Women Ice Hockey Officials and Gender Relations in Officiating

By

Madison Danford

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements

for the degree of Master of Science

The Graduate Department of Exercise Sciences

University of Toronto

© Copyright by Madison Danford 2019

Women Ice Hockey Officials and Gender Relations in Officiating

Madison Danford

Master of Science

Graduate Department of Exercise Sciences, University of Toronto

2019

Abstract This study explores the current experiences of women ice hockey officials in Canada. To guide my research, I applied a Critical Feminist Theory framework to data from document analyses, observations of hockey games and semi-structured interviews with women ice hockey officials from across Canada. The results show that women ice hockey officials face numerous challenges in obtaining higher certification levels and having opportunities to officiate higher level hockey games. The career paths and career contingencies for women ice hockey officials differ from their men colleagues due to the hegemonic structures that construct hockey as a masculine space, and as a result, these structures directly influenced the participating women’s ability to advance in officiating in Canada. The participants shared experiences of exclusion at sites of training and education, limitations to advancing, and disinvolvement such as quitting/dropping-out, and retirement. This study unpacks the complex tensions between the ‘love of the game’ and systemic hegemonic exclusion institutionally, and calls for policy and procedures to better support women ice hockey officials.

ii

Acknowledgments There are so many people I want to thank for making this thesis possible. First, thank you to all the participants who shared their knowledge, experiences and stories with me; this project would not have happened without your willingness to speak with me. To my supervisor, Dr. Peter

Donnelly, thank you for your continuous guidance, support, patience and all the extra hours working through edits with me; I am forever grateful for the opportunity to learn from you. To my advisory committee, Dr. Simon Darnell and Dr. Margaret MacNeill, I am extremely appreciative for your kindness, support and direction throughout the process. Special thanks to the 40 Sussex crew who supported me every step of the way, especially Dr. Mike Dao for his advice, guidance and proof that the toughest moments will pass; I would not have done it without all of you constantly looking out for me. Finally, thank you to my family and friends – mom, dad, my sisters, Esten and my mentor, Bess Lennox for rooting for me, listening to me, and offering endless support constantly. Without the strong support I had, I would not have completed this thesis. Thank you.

iii Table of Contents Abstract ...... ii Acknowledgments ...... iii Tables ...... vii Chapter One: Introduction...... 1 1.0 Personal Narrative...... 1 1.1 Context ...... 2 1.2 Research Questions ...... 5 1.3 Chapter Overview...... 6 Chapter Two: Literature Review ...... 7 2.0 Introduction ...... 7 2.1 Political and Historical Context ...... 7 2.1.1 History: ...... 8 2.2 Theoretical Framework ...... 10 2.2.1 Critical Feminist Theory ...... 11 2.2.2 Socialist Feminism: ...... 12 2.3 Review of Literatures...... 14 2.3.1 Women in Positions of Power and Leadership: ...... 14 2.3.2 Women in Positions of Power and Leadership in Sport: ...... 17 2.3.3 Sport Officials ...... 21 2.3.3.1 Women officials: ...... 21 2.3.3.2 Officials in General: ...... 24 2.3.3.3 Violence and Harassment: ...... 25 2.3.3.4 Dropping out...... 27 2.3.4 Careers: Paths, Patterns and Contingencies ...... 28 2.3.4.1 Second Shift: ...... 30 2.4 Conclusion ...... 32 Chapter Three: Methods ...... 33 3.0 Introduction ...... 33 3.1 Methods ...... 33 3.2 Document analysis: ...... 33 3.3 Observations: ...... 34 3.4 Interviews: ...... 36 3.5 Conducting the Research ...... 37 3.5.1 Document analysis: ...... 37 3.5.2 Observations/ fieldwork: ...... 38 3.5.2.1 Actors observed – Officials: ...... 40 3.5.2.2 Actors observed – Spectators / fans ...... 40 3.5.2.3 Actors observed – Players: ...... 41

