis doing better than seven other cities (ThunderBay, Saskatoon, Regina, Sudbury, Victoria,London and Vancouver). Aboriginal unemploy-ment rates for three cities are at or below 10percent − Ottawa-Hull, Toronto and Calgary.While the levels of unemployment in cities ingeneral are obviously unacceptable, these levelsare not as high as might have been anticipated,with the exceptions noted of Regina, Saskatoon,Sudbury and Thunder Bay.

Of course, city-to-city variations inunemployment rates among the Aboriginal iden-tity population may simply reflect the varying


Table 9Ratio of Aboriginal unemployment rate to total unemployment rate,

by province and territory, 1991-2001


1991

159220209212197199329383305269303191

1996

141205186207252230325361293266238172

2001

154180201225224240314362288264231167

% point change1991-2001

-5 -40 -8+13+27+41 -15 -21 -17 -5 -72 -24


total unemployment rates in each city. To seethe extent to which this is the case, Figure 17illustrates the relative unemployment rate(i.e., the Aboriginal identity populationunemployment rate divided by the totalunemployment rate) for each city. Resultsrange from 130 in Ottawa-Hull (meaning thatthe Aboriginal unemployment rate is 1.3 timesthat of the general population) to 333 inSaskatoon and 345 in Regina, with Aboriginalunemployment rates more than three timesgreater than the overall unemployment rate.Once again, we see a pattern of generallyrising relative rates as we move from the eastto the west, to reach their highest levels inSaskatchewan’s cities and then diminish as wego further west. Overall, however, the patternis not as pronounced for the cities as it is forthe provinces, with the exception of Regina andSaskatoon.

There is considerable variation in unem-ployment rates among Aboriginal identitygroups, as may be seen in Figure 18. In 2002the jobless rate was 22 percent for NorthAmerican Indians and Inuit, but Métis unem-ployment was about one-third lower at 14.0percent. (The ‘other/NA’ group are those whodid not identify with a specific Aboriginal iden-tity group or who provided multiple answers.)

Participation rates

Table 10 shows the rate of labour forceparticipation (i.e., the proportion of the workingage population either working or activelysearching for work) among Aboriginal peopleand the total population in 1991, 1996 and2001. Aboriginal participation rates have


Table 10Aboriginal and total

participation rates, 1991-2001

Aboriginalparticipation

rate (%)

57.4

58.7

61.4

totalparticipation

rate (%)

68.0

65.5

66.4

relativeparticipation

rate

84

89

92

1991

1996

2001


improved consistently from 1991 through 2001.Moreover, because participation rates amongthe whole population declined between 1991and 1996 and remained the same in 2001 as1996, relative participation rates of the Abori-ginal population have been closing in to almostequal those in the general population. The rela-tive participation rate of the Aboriginal identitypopulation rose from 84 in 1991 to 88 in 1996and 92 in 2001. These results confirm the trendnoted in our previous report and are very posi-tive news. Put simply, people of Aboriginal iden-tity are trying to get jobs at almost the same rateas the total population, despite Aboriginals’high rates of unemployment.

Figure 19 shows the Aboriginal popu-lation’s participation rates and relative parti-cipation rates for each province in 2001. Parti-cipation rates were lowest in Saskatchewan(54.5 percent) and highest in Yukon (71.9percent). However, participation rates for the

total population were higher in the west andlower in the east, so the pattern of relativeparticipation rates is more recognizable: Rela-tive rates are worst (i.e., lowest) in Saskatchewan,Manitoba, the Northwest Territories/Nunavutand Alberta. Interestingly, relative participationrates in Newfoundland and Labrador are over100 percent, meaning that persons of Abori-ginal identity have a higher labour force partici-pation rate than the total population in thatprovince. Similarly, in Prince Edward Island,New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario and BritishColumbia, Aboriginal identity participation ratesare close to those of the total population.

The trend we found in the previous reportseems to be recurring in 2001. Aboriginal parti-cipation rates seem higher than would beexpected, given their high unemployment.Unemployment rates and participation rates areusually inversely correlated: higher unemploy-ment means lower participation and vice versa.


