In addition, we feel that there is already evidence that the stringent training and selection criteria which were initially employed by the Correctional Service of Canada have not been continued with the same rigour as they were when men were first being hired in the regional prisons. Indeed, we are hearing from staff, as well as from women prisoners, that some of the men who havoc most recently been hired to work in the prisons are not well suited to their positions and that they have clearly not undergone the same screening and selection process as those who were hired within the first year or two of the operations of the new prisons.

For the reasons articulated above, it is the view of CAEFS that there is not a reasonable alternative to imposing a blanket requirement that no men work on the front lines with women prisoners. Consequently, it is our view that the exemption which currently exists for the Edmonton Institution for Women should be expanded and become the policy norm for all women's prisons.

CAEFS believes there are indeed legitimate reasons for restricting the duties of male workers in women's prisons. In fact, the affirmative action provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms permits, and Canada's International obligations require, such restrictions. Furthermore, it is the contention of CAEFS that the current restriction of duties for men who work as Primary Workers reveal that CSC is implicitly agreeing with the position taken by CAEFS. By limiting the responsibilities of male Primary Workers to non-invasive security practices, CSC has changed the job description for men and disproportionately created a situation where women Primary Workers have to perform all invasive security procedures.

It is our view, that this situation disproportionately disadvantages women Primary Workers and results in a significant difference in both the nature of the work and the manner in which women prisoners regard the different genders of staff who are referred to as "Primary Workers". Those staff; in this case the women who have the responsibility of counselling and supporting women, also have the obligation to perform such security duties as stripping and searching prisoners.

Given the reality that most prisoners, especially women who have endured histories of physical and/or sexual abuse, describe strip searches as akin to being sexually assaulted, and they frequently experience flash backs to previous abuse in such circumstances, it should come as no surprise that women prefer to work with men who cannot subject them to such degradation. Moreover, as we have discussed, some of the men who were initially hired by CSC to fill the primary worker positions are very sensitive, warm, kind men.

These men have the privileged position of utilizing their skills to benefit the women, women primary workers, on the other hand, frequently complain that they arc custodians alone, and that they are not able to utilize their skills to assist the women because they are expected to do what one worker described as the "dirty work". Some of the staff have worked for years with women, as rape crisis and transition house counsellors, social workers, Elizabeth Fry service providers, et cetera. It is a tragic and outrageous irony that such staff are not being permitted to utilize their skills fully to assist women as a result of the presence of male co-workers.