iv 3.5.2.4 Actors observed – Coaches: ...... 41 3.5.3 Interviews – Participants: ...... 41 3.5.4 Consent: ...... 42 3.5.5 Procedure: ...... 43 3.6 Data Analysis...... 45 3.6.1 Data analysis procedure: ...... 46 3.7 Ethical considerations: ...... 47 3.8 Conclusion ...... 49 Chapter 4: Career Paths and Career Contingencies ...... 50 4.0 Introduction ...... 50 4.1 Pre- officiating experiences ...... 50 4.2 Continuity ...... 53 4.2.1 Training and Education: ...... 53 4.2.2 Certification Process: ...... 53 4.2.3 Certification Requirements and Courses:...... 54 4.2.4 Preparation: ...... 57 4.2.5 The Four-person System of Officiating: ...... 59 4.2.6 Pay Rates: ...... 61 4.2.7 Sites of Learning: ...... 63 4.3 Career Progress ...... 65 4.3.1 Introduction to the 'system': ...... 65 4.3.2 ‘Stuck’ in the System: ...... 67 4.3.3 Younger Men Officials: ...... 71 4.3.4 Leading the System:...... 73 4.3.5 Mentorship: ...... 78 4.3.6 Scheduling and Constraints: ...... 80 4.3.7 'Second Shift': ...... 80 4.3.8 The 'Mommy Penalty':...... 82 4.4 Disinvolvement / Reinvolvement ...... 83 4.4.1 Quitting/ drop-out/ retirement: ...... 84 4.5 'For the love of the game' ...... 86 4.6 Conclusion ...... 88 Chapter Five: Experiences ...... 89 5.0 Introduction ...... 89 5.1 Enjoyment...... 89 5.2 Game Experiences ...... 91 5.2.1 Before the game: ...... 91 5.2.2 Appearance:...... 91 5.3 During the Game ...... 96 5.3.1 Men Colleagues: ...... 96 5.3.2 Spectators: ...... 99 5.3.3 Coaches:...... 103 5.3.4 Players: ...... 106

v 5.4 One of the Last Bastions ...... 110 Chapter Six: Discussion and Conclusion ...... 114 6.0 Introduction ...... 114 6.1 Review, Discussion and Interpretation ...... 114 6.1.1 Career Paths and Career Contingencies: ...... 114 6.1.2 Certification: ...... 115 6.1.3 Preparation: ...... 117 6.1.4 Four-Person Officiating: ...... 118 6.1.5 Pay rates and expenses ...... 118 6.1.6 Sites of learning: ...... 118 6.1.7 Career Progress: ...... 119 6.1.8 Disinvolvement / Reinvolvement: ...... 121 6.1.9 Quitting/dropping out/retirement: ...... 121 6.1.10 'For the love of the game': ...... 122 6.1.11 Enjoyment: ...... 122 6.2 Experiences ...... 123 6.2.1 Before a game: ...... 123 6.2.2 During the game: ...... 123 6.3 Limitations ...... 125 6.4 Policy, Practice and Recommendations ...... 126 6.4.1 Protecting officials from harassment and abuse: ...... 126 6.4.2 Other Recommendations: ...... 129 6.5 Conclusion ...... 132 References ...... 134 Appendices ...... 153 Appendix A: Research Ethics Approval ...... 153 Appendix B: Email Recruitment ...... 154 Appendix C: Social Media Recruitment ...... 155 Appendix D: Consent Form ...... 156 Appendix E: Interview Guide ...... 160 Appendix F: Observation Guide ...... 162 Appendix G: Hockey Canada Officiating Registration Numbers ...... 163 2014-2015 ...... 163 2015-2016 ...... 164 2016-2017 ...... 165 2017-2018 ...... 166 Appendix H: Officiating Level System Breakdown ...... 167

vi

Tables Table1: Gender Composition of Officiating Crews in the Games Observed ...... 38 Table 2: Hockey Canada Certification officials by Gender, 2018-2019 ...... 42

vii Chapter One: Introduction

1.0 Personal Narrative

Hockey has always played a large part in my life; my first steps were taken in the lobby of my community arena. Everyone in my family and many people in my home town, a small town in Eastern Ontario, plays hockey. The arena is crowded on any given evening from

September to March. Once I turned 14, I began officiating at a local House League so that I could remain active, be involved in the game, earn my high school community hour requirements and some pocket money. I never officiated at a higher competitive level, mainly at House

Leagues. As I grew older, I continued to play hockey, but eventually stopped officiating as the process of attaining higher levels of certification became more challenging, time consuming and expensive. When I moved to the University of Toronto for undergraduate studies, my sister, a

Varsity Blues women’s hockey player, helped me to gain a position working for Varsity

Athletics as the Game Day Coordinator for all men’s and women’s interuniversity hockey games and other hockey events. I stayed in this position for six years (2012-2018), working closely with the coaches, athletes, athletics directors and game officials. During my time in this position I built a rapport with many of the women officials who came to referee games at Varsity Arena. A frequent topic of discussion with women officials concerned the struggles some of them faced as a result of being a woman official in an occupation dominated by men.

After my sister graduated, she became a hockey official as a way to stay involved in the game. She would often share stories with me about disgusting and demeaning behaviour by men

(athletes, coaches, spectators, officials) that she encountered while officiating games, and I became more and more interested to see if other women officials had similar experiences, or faced other aspects of inequality during their officiating careers.