This pattern is called the ‘discouraged worker’effect because it is thought that higher unem-ployment levels discourage workers who thenquit looking for work and drop out of the activelabour force. Is there a way to quantify thisrelationship, so we could see how much betterthan expected are Aboriginal participationrates? If we can derive an equation thatexpresses the quantified relationship betweenparticipation rates and unemployment rates forthe general population, we can then apply thatto the Aboriginal identity population to seehow different it is. An equation is simply astatement that says for x unemployment ratethere is usually y participation rate.

A rigorous study of the relationshipbetween unemployment and participation rateswould attempt to derive such an equation byanalysing microdata reflecting the real experi-ence of millions of Canadian workers. How-ever, for a rough estimation, we can use aggre-

gate data collected for the provinces. If weexclude the Territories and Prince EdwardIsland, the variation in unemployment amongthe provinces ‘explains’ about 77 percent ofthe variation of participation rates, with parti-cipation rates falling by 0.74 of a percentagepoint for every one percentage point increasein unemployment rates. The results are almostidentical in all respects to those for 1996. (Theequation is: participation rate = -0.74 times theunemployment rate plus 0.72.)

Table 11 presents the results of applyingthis equation to 2001 Aboriginal identityunemployment rates to derive an ‘expected’participation rate − if there were the samerelationship between participation and unemploy-ment rates among the Aboriginal identityworkforce as among the total population. Thetable compares the expected and actualparticipation rates, and shows the difference interms of percentage points.

Table 11Aboriginal participation rate,expected versus actual, 2001

CanadaNfldNSNBQueOntManSaskAltaBC

actualparticipation

rate (%)

61.060.460.662.157.764.659.054.564.262.9

expectedparticipation

rate (%)

58.247.656.251.558.761.458.355.361.355.7

% pointdifference

(actual - expected)

2.8 12.8 4.4 10.6 -1.0 3.2 0.7 -0.8 2.9 7.2


On average in Canada, the actual parti-cipation rate of Aboriginals was 3 percentagepoints better than it would have been had theAboriginal workforce had the same relation-ship between participation and unemploymentas did the total population. Once again, this isvery positive news, as it means that the Abori-ginal identity population is not being as easilydiscouraged from attempting to find work as isthe general population. On top of already highparticipation rates, this finding implies that themain labour market challenge to the Aboriginalcommunity is not lack of will to work: Rather,the challenge is finding jobs.

However, the picture is not so clear-cut if we look at the data at the level of indi-vidual provinces. In Quebec, Manitoba andSaskatchewan, actual participation rates areabout the same as expected participationrates. In Manitoba and Saskatchewan, this

result reflects an all-too-familiar pattern of rela-tive underachievement compared to the otherprovinces.

Figure 20 shows participation ratesand relative participation rates for the Abori-ginal identity population in 14 major cities. Ineight cities − Montreal, Ottawa-Hull, Toronto,Hamilton, London, Sudbury, Calgary andVictoria − Aboriginal participation rates arealmost the same as participation rates amongthe total population. Aboriginal participationrates are the same as the overall populationin Hamilton and Calgary, and in fact higherin Ottawa-Hull and Toronto. Only in Reginaand Saskatoon are relative participation rateslower than 90 percent.

Figure 21 shows participation ratesamong Aboriginal identity groups. As withunemployment rates, North American Indians


fare worst (57 percent), followed by Other/NA(60 percent), Inuit (63 percent) and Métis (69percent).


1. The Canadian labour market absorbed122,390 more working age people ofAboriginal identity over the five yearsfrom 1996 to 2001. Despite the sub-stantial increase in Aboriginal personsseeking employment, the Aboriginalunemployment rate dropped by one-fifthfrom 24.0 percent in 1996 to 19.1 percentin 2001.

2. In respect of unemployment, the positionof the Aboriginal identity population isabout the same compared to that of thetotal population in 2001 as it was in1996 and 1991. The gap has not widened

appreciably despite the large increase inthe Aboriginal workforce, but neither hasthere been any improvement.

3. Relative rates of unemployment remainhighest in Manitoba and Saskatchewanand lowest in the east. Relative rates con-tinue to increase in Ontario, but havestabilized in Quebec.

