|
|
     |
||
 |
     |
 |
|
The TAGS program was intended to address the long-term restructuring requirements of the groundfish industry, and labour force adjustment was seen as a key component of this strategy. The goal of TAGS/HRDC labour force adjustment was to assist individuals affected by the collapse of the groundfish fishery to adjust out thereby resulting in a reduction of the numbers of fishers, trawler and plant workers in the groundfish industry. The principal indicator for measuring HRDC's success in implementing the TAGS program is whether the program has brought about adjustment out of the groundfish industry. Consultation between the Evaluation Team and the TAGS/HRDC Evaluation Advisory Committee led to the development of concepts and measures of adjustment. Analysis of the characteristics of adjusted TAGS clients generates insights into the factors associated with adjustment and the predictors of adjustment. Just as the characteristics of the adjusted TAGS clients are important, so are the characteristics of the non-adjusted population. A certain portion of the client population have not adjusted because:
While the identification of the adjusted and non-adjusted TAGS clients gives a snapshot of the situation based on a one year period, it should be noted that this number will change as more clients adjust. Many clients have begun the adjustment process with the assistance of TAGS/HRDC programming, and the full benefits of these investments may take some time to be realized. Discussion in this section focuses on the individual TAGS client and his or her adjustment process. However, adjustment is also influenced by the household and community in which the individual lives, and these aspects of adjustment are considered in Section 5. 4.1 Concepts and Measures of Adjustment42 There have been some significant and well-publicized changes to TAGS since its announcement in 1994 (see Section 2). These changes have not diminished the importance of the program goal to assist TAGS clients in reducing their reliance on the groundfish industry. However, the target number of clients to be adjusted has been affected as a result of reductions in active programming resources. In December, 1995, the TAGS/HRDC Evaluation Team worked with program officials to clarify the adjustment targets for TAGS. The following was the agreed vision of adjustment and the applicable targets.
In July 1996 the Minister of Fisheries announced changes to TAGS which terminated active programming and curtailed the duration of the TAGS by as much as 12 months. However, HRDC committed itself to providing continuing support, either through TAGS or through the EI employment benefits, for clients who were currently implementing TAGS action plans with training or employment supports. The Evaluation Team developed the following criteria for adjustment:43 a TAGS client would be considered to have adjusted out of the groundfish industry when she/he...
4.1.1 Level of Adjustment The adjustment measure is based on how TAGS clients have fared during the past year, which in turn is affected by general economic and employment conditions.45 The estimated proportion of TAGS clients who meet the adjustment criterion described above, i.e., who are no more reliant on UI or EI than they were prior to the closure of the groundfish fishery, and who are receiving at least 80% of their pre-closure income levels, is:
74 percent of clients who were adjusted in 1995 were also adjusted in 1996. This corresponds to 19 percent of all TAGS clients or 7,321 clients being adjusted in both years. TAGS clients who took early retirement or licence retirement options are not included in the above numbers.47 A total of 1,492 TAGS clients either took early retirement or retired their licences through TAGS/HRDC or TAGS/DFO programs. This increases the total number of clients adjusted in 1996 to 12,127. While the adjustment measures indicate more than a quarter of TAGS clients successfully adjusted, as a sobering note, only 3% of TAGS clients (1,040) had work outside the fishing industry as their main source of income in 1996, and met the adjustment criteria. As well, three-quarters of adjusted TAGS clients rely on HRDC sources (EI/UI and/or TAGS/HRDC employment supports such as Wage Subsidy) for up to 80 percent of their income. 4.1.2 Adjustment Where HRDC Interventions Made a Difference Successful adjustment of TAGS clients may or may not have occurred as a direct result of TAGS/HRDC active programming. It is important to distinguish those adjustments that occurred as a direct result of active programming for the following reasons:
A significant amount of adjustment involves work inside the fishing industry, harvesting or processing species other than groundfish. Non-groundfish work has grown for reasons exogenous to the TAGS/HRDC program. Consequently, adjustment estimates which are based on such work cannot be credited to TAGS interventions.48 Thus, as of the end of 1996, TAGS interventions are associated with adjustment of 732 clients who are working outside the fishery and 1,492 clients who have taken advantage of TAGS retirement option. Table 4.4 Number and Type of Adjustments (1996)