1 In a graduate course on qualitative research methods, I had the opportunity to practice interviews and observations on a topic of my choice. I conducted a pilot project on the experiences of officials in women’s hockey. Using my previous connections with officials, I asked if anyone would be interested in speaking with me regarding their experiences as an official. Six officials volunteered to speak with me. I also conducted six observations of elite women’s hockey games, collecting data on all observed interactions with and between the officials, along with overheard comments from spectators. I am passionate about the subject; I believe that there is an important need for a forum for minority voices, in this case the voices of women officials in hockey. My aim is to work to help create a policy to establish more equity and to protect the rights of women officials in a workplace that is safe and fair for all.

1.1 Context Previous research indicates that increases in the participation rate of girls and women in sport has not been accompanied by a corresponding increase of women in leadership positions within sport (Acosta & Carpenter, 2004). In fact, a considerable decline in the number of women leaders in sport (i.e., governance, coaching, officiating, and so on) has occurred since the 1970s

(Acosta & Carpenter, 2004). While participation in girls' and women’s ice hockey is increasing, women in ice hockey administration, coaching and officiating are not increasing to the same extent. In addition, qualified women are not gaining access to positions of power; and very few have the opportunity to officiate at the highest levels of hockey. There are some suggestions that the lack of opportunities and access are due to the hegemonic masculine ‘old boys’ club’ that is produced, supported and embedded within the culture of hockey (Boissinot, Baillargeon &

Irving, 2015, p.133). This study examines the experiences of women ice hockey officials in order to determine if that view is valid.

2 There is limited research on the experiences of officials in ice hockey; however, previous research suggests that the abuse and harassment experienced by officials from key actors in the game -- e.g., coaches, players and spectators -- results in a high rate of dropout from officiating

(e.g., Anshel & Weinberg, 1999; Dorsch & Paskevic, 2007; Folkesson, Nyberg, Archer &

Norlander, 2002; Forbes & Livingston, 2013; Goldsmith & Williams, 1992; Kaissidis & Anshel

1993; Livingston & Forbes, 2007). More recent research suggests that there may be other factors involved in the decision to drop out or remain in officiating; these include age, level of officiating, and varying experiences (Livingston & Forbes, 2016).

The majority of the research that investigates the experiences of sport officials does not include women officials. In recent years, research has increasingly focused on the representation of women in positions of power both in and outside of sport (e.g., Anderson, 2009; Burton, 2014;

Carli & Eagly, 2008; Claringbould, 2007; Donnelly, Norman, & Kidd, 2013; Duncan &

Brummett, 1993; Lemm, Dabady & Banaji, 2005; Tingle, Warner & Sartore-Baldwin, 2014).

However, little attention has been paid to the representation of women in officiating.

Some of the sport-based research seeks to understand reasons for the underrepresentation of women, and to generate metrics showing the underrepresentation of women coaches, administrators, and others in positions of power in sport. The limited research available on women leaders in sport suggests that women are not welcomed into sporting spaces, especially in board rooms and committee rooms (where decisions are made) at the same rates as men (Forbes,

Edwards & Fleming, 2015). Other research suggest that women in sport face discrimination, prejudice, and sexism from men in positions of leadership (Tingle, Warner & Sartore-Baldwin,

2014); and that if women are able to cross the line and venture into men’s sport or areas of women's sport administered and led by men, they may feel constrained to hide their physical

3 body, masking their femininity in order to appear more masculine, so that they can be taken seriously and fit in (McCalmont, 2015).

More women are speaking up about their experiences in male-dominated sporting spaces.

In a recent case in Alberta, it was found that less qualified men officials, rather than more qualified women officials, were being assigned to games in leagues at higher levels of competition (Canadian Press, 2019). Similarly, an all women officiating squad in Saskatchewan fought for four years to be allowed to officiate a AAA men’s hockey team, finally receiving approval and officiating the game in February, 2019 (Laskowski, 2019).

These recent cases are an indication that a study of the experiences of women officials in ice hockey is needed, and may provide insights into the struggles women are engaged in in order to gain respect and progress through the ranks of officiating. In the current climate for women’s semi-professional hockey in Canada, with the closure of the Canadian Women's Hockey League

(CWHL), women are now unable to play the game regularly at the highest levels at which they are capable; this also reduced the opportunities for qualified women officials to work at the highest level.

The Hockey Canada Annual Report (2018) indicates there are 32,985 registered officials in Canada. and only 2,024 of them are women. The underrepresentation of women is evident, especially at the higher certification levels, where women are not yet permitted to study and train for Level VI certification (the highest level). It is possible that the systemic barriers embedded in the hockey system in Canada slow or prevent women from being able to advance in their work as officials.

To that end, this thesis focuses on the current experiences of women ice hockey officials in Canada. While some girls’ and women’s hockey games are officiated by all women squads,

4 others have mixed gender squads or even all men squads. In a majority of cases, to my knowledge, the assignment of officials to a game is made by a man, the Referee-in-Chief (RIC).

Situations such as these provide rich sites for research exploring gender relations and conflicts, especially as women officials attempt to progress in what has been an almost exclusively men’s domain.