4. Along with better unemployment rates,the Aboriginal identity population con-tinues to enjoy improving participationrates. Relative participation rates arealso continuing to improve. Overall, theAboriginal identity population’s partici-pation rates are three percentage pointshigher than would have been expectedgiven their unemployment rates. TheAboriginal identity population is demon-strating a surprisingly strong labour mar-ket attachment.


5. The Aboriginal identity population’s relativeparticipation rate is over 100 percent inNewfoundland and Labrador, indicatingthat participation is higher among theAboriginal identity population than thepopulation overall. All across the east, theAboriginal identity population’s relativeparticipation rates are over 90 percent.Unfortunately, Manitoba and Saskatche-wan’s relative rates are once again theworst among the provinces. A similar pat-tern can be seen for expected versus actualparticipation rates.

Geography of Labour Markets forAboriginal Peoples

Regions

Table 12 provides a regional summaryof absolute and relative unemployment and

participation rates for the Aboriginal identitypopulation in 1996 and 2001. Looking first atthe absolute rates, labour market conditions in2001 were slightly less favourable in the westthan in the east, both for unemployment andparticipation. Generally the regional patternin 2001 is similar to 1996 with respect to abso-lute rates. In all regions, unemployment andparticipation were both better in 2001 than in1996 in absolute terms, reflecting improvedeconomic conditions for Canada as a whole.

In relative terms, the picture is not quiteas bright. None of the regions’ relative unemploy-ment rates improved from 1996 to 2001, insteadremaining about the same. In contrast, the rela-tive participation rates for all regions did improvefrom 1996 to 2001. However, the west is notdoing as well as the east in relative terms eitherin unemployment or in participation, and thePrairies are doing worst of all.

Table 12Aboriginal unemployment rate and

participation rate, by region, 1996 and 2001

East (Newfoundland to Ontario)

West (Prairies, BC and Territories)

Prairie provinces

East (Newfoundland to Ontario)

West (Prairies, BC and Territories)

Prairie provinces

unemployment rate participation rate

actual

23.4

24.3

24.0

17.8

19.8

18.4

relative

229

291

326

232

288

330

actual

59.1

57.9

55.6

62.3

60.9

59.6

relative

94

85

80

95

89

84

1996

2001


Finding the cause of the east-west dif-ferences goes far beyond this report, and likelyinvolves many factors that are difficult to quan-tify. A simple regression of the percentage ofthe Aboriginal identity population without highschool certification in each province in 2001‘explains’ 43 percent of the variation in Abo-riginal identity population relative unemploy-ment rates among the provinces. This figure isslightly less than for the 1996 data, when thesame regression was found to account for 56percent of the variation in relative unemploy-ment. A rigorous study of this issue would need

to use microdata rather than simply regressaggregate data by province. Nonetheless theaggregate data is suggestive of an expectedrelationship between education and unemploy-ment.

Cities

We also look at geography from the per-spective of the cities, shown in Table 13. In theeastern cities (arbitrarily counting Sudbury and

Table 13Aboriginal unemployment rate and total

unemployment rate, eastern and western cities, 2001

Montreal

Ottawa-Hull

Toronto

Hamilton

London

Sudbury

eastern average

Thunder Bay

Winnipeg

Regina

Saskatoon

Calgary

Edmonton

Vancouver

Victora

western average

Aboriginalunemployment rate

12.2

7.3

8.7

12.3

15.3

19.7

10.9

22.7

14.3

20.7

22.3

10.1

13.1

15.4

16.4

15.1

totalunemployment rate

relativeunemployment rate

eastern cities

western cities

7.5

5.6

5.9

5.7

6.7

9.2

6.4

8.8

5.6

6.0

6.7

4.9

5.5

7.2

6.6

6.2

163

130

147

216

228

214

169

258

255

345

333

206

238

214

248

243


everything east of it as eastern) unemploymentamong the Aboriginal identity population was10.9 percent in 2001, compared to unemploy-ment in the total population of those cities of6.4 percent, so in relative terms the Aboriginalunemployment rate was 1.7 times that of thetotal population. While this unemployment rateis far too high, it is not outside the bounds ofCanadian minority groups; recent immigrants toCanada also have unemployment levels at about11 percent.

