|Institution:||University of Waterloo|
|Full text PDF:||http://hdl.handle.net/10012/6746|
With fast development of technology and globalization competition, firms today are in a changing environment. Skills obsolete quickly. To prevent the skill shortage, training has been given more and more attention. However, current literature has some gaps in examining the training determinants. This thesis use the Workplace and Employee Survey (WES) data (1999 - 2005) to conduct research on the determinants of provision of training and training selection in Canada. The workplace data is a longitudinal panel data of seven waves while the employee data is linked to employer at the micro level. Training is first explored on the workplace panel data to capture the workplace determinants that decide training incidence and intensity. Then with these workplace determinants included, provided that different company train differently in regard of training incidence, employee’s participation in training is investigated on the linked data. Heckman Two-step selection model is adopted to correct the selection bias which has not been properly addressed in most of the studies. With the analysis results, determinants of training are identified. Profit, non-wage benefit and payroll are alternatives to training regardless of firm size. Firms train less if they are experiencing high turnover rate while more training will be provided if firms have larger proportion of professional and technical workers or undergo some organizational change. Employees with longer tenure, married people and female employees are the group of employees that have disadvantage in training. Classroom training is more sensitive for immigrants and temporary workers. The negative effects are greater for classroom training than on-the-job training when those two variables are presented. Collective bargaining agreements only guarantee a large proportion of employees having the training opportunity while training intensity cannot be promised. In fact, small firms reduce their training expenditure while large firms increase investment in training when they are unionized.Several implications are also mentioned.