As women continue to work toward more equitable treatment in their struggles for positions of power in sport, it is becoming evident that there are still many systemic barriers in place preventing women from advancing to the same levels as men in sports leadership. This thesis represents an attempt to provide a platform for the voices and experiences of women ice hockey officials, women whose voices generally go unheard. The thesis also uses those voices and experiences to generate suggestions and recommendations for ways to remove the systemic barriers, and bring about changes toward more gender equality in the current officiating system in ice hockey in Canada.

1.2 Research Questions

As illustrated in the following thesis, I argue that women ice hockey officials experience gender-discrimination that directly impacts their opportunities to advance to the same level as men officials. As a result, their career paths are limited and their ability as officials is devalued.

This study is exploratory in nature and aims to investigate gender relations and the experiences of women ice hockey officials at various levels of hockey across Canada. In particular, the key research questions include:

• What are the experiences of women officials in ice hockey, especially in terms of their

relations with men as players, spectators, coaches and other officials?

5 • What process(es) or framework(s) (if any) best describe and characterise the development

and experiences of women officials in ice hockey?

• What are the implications of this exploratory project and how might they be used the

generate change?

1.3 Chapter Overview

This thesis is divided into six chapters, each of which includes a number of sub-sections organized around key themes. Chapter 2 (Literature Review) lays the foundation of the current study by elaborating on three sections: political and historical context, theoretical frameworks, and previous literatures. The chapter aims to provide a summary of current thinking while also identifying gaps in the literature. Chapter 3 outlines the research methods used during this study, which includes document analyses, observations and semi-structured interviews. The findings of the study are then presented in two chapters. Chapter 4 investigates the career paths and career contingencies (the challenges to be overcome in order to move to the next step in a career) that women officials encounter as they advance in officiating. Chapter 5 explores the experiences shared by the women officials, alongside observations of the pre-, during and post-game interactions they had with key actors. Finally, Chapter 6 reviews and discusses the findings in relation to policy and the research literature, and outlines key implications for practice and policy reform.

6 Chapter Two: Literature Review 2.0 Introduction This chapter provides an overview of the current literature as it relates to the careers of women hockey officials and their experiences of gender relations in their work. The review covers research, policy and theory, where I both summarize the literature and identify gaps. The chapter is divided into three major sections: (1) political and historical context, (2) theoretical framework and (3) review of relevant literature.

2.1 Political and Historical Context Sport has traditionally, in most societies, been considered an aspect of masculine culture and practice. Girls and women have routinely been excluded, marginalized or subordinated with regard to participation in organized sports and often in recreational sports. This thesis is located within a large body of social scientific research (historical, sociological and anthropological) on sport and gender.

Three major approaches to / levels of analysis of research are evident in the social scientific and psychological research on sport and gender: categorical, distributive, and relational (e.g., Dewar, 1991; Donnelly, 1996; Ingham, Howell & Swetman, 1993). Categorical research is the most prevalent level of analysis. Masculinity and femininity are assumed to be distinct binary categories, and research focuses on the differences between the categories, using those differences to explain behavioural and performance differences and also to explain participation differences. The now largely discredited gender/sex role theory is grounded in categorical assumptions (e.g., Chalabaev, et al., 2013; Hardin & Greer, 2009). A major consequence of categorical research is that it has focused thinking on gender differences rather than similarities. More recent thinking critiques the notion of gender as a binary and focuses more on sex as a physiological continuum and gender as an extremely wide range of identities --

7 despite the homogenizing effects of stereotyping -- that are not necessarily connected to biological differences. However, the establishment of such categories has real consequences.

This thesis is grounded primarily in distributive and relational levels of analysis/ approaches to research. Distributive research is based on the assumed categories of gender, and focuses on the differential distribution of resources between boys/men and girls/women. For example, this study points to the fact that there are significantly more men than women who hold higher levels of certification in ice hockey officiating, and that officials are paid more for officiating at boys'/men's games than at girls'/women's games. Distributive research underlies liberal feminist approaches to research and policy, and is used, for example, in calls for equal pay for equal work, or for more women in leadership positions in sport or politics.

The relational level of analysis underpins critical feminist theory. Studies of gender relations focus on institutional, structural and interpersonal aspects of culture, policy and practice that underlie the inequitable distribution of positions and resources between boys/men and girls/women. It is concerned with why, and how men have excluded, marginalized and subordinated women in sport. In addition to the underlying methodology, the distributive and relational levels of analysis are both political and theoretical -- they are concerned with social change in terms of producing greater gender equity.