However, Aboriginal unemployment inthe western cities is 15.1 percent, despite lowerlevels of unemployment among the total pop-ulation of those cities, resulting in relativeunemployment of 2.4 times the general rate.This high absolute and relative jobless rate isoutside of the bounds of experience of almostall minority groups in Canada.

Table 14 shows labour force partici-pation rates for cities in 2001, and averages for

Table 14Aboriginal participation rate and total participation rate,

eastern and western cities, 2001

Montreal

Ottawa-Hull

Toronto

Hamilton

London

Sudbury

eastern average

Thunder Bay

Winnipeg

Regina

Calgary

Edmonton

Vancouver

Victora

western average

Aboriginalparticipation rate

totalparticipation rate

relativeparticipation rate

eastern cities

western cities

64.2

72.6

71.7

65.5

66.0

60.0

67.6

65.7

70.4

68.8

65.5

67.4

62.0

68.2

98

103

104

100

98

97

100

57.3

64.3

58.3

58.4

75.3

66.7

63.3

63.5

69.2

63.7

68.6

70.5

79.8

75.2

71.8

66.2

64.3

64.5

90

94

83

84

100

93

96

99

93


Rural and urban

As a final view of the geography oflabour markets for the Aboriginal identitypopulation, we also look at unemployment andparticipation indicators by area of residence –on reserve, rural (both farm and small town),small urban and large urban (also known as aCensus Metropolitan Area). The data may bea little skewed because there is some overlapof reserves with the other categories and,more importantly, there are also some ques-tions regarding the accuracy of on reserveemployment data. Nevertheless, these are thebest data available and are likely accuratewithin at most a few percentage points.

Figure 22 shows the rate of unemploy-ment in the four areas of residence. Unem-ployment is by far and away highest on reserve,at 27.6 percent in 2001, and is much lower in

east and west. Participation rates among theAboriginal identity population in the east arevery good – in fact, they are the same as forthe total population. This is the equity levelthat should be one of the central goals oflabour market policy for Aboriginal Canadians,and it is encouraging to see that there aresome parameters in which equity already hasbeen achieved. It may sometimes be arguedthat equity is an impossible goal over thenear future, but the fact that it already hasbeen accomplished in much of Canada (andnot just a few scattered small towns) demon-strates that equity is possible.

Unfortunately, cities in the west remainsome distance from equity even with respectto participation, a key labour market indicatorthat is among the best for Aboriginal Canadians.Participation rates lag behind, at an average93 percent of the level of the total population.


all other areas of residence − ranging from18.5 percent in rural areas and 18.4 percentin small urban centres to 13.9 percent (halfthe rate on reserve) in the large urban areas.Figure 23 shows participation rates by area ofresidence, which range from 52 percent onreserve to 63.9 percent in rural areas, 64.8 per-cent in small urban areas and 65.8 percent inlarge cities. Again, reserves are performingleast well among the four community sizes inthis second key labour market indicator.

These are important observations sincethey indicate that First Nations members mayhave to choose between a job and remaining ona reserve. But remaining on a reserve is oftennot only a matter of where to live and whetherto have a job: It may also be a question ofretaining culture, identity and tradition. Thisdilemma is compounded by federal policy,since almost all federal benefits are currentlytied to the reserve base, thus reinforcing the

severance of Band ties when a Band mem-ber moves off reserve. However, federal policymay eventually change due to recent courtrulings extending voting rights to Band mem-bers living off reserve.


1. Canada’s Aboriginal labour market seg-ments in four ways: between east and west,and on and off reserve. In the east andoff reserve, the Aboriginal labour marketis not too far different from the Canadiannorm. On reserve and in the west, theAboriginal labour market is much worsethan the Canadian norm. These realitiespose significant challenges for labourmarkets in the west, where the Aboriginalidentity population is of increasing impor-tance to the economy, as is discussed fur-


ther in the next section of this report, andfor federal and Band policies regardingreserves.

2. The positive aspect of this review ofthe geography of Aboriginal labour mar-kets is that it is not all bad, and many ofthe indicators in the east are positive. Thisis a tangible demonstration that successis possible.