In addition TAGS/HRDC provided active interventions to 3,930 clients who were adjusted at the end of 1996 and who were still working in the fishing industry. Interventions49 have also been provided to 15,721 clients who are not yet adjusted out of the groundfish industry. These are best considered investments for which the returns have yet to be realized. Future returns to these investments may increase the total number adjusted as they find sufficient work outside the groundfish industry. 4.2 Characteristics of Adjusted TAGS Clients Table 4.5 Characteristics of Adjusted Clients
Comparison of those who met the overall adjustment measure and who are working in the fishing industry to those who have adjusted and left the fishing industry is interesting:
4.3 Future Implications of Non-Adjustment 4.3.1 The Unadjusted Population The population of unadjusted TAGS recipients was examined to discover if there were any sub-groups that were more or less likely to adjust. A cluster analysis based on variables identified as being associated with adjustment collapsed into four major groups within the population of unadjusted TAGS clients.52 See Appendix 2 for a description of the cluster analysis procedure and the variables used. The clusters of non-adjusters are identified as:
Table 4.6 provides a description of the leading characteristics of these groups.53Table 4.6 Description of Non-Adjusted Groups
4.3.1.1 Clients who are Planning on Remaining in the Fishery For the first group, we identified a significant group of about 10,500 TAGS clients who are planning on remaining in the fishery and who are committed to their former way of life but for many of whom it will not be possible to be a part of the fishery of the future. Few in this group have taken advantage of TAGS adjustment supports, and while some have sufficient earnings in current fisheries, many do not. The largest portion of this group are fishers who mostly continue to fish, but did not earn enough in 1996 to qualify as adjusted. On average they fished 4 weeks in 1996 and earned about $3,000. They almost all expect to be fishing in the year 2000. The fishers in this group account for about two-thirds of the non-adjusted fishers (about 28% of the classified population). The rest of the fishers do not expect to be fishing in the year 2000; they either do not know or expect to be retired or employed outside the fishery. Plant workers in this cluster are more diverse than the fishers. There is an identifiable group who expect to go back to work in the fish plant, and have not taken much training under TAGS. The group includes both women and men (the women are more likely than the men to have taken training), and about half actually did plant work in 1996. It should be emphasized that while this group intends to remain in the fishery, and may have had this intention reinforced by some success in finding fishing industry employment in 1996, they are still significantly behind those who were sufficiently successful in the fishery to be counted as adjusted. Many of this group are likely to be frustrated in their intention to remain in the fishery. 4.3.1.2 Likely Adjusters The second group, the "likely adjusters" group, are mainly plant workers, all of whom have taken advantage of training under TAGS and expect to be out of the fishing industry after TAGS. Because of the investments they are making in training, it is too early to predict their likely situations. However the small numbers adjusting out of the fishing industry to date, and the continuing difficulties of the provincial economies, do not provide grounds for optimism. An estimated 4,850 TAGS clients are in this group whose main constraints are limited labor market opportunities and their relative disadvantage in these markets. These people expect to be working outside the fishery in 2000, and all have taken some sort of training under TAGS. About 20% of this group perceive very high barriers to finding a job. Most of these people did not work at all in 1996. Compared to the plant workers in the first group, the adjustable group has neither been as successful in getting plant work during the TAGS period, nor as dependent on plant work. Fifteen per cent of the group worked at fish processing in 1996, while 20% worked outside the fishing industry. However, the earnings of people working outside the fishery were low (about $8,000 on average), especially for the women in this group. This cluster has the highest education levels of any of the groups (about 45% completed high school). Only about 15% of them qualified for EI in 1996. However, 79% have sufficient TAGS duration to carry them through to the scheduled end of the program in 1998. The "likely adjusters" group may indicate a future dilemma: they participated in TAGS/HRDC adjustment options, but they were not yet successful in finding alternative employment. The program options that are available under EI are similar to those offered by TAGS/HRDC. Therefore, even if this group participates subsequently in EI active re-employment measures, the future outcomes for them may not be much different from their experiences on TAGS. In a sense, this group is in the lead position because they have already embarked on adjustment. Their limited success to date does not bode well for the other two clusters who are less positively oriented towards adjustment in the first place, and who also are less advanced than this group in preparing for the end of TAGS. 4.3.1.3 Group Facing Adjustment Barriers, and with No Apparent Direction This third cluster of about 3,600 clients is also cause for concern. They are uncertain about their future and none have taken advantage of training options offered by TAGS/HRDC. This group will likely remain in the communities without much hope of work either in the fishing industry or in other sectors. Almost all this group are plant workers. majority (63%) of the clients in this group don't know what they will be doing in 2000. About 20% of the group think they will be unemployed. This group has not been able to get as much fish plant work as the group of clients who is planning on remaining in the fishing with 32% working in a fish plant. However, they have done better than the adjustable group in this regard ó possibly because they were not involved in training courses. Two thirds of this group did not finish high school and an estimated 19% qualified for EI in 1996. 