2.1.1 History: The history of women's participations and leadership in sports is quite well documented in the Global North. Indirectly associated with the first wave of feminism toward the end of the 19th and the early 20th centuries -- which was mainly concerned with the achievement of suffrage and women's rights -- increasing sport participation has a number of starting points. For example, in Canada, Ann Hall has documented the connection between women's early involvement in cycling, the emergence of less restrictive clothing to facilitate

8 riding, and increasing women's participation in other sports (Hall, 2016; Hall, 2018). Historians of Canadian sport have tended to emphasize celebrity women's teams -- for example, the

Edmonton Grads basketball team (Hall, 2011) -- and athletes such as Bobbie Rosenfeld (Dublin,

2004; Levy, et al., 1999) because of the far greater source material available.

Others, such as Ann Hall (2016) and Bruce Kidd (1996) have pointed to an early 'Golden

Era' for girls and women's participation and leadership in sport. Between the 1920s and early

1970s, there are many examples in Canada of what Kidd (1996) identifies as 'girls' sport run by girls. This took two main forms: industrial leagues for women in ice hockey and baseball/softball

(although these were often coached and organized by men); and girls' and women's sports in schools (especially private schools) and universities, which were usually coached, organized, and officiated by women in separate athletics departments from boys' and men's sports.

With the emergence of the second wave of feminism, a new wave of struggle for women's rights starting in the late 1960s, the opportunities for girls' and women's participation in sports began to increase significantly, especially in educational institutions. These changes were encouraged by law in the United States, where the Title IX Educational Amendments made gender equality mandatory in all educational institutions receiving federal funding -- these were rapidly applied to university sports. In Canada, gender equality received great impetus from the

Royal Commission on the Status of Women (1968-70), leading to more general equality legislation (the 1977 Canadian Human Rights Act) and constitutional change (the 1982 Canadian

Charter of Rights and Freedoms). These triggered efforts to increase opportunities for girls' and women's participation in sport, leading to the 1986 Sport Canada Policy on Women in Sport

(Myers & Doherty, 2007). Other societal changes that helped to increase girls' and women's participation were related to the Cold War (~1950-1990) which was fought, in part, through

9 international sport competitions. In the emerging 'global sporting arms' race' competing countries in the communist-capitalist divide increasingly recognized that men's and women's medals counted equally in the medal tables, and began to increase support for girls' and women's sports.

In a striking paradox, increasing opportunities to participate were accompanied by almost parallel losses in women's sport leadership opportunities, in coaching, officiating and administration. This occurred as better funded women's sports became a much more realistic career opportunity for men, and as schools and universities began to merge women's and men's athletics departments under a single administrator, usually a man. These losses have been documented in the United States in an ongoing series of distributive studies by Vivian Acosta and Linda Carpenter (e.g., Acosta & Carpenter, 2012), and by a series of Racial and Gender

Report Cards produced by Richard Lapchick's Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport

(www.tidesport.org/racialgenderreportcard.html). In Canada, a series of reports by the Centre for

Sport Policy Studies at the University of Toronto is documenting the ongoing loss of women's leadership positions in Canadian university sport (e.g., Donnelly, et al., 2013).

One of the more intriguing limitations in the history and distributive documentation of women's participation and leadership in sport is research on officiating. This study represents a small attempt to address that absence by focusing on the experiences of a sample of women ice hockey officials in Canada.

2.2 Theoretical Framework This section provides an overview of a sociological framework that could help our understanding of the experiences of women officials in ice hockey in Canada. Much of the current literature on women sports officials appears to be atheoretical, or to be grounded in liberal feminism. Critical Feminist Theory (CFT) is used to interpret the gender relations experienced by women ice hockey officials.

10 2.2.1 Critical Feminist Theory

Critical Feminist Theory (CFT) helps to confirm my belief in gender equity and the right of women to be treated equally. Gender is defined by Peterson and Runyan (2010, p. 79) as “the dichotomous and hierarchical relationship between the social constructions of masculinity and femininity.” Gender is a view point through which the world is constantly framed so that “gender difference is institutionalized as dominant and taken-for-granted logic” (Peterson & Runyan,

2010, p. 84). In turn, gender is deeply rooted within the ordering system that permeates all aspects of human life, privileging some while marginalizing others (Peterson & Runyan, 2010).

In general, critical feminist theory is associated with research focused on agency, power relations, shifting positionalities, voice, individual experience, and socially constructed knowledge (Hooks, 2000a, 2000b). CFT helps to interpret the nature of the power relationships, marginalization and the dynamics among women ice hockey officials and key actors in the hockey environment. Critical feminist literature has helped to shape my understanding of how various dimensions of power operate within the lived experiences of the women officials.