Future of Labour Markets for Abo-riginal Peoples

Due both to a younger age profile andto additional persons identifying themselvesas Aboriginal, Canada’s Aboriginal labour forcewill continue to grow very rapidly. We cannotpredict how many additional people willdecide to identify themselves as Aboriginal infuture surveys, but we can project exactlythe growth of the Aboriginal labour force overthe next 15 years to the extent that this growthis due only to maturing of the existing Abori-ginal identity population. This is possiblebecause everyone who will become older than15 years of age over the next 15 years hasalready been born. Thus we need only projectthe aging of the labour force to allow us to putsome precise quantitative parameters aroundcritical policy questions for Canada’s futurelabour market, at least to the extent that futuregrowth of the Aboriginal identity population isdue only to demographic factors (we here ignoremortality as this will be a small factor for thisage group).

The central question is how many jobswould be needed to close the employment gapbetween the Aboriginal and the non-Aboriginalpopulations?

Figure 24 shows the anticipated growthof the Aboriginal identity population aged 15 to64, if there are no additional people deciding toidentify themselves as Aboriginal beyond thosewho have already done so in the 2001 census –i.e., due to ‘natural’ growth. Figure 25 showsthe amount of new employment that will beneeded to achieve equity in participation andunemployment rates between the Aboriginalidentity population and the total population, assu-ming that 2001 unemployment and participationrates for the general population (7.4 percent and66.4 percent, respectively, for the total Canadianpopulation aged 15 to 64) continue into the future.

Figure 25 shows that with 323,945 per-sons between the ages of 15 and 64 employedin 2001 in the Aboriginal identity population,52,764 more would have had to have beenemployed if participation rates and unemploy-ment rates had been equal to those in the totalpopulation in 2001. Similarly, it shows that103,093 more persons of Aboriginal identitythan were employed in 2001 will have to beemployed in 2006, to achieve equality with the2001 participation and unemployment rates ofthe total population – and similarly increasingemployment growth for succeeding years(156,378 in 2011 and 189,842 by 2016).

Figure 26 projects the Aboriginal labourforce as a percent of the total workforce (aged15 to 64) from 2001 through 2016. Estimatesof the future Canadian workforce are takenfrom Statistics Canada’s medium populationprojection [George, Loh, Verma, and Shin2001]. The Aboriginal workforce will rise from2.9 percent of the total workforce in 2001 to aprojected 3.6 percent in 2016, a hefty 24 per-cent increase. However, the estimates of thefuture Canadian workforce are based on thefull population, while the Aboriginal identity futurepopulation estimates exclude persons living in


collective dwellings. This should be a relativelysmall factor, but it means that the proportion of theAboriginal workforce in the future is somewhatunderestimated in these and all subsequent figuresin this section of this report. Nevertheless, theseestimates are within the general ‘ballpark’ andcan form a reasonable basis for policy.

Of course, the proportion of Aboriginalworkers in the workforce will vary significantlygeographically. Table 15 shows the ‘natural’increase in the Aboriginal identity workforce overthe next three census periods, from 2001 to 2016.Figure 27 illustrates the cumulative percent-age increase in each province from 2001 to 2016.By ‘cumulative’ we mean the total increasefrom 2001 to the other time periods; for example,in Saskatchewan the figure shows a 19 percentincrease in the Aboriginal workforce from 2001to 2006, a 39 percent increase from 2001 to2011 and a 55 percent increase from 2001 to 2016.The largest increases will be in Manitoba,Saskatchewan and the Territories.

Provinces

Figure 28 shows the projected Abori-ginal workforce as a percentage of the totalworkforce for each province in 2001, 2006, 2011and 2016. The graph dramatically illustratesthe growing importance of the Aboriginal work-force in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, comparedto all the other provinces. In both provinces,the Aboriginal workforce will climb to about 17percent of the total workforce over the nextdecade and a half. To no small degree, theAboriginal children who are today in Manitobaand Saskatchewan homes, child care centresand schools represent the economic future of thetwo provinces.

