Stats Can: Child Care Workers Serving Children Aged 0 to 5 Years in Canada, 2021 to 2022
Photo by Arfan Adytiya on Unsplash
Statistics Canada recently published a report on Child care centre workers serving children aged 0 to 5 years in Canada, 2021 to 2022.
In compliance with the 2021 federal government of Canada commitment towards building a Canada-wide Early Learning and Child Care system through bilateral agreements with the provinces and territories, Statistics Canada has published a report (December 2024) to “fill information gaps related to the centre-based child care workforce providing care to children aged 0 to 5 years”, 2021 to 2022.
The study uses the 2022 Canadian Survey on the Provision of Child Care Services, the first national survey to give an overview of child care services in Canada from the perspective of child care providers.
The report describes:
• the composition, training and roles of employees in child care centres
• pay and benefits
• turnover
It outlines “how these three elements differed across models of service delivery, jointly determined by ownership (not-for-profit or government-operated, or for-profit) and organizational structure (single use or multisite)”.
Overall findings indicated:
• A typical centre offering full-time services had about 12 employees on average, of whom about two-thirds were staff providing direct care to children.
• About three-quarters of centres provided benefits to employees
• About two-thirds of centre budgets were allocated toward paying employee wages
• Turnover and vacancies in centres were highest for employee positions requiring training in early childhood education
• Models of service delivery were frequently associated with differences in the characteristics of centres and staff, particularly in relation to employee pay and benefits.
The study sample represented 11,820 child care centres providing care to children aged 0 to 5 years across Canada:
• 1,324 were for-profit multisite centres (11%)
• 4,419 were for-profit independent centres (37%)
• 2,618 were non-profit or government-run multisite centres (22%)
• 3,459 were non-profit or government-run independent centres (29%)
• Centres employed an estimated 136,900 people working either full or part time (not including casual or on-call staff, unpaid students, or volunteers)
• About 15,670 employees worked in for-profit multisite settings, 47,970 in for-profit independent settings, 36,110 in not-for-profit or government-run multisite settings, and 37,150 in not-for-profit or government-run independent settings.
Extracts from the Report:
A typical centre employed about 12 people (full- and part-time supervisors, staff and support workers) and had an average of 56 children enrolled on a full- or part-time bases. About 1 in 10 centres provided only part-time care. Nine in 10 centres employed full-time supervisors (88%) and staff (92%), while comparatively fewer centres employed part-time staff (52%) or casual, on-call or supply staff (31%). Over 9 in 10 centres had hired one or more full- or part-time staff member with a postsecondary ECE credential. In a typical centre offering full-time services, about two-thirds of employees (an average of 7.9 individuals) provided direct care to children, with the remaining third divided between supervisors (1.7) and support workers (1.6).
Not-for-profit centres that were part of a multisite organization had more employees overall (13.8) and were most likely to imply support workers full time (58%), compared with other categories. On average, these centres also had more children enrolled at a single location (66.1) than both types of independent centres. For-profit independent centres were least likely to have supervisors with ECE training (77%), and for-profit multisite centres were most likely to have one or more employees with ECE workshop-level credentials (66%).
The average hourly rate was $27.80 for supervisors, $21.90 for staff with an ECE credential or training, and $18.00 for staff without ECE credentials. On average, two-thirds of centre budgets (67%) went toward paying employee wages.
About three-quarters of centres (76%) reported providing benefits to their employees.
More than two-thirds of centres (68%) provided paid time for documentation, meetings or program planning. About 6 in 10 centres offered benefits such as supplementary health or dental plans (60%), paid sick leave (61%), paid vacation leave (60%), and financial assistance or paid time for training (62%).
About half of centres provided life insurance or disability insurance (53%) and had paid breaks or compensation for overtime (54%). About one-third of centres offered pension plan contributions or group RRSPs (37%), and one-quarter had reduced child care fees for employees’ own children (27%). Top-ups to maternity or parental leave were offered by 1 in 10 centres.
Rates of pay were highest for supervisors and staff with ECE credentials in not-for-profit centres, whether multisite or independent. Not-for-profit multisite centres devoted the highest share of their operating budgets (74%) to employee wages, while for-profit independent centres contributed the lowest (61%).
Not-for-profit multisite centres were most likely to provide employee benefits (93%), while for-profit independent centres were least likely to do so (61%). Not-for-profit multisite centres were about three times more likely to provide pension plan contributions or group RRSPs than both independent and multisite for-profit centres. While not-for-profit independent and for-profit multisite centres were similarly likely to provide benefits overall, not-for-profit independent centres were more likely to offer pension plan contributions or group RRSPs and paid sick leave, while for-profit multisite centres were more likely to offer reduced fees for employees’ own children.
Rates of pay (including wage enhancements) were higher among supervisors and lowest among staff without ECE credentials or training, consistent with prior research (Flanagan et al., 2013). Furthermore, this report observed higher pay in not-for-profit or government-run centres, corroborating past work (Cleveland & Hyatt, 2002; Doherty et al., 2000), while it also found that pay rates did not differ by organizational structure. About three-quarters of centres provided employee benefits, and nearly one-quarter did not (where benefits additionally included compensation for additional time in training or participating in other activities related to child care). The proportions of centres providing supplementary health or dental plans and pension plan contributions or group RRSPs are comparable to recent estimates from the Atkinson Centre for Society and Child Development (McCuaig et al., 2022). Providing benefits to child care employees not only benefits their health and long-term financial stability, but also has been identified as a means to improve employee retention (Cleveland & Hyatt, 2002) and potentially has advantages for children. Additionally, providing time and compensating staff for activity planning to facilitate active learning are seen as important contributors to child care quality (Bigras et al., 2010)
Turnover among child care employees and subsequent workforce shortages have been identified among the main challenges impacting the child care workforce (Fairholm & Centre for Spatial Economics, 2009b; R.A. Malatest and Associates, 2009; McCuaig et al., 2022; Toronto Children’s Services, 2023). Findings from this study generally support not-for-profit independent centres having lower rates of turnover and vacancies for ECE-trained employees. Higher overall pay and benefits in not-for-profit and government-operated centres have previously been found to be important predictors of job satisfaction and employee retention (Cleveland & Hyatt, 2002; Doherty et al., 2000; Fairholm & Centre for Spatial Economics, 2009b; Flanagan et al., 2013). Unexpectedly, among not-for-profit centres, employee vacancies were lower in independent centres than in multisite ones, despite the latter providing comparable rates of pay and more benefits. Meanwhile, ECE employee departures were most common in for-profit multisite centres. Multisite centres (particularly for-profit chains) have been characterized as having top-down management styles that reduce employee autonomy, initiative and ultimately job satisfaction (Royer & Moreau, 2016; Rush, 2006). Further work may investigate how organizational structure, in addition to unmeasured characteristics (geography, unionization and general education), influence these relationships.