Intersectionality has become prominent when conceptualizing CFT since it increases our ability to understand the relations between systems of oppression that construct identities and social locations in hierarchies of power and privilege (Carastathis, 2014). Hooks (2000c, p.14) explains “[traditional feminist analyses] reflect the dominant tendency in Western patriarchal minds to mystify woman's reality by insisting that gender is the sole determinant of woman's fate.” Traditional feminist theory emerged among middle class, white Western women, focusing primarily on gender and not on other factors such as race or social class. It is important for me to acknowledge that race, class, and gender have all been considered in the analysis, and that this intersectionality has helped to shape the discussion. To this end, CFT shaped the approach to the

11 project, helping to underpin the sites of oppression and marginalization faced by women in hockey officiating, while examining the structure that enables a hyper masculine social network to be reproduced.

Susan Birrell (2000) explained feminist theory in the study of sport as a “dynamic, continually evolving complex of theories or theoretical traditions that take as their point of departure the analysis of gender as a category of experience in society” (Birrell, 2000, p. 61).

The main purpose of this framework is critical; namely, to theorize the well-established inequality in gender relations within a patriarchal society with a view to bringing about more equality (Birrell, 2000). This framework is employed with relational analyses in order to better understand women in sport in relational terms -- a position that draws on, and contributes to the development of feminist theories outside the field of sport

Feminist theory represents a framework for understanding a particular cultural context, in this case, the cultural context of ice hockey (Birrell, 2000). Feminist theory is frequently grounded in analyses of personal experiences, while relating and locating those experiences to larger social structures and sets of relations (this is captured in the feminist dictum that 'the personal is political'). Given the lack of research on women officials, and the importance of having more women occupying leadership positions in sport, including officiating, it is important to learn from the experiences of women ice hockey officials in order to understand the current structures and restrictions that comprise systemic barriers to women in hockey officiating.

2.2.2 Socialist Feminism: Within CFT there are various approaches. Because this thesis is concerned with women's work, and with the effects of unpaid work on their paid work as officials, a socialist feminist perspective is taken. This focuses on women’s labour, working conditions, the differences of opportunities and conditions in relation to men when doing the

12 same job, and the ‘second shift’. Work, for women, as outlined by Green, Woodward and

Hebron (1990) is not simply paid employment, but includes other forms of labour: unpaid domestic labour; care for dependents – children, partners, elderly relatives. Socialist feminism focuses on differences in power between men and women (Bray, 1988). The power relations and differences are manifested and reproduced by the division of labour (Bray, 1988).

This division of labour involves women's unpaid domestic labour and the paid labour many are also obliged to undertake in order to meet expenses. Socialist feminism became evident in the sociology of sport and leisure as research (e.g., Green, Woodward and Hebron, 1990;

Thompson, 1999) began to show how boys' men's sport and leisure participation, and the time available to participate, was enabled by the unpaid work of women (cooking meals, doing laundry and providing transportation in addition to other domestic and reproductive labour). As

Bray (1988) explains, because of the expectations of domestic and reproductive labour, many women are less likely and able to commit themselves as fully to wage labour as men. This results in many women not progressing in their careers, or receiving promotions. Bray’s analysis of socialist feminist theory is over 30 years old, but it still has some relevance today.

Women ice hockey officials who are mothers or caregivers, as shown in the following chapters, have outlined the difficulties in progressing in the career due to the home – work expectations required of them. When women have paid jobs outside of the home, as well as primary responsibilities for housekeeping and childcare, that unpaid work is often described as the ‘second shift’ (Green, Woodward & Hebron,1990). Thus, many women face difficulties balancing being a ‘good employee’ and being a ‘good mom’ (Green, Woodward &

Hebron,1990), which became evident for women ice hockey officials who are mothers, resulting in some feeling obliged to quit officiating as the balance becomes too difficult to maintain.

13 This socialist feminist analysis is reflected in the gender inequalities experienced by women ice hockey officials, who perform the same work as men ice hockey officials, but often have different experiences. The relationship between home and workplace, women’s paid and unpaid labour, and the social organization of motherhood has influenced women’s ability to progress and continue in a career (Bray, 1985). Feminism as a movement is defined, and designed to end sexist oppression (Hooks, 2000b). Acts of feminism represent a starting point for the exploration and analysis needed to eradicate the underlying cultural basis of sexism and other forms of group oppression (Hooks, 2000b). As the culture of sport continues to celebrate and attempt to reproduce patriarchal gender privilege, critical feminism will continue to help with understanding and changing this aspect of social injustice (Birrell, 2000).

2.3 Review of Literatures

In each section I summarize and analyse key literatures, pointing to gaps that this research project aims to fill. A review of available literatures is provided for: (1) women in positions of power and leadership; (2) women in positions of power and leadership in sport; (3) sport officials; and (4) career paths and career contingencies.