Figure 29 gives the same information, butfor the three Territories. There are large dif-ferences among the Territories in respect oftheir current and future Aboriginal workforce.Southern Canadians may have a tendency tospeak of the Territories as a group and to


Table 15‘Natural’ growth in the Aboriginal

workforce, 2001 to 2016

Nfld

PEI

NS

NB

Que

Ont

Man

Sask

Alta

BC

Yukon

NWT &

Nunavut

2001

12,850825

10,94011,34551,350

124,03590,44574,44097,390

110,7904,225

11,33012,715

2006

14,245955

12,25312,35856,483

136,385103,81888,613

111,933124,355

4,69313,08315,368

2011

15,3851,030

13,71513,47561,870

150,575119,095103,810127,015137,170

5,16014,83518,065

2016

15,703 1,09814,53314,18064,828

157,278130,443115,658136,900143,185

5,46315,87820,458


lump them together for planning purposes, butthere are different challenges and opportunitiesrepresented by an Aboriginal workforce thatwill range by 2016 from about 24 percent of thetotal workforce in Yukon to 50 percent in theNorthwest Territories and almost 90 percent inNunavut.


1. Over the last decade, Canada’s labourmarket has performed better than manywould have expected in successfullyabsorbing rising numbers of Aboriginalworkers. The challenge will be greaterover the next several years. To begin toclose the gap between the Aboriginalidentity population and the total popula-tion will require substantially escalatingemployment opportunities for Aboriginalpersons.

2. The increasing importance of the Abori-ginal workforce to Manitoba and Saska-tchewan cannot be exaggerated. There islikely no single more critical economicfactor for these provinces. The much lar-ger Aboriginal presence in these two pro-vinces also means that federal Aboriginalpolicies should be looked at through a‘prairie lens,’ as the Prairie provinces willbe disproportionately affected by anychanges in federal policy.

Policy Implications

This report’s objective is to provide anempirical basis for policy debate. In the fol-lowing pages, we set out several possible direc-

tions for reform that could usefully be discussedin light of the analysis undertaken in this paper.

Invest in children now

As we have seen, the Aboriginal work-force will become increasingly important overthe next decade and a half. This is especiallyso in the Prairie provinces. The children whowill make up the new entrants into the labourforce are today at home, in schools and in childcare centres.

Federal, provincial/territorial and FirstNations’ governments, and Aboriginal organi-zations, have put great effort into programs forAboriginal families and children but − giventhe scale of the challenge before us − moreneeds to be done. Rather than viewing poten-tial spending simply as more demand on astretched public purse, we should be activelylooking for every possible way to invest wiselyin improving the odds for Aboriginal childrenand youth. Dollars well spent now are bound toreturn large pay-offs for the future. Literacy andnumeracy are essential for employment intoday’s economy and will be still more impor-tant in the future. Are there any areas in whichmore or better programming for Aboriginal chil-dren and their families could be considered?

Following are a few examples of thefundamental questions that federal, provincial/territorial and First Nations’ governments shouldbe asking themselves:

• Is every Aboriginal child who could benefitfrom a ‘Head Start’ type of program able toaccess one?


• Are there Aboriginal-controlled child andfamily services in all the major cities, with awell-funded preventative mandate and astrong community strategy?

• Is high quality, reliable child care availableto all Aboriginal families who could benefitfrom it, whether on or off reserve?

• Do schools serving Aboriginal children andyouth have ample resources and adequateskills to provide support to their Aboriginalstudents?

• Are there culturally appropriate resourcesavailable to help every Aboriginal parentwho could benefit from help, both on andoff of reserves, especially in the cities?

• Are there programs to help Aboriginal chil-dren and youth stay in school and to get backin if they do drop out for a few years?

• Are universities and colleges as accessible aspossible to qualified Aboriginal applicants?

• Can qualified Aboriginal applicants readilyaccess apprenticeship and trades programs?

• Is upgrading readily available for youngAboriginal adults who now want to com-plete their education?

• Are good literacy and numeracy programsavailable in correctional facilities, espe-cially for young offenders?

Setting a clear policy goal

Throughout the world, governmentshave been setting clear, quantifiable goals forthemselves as a way of measuring progress and

evaluating the success of their programs. Thedata in this report show that the Aboriginal iden-tity population has moved forward on relativeparticipation rates, but remains more or less at astandstill in regard to relative unemploymentrates.