4.3.1.4 Unclassified Group The unclassified population has, overall, similar characteristics to the three clusters we have described above54. The major differences are that the unclassified group also contains older workers who expect to retire, or who have already retired, and people who took part in one of the TAGS employment programs (and who, on average, have very low earned incomes). About 9,000 of the unadjusted population fall into this group. 4.3.2 The Future Outlook for the Unadjusted Population The outlook for the currently unadjusted population is:
4.4 Summary of Findings on Adjustment The overall adjustment target for the TAGS program is being reached: an estimated 12,127 TAGS clients55 have adjusted out of the groundfish industry at the end of 1996. The bulk of this adjustment involves work in other sectors of the fishing industry. The TAGS/HRDC Evaluation Study estimates that only 1,040 TAGS clients are working with their main job outside of the fishing industry, and an additional 1,492 have taken advantage of retirement options to leave the industry altogether. However, many of the investments by TAGS/HRDC in client adjustment, particularly in training, will continue to yield results over the life of the TAGS program and beyond. Consequently, the Evaluation Team expects that the current estimate of clients who have permanently left the fishing industry with the help of HRDC interventions could rise in future. The main factors associated with successful adjustment out of the fishing industry are:
Through cluster analysis, the population of TAGS clients who were not considered adjusted (approximately 28,000) was broken down into four groups:
The group who seem to have little interest in adjustment because of their expectation of continuing in the fishery are estimated to number about 10,500. Despite their strong expectations, none of this group managed to find enough fishing industry work in 1996 to count as adjusted, and, barring a massive improvement in the groundfish fishery, many will continue to be frustrated when TAGS expires. The second group is made up of TAGS clients who have pursued adjustment, have all taken training while on TAGS, and expect to be out of the fishing industry when the program ends. They number about 4,800, and are indicative of the special challenges faced in adjusting out of the fishing industry. In most respects they are strong candidates for successful adjustment, and have all engaged in active programming towards that end, but none was able to find enough employment in 1996 to be considered successful in this ambition. The third group is made up of TAGS clients who face barriers to adjustment in terms of age, education and other factors, and/or seem to lack direction. None of this group of 3,600 has taken training while on TAGS, and two-thirds of them say they don't know what they will be doing in the future or that they expect to be unemployed. The Evaluation Team's assessment of adjustment of TAGS clients to the end of 1996 is mixed. While TAGD/HRDC approximated its overall adjustment target in 1996, much of this adjustment has been to another sector of the fishing industry or by retirement. Only a small proportion has adjusted outside the fishing industry. It is likely, therefore, that if and when the industry re-opens, this large labour force will still be in a position to press for employment opportunities in harvesting and processing groundfish. Under these conditions it is possible that the long-standing problem of over-capacity and excess labour supply in the groundfish industry will be renewed. The Evaluation Team emphasizes, however, that many investments made by TAGS/HRDC in client adjustment will take some time to produce results in terms of clients leaving the fishing industry on a permanent basis. On a less optimistic note, we wish to flag as a potentially significant issue the difficulties currently experienced by many TAGS clients who are "highly adjustable" in terms of attitudes and previous or current participation in adjustment programs. While they appear to have embraced the need to adjust out of the groundfish industry, and have actively prepared for it, they have had little success to date in finding alternative employment.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![[To Top]](/web/20060127004410im_/http://www11.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd-img/top.gif){kind=small}
![[Previous Page]](/web/20060127004410im_/http://www11.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd-img/back.gif){kind=small}
![[Table of Contents]](/web/20060127004410im_/http://www11.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd-img/content.gif)
![[Next Page]](/web/20060127004410im_/http://www11.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd-img/next.gif){kind=small}