2.3.1 Women in Positions of Power and Leadership: Power plays a key role in the gender relations evident in organizations and in public and private spaces (Claringbould, 2007). The tradition of women not rising to positions of leadership is apparent internationally, and not limited to sports. Although women constitute more than 50% of the population in many countries, there are remarkably few women politicians and senior bureaucrats. For example, girls and women constitute a little over 50% of the population of Canada, but just over 25% of

Members of Parliament -- which is, in itself, a new record for Parliament. Women make up, on average, just over 10% of senior executives in the top 50 publicly quoted companies in Europe

14 (European Commission, 2007). In the United States, fewer than 16% of the directors of Fortune

500 companies are women (Eagly & Sczesny, 2009). The phenomenon of “think manager-think male” (Schein, 1996) depicts the stereotypical responses for women and men based on the position descriptions for varying occupations. This theme is prevalent for women in the workforce in general, and it can be more prevalent when that workforce is in sport, an area traditionally considered to be a male domain.

In positions of power and higher leadership, women face prejudice because of the tradition of hegemonic masculinity, where women generally are not perceived as natural or appropriate as men for leadership positions (Lemm, Dabady & Banaji, 2005). Women leaders often face a double bind; if a woman leader engages in friendly communication it can be rejected as seeming too feminine (weak, uncertain, or ineffectual) and insufficiently masculine (not tough, or competent enough); whereas if she demonstrates those ‘masculine’ characteristics she is characterized as being insufficiently feminine. Thus, women leaders face an almost impossible dilemma as they try to avoid appearing to be too masculine or too feminine (Carli & Eagly,

2008).

The World Economic Forum recently published The Global Gender Gap Report (2018), highlighting gender disparities from 149 countries. The Global Gender Gap Index was first introduced by the World Economic Forum in 2006 as a framework for capturing the magnitude of gender-based disparities and tracking their progress over time. The index attempts to measure the relative gaps between women and men across four key areas: health, education, economy and politics (Global Gender Gap Report, 2018). The most gender-equal country to date is Iceland, which has closed over 85% of its overall gender gap. Following Iceland is Norway (83.5%) and

Sweden and Finland (82.2%). The least gender-equal country is Yemen (49%), with Pakistan

15 (55%) and Iraq (55.1%) just behind. Despite the gender gap closing slightly since 2017, if it continues to close at the current rate, it will take 108 years to achieve full parity (Global Gender

Gap Report, 2018).

In terms of the economy, women are missing from boardrooms and the workforce across the world. In Australia, only 17.1% of the CEOs and heads of businesses are women. In Canada, of the top 100 companies on the Toronto Stock Exchange, one has a woman CEO, six have women as chair of their boards of directors, 15 have only one woman on their boards of directors

(Erlichman, 2018). Women are missing from the business sector, and similar gaps are evident in health, education and politics.

Gender quotas have been proposed as a way to achieve greater equality. Quotas provide a tangible action plan for policy makers, holding organizations and agencies accountable for their levels of gender equality. Quotas have been proposed as a means of increasing the proportion of women candidates for political office (Franceschet, Krook, & Piscopo, 2012). Such measures may help to diversify the types of women elected, raise awareness about women’s issues in policy making, change the gendered nature of the public sphere, and inspire other women to become involved (Dahlerup, 2008). Quotas may take various forms, but they are now widely used in more than 100 countries. As with affirmative action (quotas) for racial equality, critics have argued that quotas will facilitate an increase in the number of unqualified women holding positions; and they may reinforce stereotypes portraying women as incapable of carrying out the job, or being known as a “quota woman” (Dahlerup, 2008).

European countries using quotas have found that such concerns do eventually decline, while indicating the substantial positive effects they achieved toward gender equality by the imposition of quotas (Dart, 2017). In framing the introduction of quotas, the narrative is deemed

16 particularly important to avoid any negative reactions, focusing on the need to increase diversity and move in the direction of equality. Norway provides important examples of the implementation of quotas. In 2003, the country was the first to introduce quotas for publicly traded companies. However, because many of the companies did not comply, in 2006 the law become more rigid: If a company’s board was not 40% female by 2008, the company would be dissolved. This made some company’s change their status to a private entity so they would not have to abide the law (National Post, 2015). Since then, little change has been made as the law is not implemented or highly regarded, resulting in a loss of the potential benefits for women and the companies. In order for gender quotas to work, they must be implemented in an appropriate and workable way, and maintained at a high level to ensure the quotas are being met.

The depth and breadth of scholarship examining the underrepresentation of women in positions of leadership and power illustrates the complexity and importance of the issue. Despite the quality of research, and the various recommendations and data available, women continue to face the challenges and obstacles of inequity while trying to navigate a system that is evidently and primarily made by men, and run by men for men.

2.3.2 Women in Positions of Power and Leadership in Sport: Sport has traditionally been constructed and understood as a gendered space, where men and boys exhibit, value and reproduce hegemonic notions of masculinity (Anderson, 2009). Sport has often been considered as a 'school for masculinity’, serving as a social institution that helps to define ‘acceptable’ forms of masculinity -- thereby turning boys into 'acceptable' men -- and to promote the subordination of the ‘other’(Burton, 2014). As a consequence, the presence of women in sport as athletes, coaches, managers, officials or other positions of leadership is under constant scrutiny.