Achieving equity in unemployment andparticipation rates is a tangible and quantifiablegoal for the Aboriginal workforce. The govern-ment of Canada and other governments shouldadopt this quantifiable goal and consistentlymeasure progress towards achieving it. Thepower of a clearly stated and measurable goalin improving programs and sustaining effort overtime cannot be underestimated.

The geographical reality

Manitoba and Saskatchewan, alongwith the Territories, will have a very large andincreasingly important Aboriginal workforce inthe near future. Other provinces will be affectedas well, but these two provinces and the Terri-tories especially must have a prosperous Abo-riginal population if they are to be successfulin the coming decades. Whether Manitobaand Saskatchewan and the Territories findthemselves keeping up with or falling behindnational growth in GDP will depend largelyupon how their Aboriginal workforce per-forms.

It should be acknowledged that boththe Manitoba and Saskatchewan govern-ments have shown a commitment to improvingliving standards for their Aboriginal popu-lation, and the federal government also hasundertaken many projects to this end. At theurban level, many of the cities, notablyWinnipeg, have tried hard to assist in impro-ving the opportunities of their Aboriginal


residents. Furthermore, First Nations havelong had significant political importance inboth provinces, and there are growing urbanAboriginal organizations in the cities. And allthree levels of government, along with Abo-riginal organizations, have generally workedwell together. Nevertheless, as we have seen,on almost every indicator, the labour marketstatus of the Aboriginal identity population inManitoba and Saskatchewan is among theworst in Canada. So not only do these pro-vinces have more at stake, they are starting ina worse position.

Federal policy should reflect thenon-uniformity of the situation of Aboriginalpeople across Canada. Policy changes thathave a financial impact should be understoodas having a much greater affect in Manitobaand Saskatchewan. For example, the federalwithdrawal from all services for First Nationsexcept those on reserve (discussed furtherbelow), which has been implemented over thelast few decades, has disproportionatelyaffected Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Otherissues, such as the extent to which federally-financed social assistance administered byFirst Nations on reserve must duplicate pro-vincial policy, will also be much more criticalfor these two provinces than the others. Inaddition, labour market policies are increa-singly a joint federal, provincial and territorialresponsibility, carried out under agreementsbetween governments. Aboriginal labour mar-ket policies and intergovernmental relationswill be inextricably intertwined, especially inthe Prairies, requiring collaboration among allorders of government, including First Nations’governments.

Ottawa is distant from the Prairies.Federal departments report through theirhierarchical structures back to Ottawa,where promotions and policy-making reside.

Federal coordination on the ground in thePrairie provinces involves at least six majorfederal departments − Human Resources andSkills Development, Indian Affairs andNorthern Development, Social Development,Industry Canada, Health Canada and HeritageCanada. While there have been attempts toget these departments to work better togetherin the regions, they are all to varying degrees‘stove-piped’ and must report back to Ottawafor any substantive change. In Ottawa,regional representation may or may not becarefully considered in decision-making, andresponsiveness to regional concerns variesfrom issue to issue and department to depart-ment.

In our previous report, we recom-mended that a federal Deputy Minister levelappointment be considered with specificresponsibility to coordinate on Aboriginalissues, and that this Deputy be stationed inthe west, and probably optimally in Winnipeg.It has been done before, when a senior Deputywas appointed for the ‘west’ and stationed inAlberta, supposedly responsible for westerndiversification. A Deputy for Aboriginalaffairs, stationed in the west, remains a validoption that merits serious consideration.

Services off reserve

The federal Human Resources andSkills Development department supports anextensive system of employment servicestargeted to the Aboriginal workforce, bothon and off reserve, through the AboriginalHuman Resource Development Agreements.In addition, there are several special arrange-ments, such as the urban Aboriginal programsbeing undertaken with several provinces andAboriginal organizations. However, for most


federal funding for Aboriginal people, currentfederal policy is to restrict its support to ser-vices for residents on reserve.

As we have seen, populations onreserves are not declining; rather there is agrowing Aboriginal identity population both onreserve and in the cities. However, our datapresents only a picture at a point in time.Behind these static data are undoubtedlysignificant comings and goings as some peo-ple leave the reserve and others return. The2001 Census data shows, for example, that30 percent (or 12,630 people) of theAboriginal identity population in Winnipegchanged its address at least once in theprevious year and, of this 30 percent, about7 percent (or 3,645 people) came from adifferent Census subdivision. Of this lattergroup, likely a substantial number came froma reserve either directly, or indirectly throughan intermediary smaller city or town.

Until recently, leaving the reserve hasoften meant leaving your Band behind, at leastfrom the perspective of the federal govern-ment. For example, while the federal gov-ernment funds First Nations’ child and familyservice agencies on reserve, these agencies arenot funded by Ottawa to provide services offreserve, even to their own First Nations mem-bers who would choose these services if theycould. Similarly, a whole range of otherservices and rights are only recognized onreserve. All this may be beginning to crumblewith the recent recognition of the right of offreserve Band members to vote in Bandelections. Presumably other mobile forms ofrights and responsibilities may one day follow.But in the meantime, Ottawa is effectivelyrequiring First Nations members to make ahard choice between continued services byBand governments and moving to the city.

This federal policy is interfering withthe natural evolution of First Nations’ rela-tionship to their land base. This relationshipneeds to be able to adapt and develop inresponse to real-world conditions and notaccording to political (and essentially finan-cial) criteria devised in Ottawa. Most impor-tantly, from the perspective of this report, it isworth looking again at Figures 22 and 23.With unemployment on reserve approaching30 percent, Aboriginal unemployment incities not quite 15 percent, and not much pro-spect of increasing employment opportunitieson many (but not all) reserves, a successfulAboriginal labour market policy will have torecognize the reality that most jobs are in thecities.

Federal policy that effectively demandsshedding critical elements of Band identity,and fails to provide for maintaining stronglinkages to Bands while off reserve, sets abarrier in the way of improving Aboriginalemployment. It forces a cruel choice: identityor employment. As noted, over time the courtswill likely constrain this policy, but the courtsare a notoriously slow and costly way to makepolicy (and do not necessarily result in thebest policy). While reconsidering this policywill neither be easy nor possible to accom-plish overnight, it is time for Ottawa to begin.

Further research

No research report would be completewithout recommending more research. Thisstudy is primarily descriptive, rather thananalytic, but it is suggestive of a number ofquestions requiring deeper analysis.

For example, it would be helpful tounderstand better the phenomenon of high


Aboriginal participation rates. Participation ratesare a critical question for policy design. If par-ticipation rates are indeed genuinely higher thanexpected, as is suggested by the evidence in thisreport, than employment support services for theAboriginal identity population should be designedprimarily to help people get into jobs, to providefor skills and training upgrades and, in someinstances, to assist in the creation of jobs. On theother hand, based on the evidence presented inthis report, it would not be sensible to spendmoney on providing additional financial incen-tives for Aboriginal persons to get jobs. Appar-ently Aboriginal people in Canada do not needincentives. This research sheds light on animmediate and vital question of program design,affecting the expenditure of millions of publicdollars.

There are many other issues that also couldbe explored more deeply. This study has not, forexample, investigated the gender aspect of labourmarkets. Are men and women in the Aboriginalidentity population differentially experiencing thelabour market? If so, in what ways and whatcan this tell us about program design?

This research would be of use not onlyto the federal government, but to provinces andFirst Nations governments as well. A more con-sistent and policy-oriented program of researchwould be a practical addition to the work that isalready under way in many governments andAboriginal organizations.

References

George, M., S. Loh, R. Verma and Y. Shin. (2001).Population Projections for Canada, Provinces andTerritories 2000-2026. Catalogue number 91-520.Ottawa: Ministry of Industry, Government of Canada.

Mendelson, M. and K. Battle. (1999). Aboriginal Peo-ple in Canada’s Labour Market. Ottawa: CaledonInstitute of Social Policy, June.

Statistics Canada. (2003). Aboriginal peoples of Canada:A demographic profile. Catalogue number 96F0030XIE2001007. Ottawa: Ministry of Industry, Governmentof Canada.

Statistics Canada. (1993). Schooling, Work and Rela-ted Activities, Income, Expenses and Mobility. Cat-alogue number 89-534. Ottawa: Ministry of Industry,Government of Canada.

aboriginal 2004 employment

Documents

Transcript of aboriginal 2004 employment