Women often face sexist stereotyping, which can lead to denial of power, and the promotion the

17 unfair treatment of women athletes (Duncan & Brummett, 1993). This, in turn, can result in low self-esteem and self-perception, reinforcing the gendered power dynamics built systemically into sport (Duncan & Brummett, 1993). For women, sport rarely offers the same pathways as it does for men. Women athletes, coaches, spectators and officials face a gendered power dynamic that affects women’s abilities to grow and progress in the culture (Tingle, Warner & Sartore-

Baldwin, 2014). Sport has not reached equality, despite clear legislation, policies, and program developments; an apparent indication that women are not recognized as important actors in many avenues of sport (Tingle, Warner & Sartore-Baldwin, 2014).

The continued underrepresentation of women directors of athletics in interuniversity athletics departments may indicate the hegemonic masculinity that constrains women’s access to obtain those positions. The proportion of women directors of athletics in the Canadian interuniversity system over the eight years for which measures are available (2010-2017) changed from 17% to 24%, and then returned to 21% (Norman, et al., 2019). Acosta and

Carpenter's (2017, p. 43) more extensive data for the United States points to the major decline in the proportion of women directors of athletics following the passage of Title IX. Before 1972, over 90% of athletics departments (usually segregated as women-only) were administered by women. After 1972 that figure fell precipitously to less than 20% in the now mostly gender- integrated athletics departments. By 2017, that figure had reached 22% -- slightly better than the

Canadian proportion of 21%.

Sport specific examples of gender (in)equity are produced annually by The Institute of

Diversity and Ethics in Sport (TIDES). The Institute is known for their annual race and gender reports of equity in university and professional sporting organizations. For example, in the one major men's professional sport league in North America known for creating opportunities for

18 women, the 2017-18 report card for the National Basketball Association (NBA) shows a mixed picture (Lapchick, Estrella, Stewart, & Gerhart, 2018). Their findings show that the percentage of women holding positions as team vice presidents decreased by 0.7% from 24.2% in 2016-

2017 to 23.5% in 2017-2018. The percentage of women in team professional staff positions also decreased by 2.9% to 37.2% in 2017- 2018. The percentage of women in team management positions increased from 29.3% in 206-2017 to 31.6% 2017-2018. The best category for the representation of women is in the NBA League Office as professional employees (Lapchick et al., 2018). Similar findings are evident in other leagues, often providing even fewer opportunities for women. However, in Major League Baseball (MLB) in 2017, 27 of the 30 teams had one or more women serving in a senior vice president or vice president role (Lapchick, Neelands,

Estrella, Rainey, & Gerhart, 2018).

Overall, these findings indicate that women are underrepresented in higher level leadership positions within sport, even when gender is not a job requirement (as in, for example, players on a men's professional teams) and even when the leadership positions are for women's sports. However, there are some suggestions that changes toward greater gender equity are being considered. Adam Silver, Commissioner of the National Basketball Association (NBA) announced on May 9, 2019 that, moving forward, 50% of new officials and coaches entering the league should be women (Martin, 2019). Financial support by the NBA for the Women’s

National Basketball Association (WNBA), and a woman head of the NBA Players' Association suggest that the NBA may be more progressive and proactive than many other sport organizations.

Recently, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) produced the IOC Gender Equality

Review Project. The document outlines 25 recommendations the IOC will try to meet by the

19 2024 Summer Olympics and 2026 Winter Olympics. These recommendations concern equality items such as equal gender participation, equal gender competition formats and rules, equal gender uniforms, and equal gender officials and coaches (IOC, 2018; Lapchick, Davison, Grant,

& Quirarte, 2016). It is also important to acknowledge the call for gender equality within the

IOC itself, as only 24.4% of members are women (Lapchick et al., 2016). While women's representation on the IOC is still higher than majority of International (Sport) Federations (IFs), the IOC needs to set higher standards for other IFs to follow (Adriaanse, 2016; IWG 'Sydney

Scoreboard': www.womensport.jp/original/IWG/IW41.pdf).

The International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF) and the Féderation Internationale de

Football Association (FIFA) have the lowest women's representation on their boards, with 0% and 1.5% respectively (Lapchick et al., 2016). As the TIDES report notes, further action should be taken to ensure an equitable representation of women in positions of leadership and power in powerful organizations such as the IOC and other national and international sporting leagues and associations.

As noted previously, the underrepresentation of women in business is similar to the underrepresentation of women as coaches, because the dominant voices in the positions of power making the decisions are most commonly men in both sectors. In Canada, the representation of women in leadership positions in sport is rare; for example, of the 54 national teams in Canada, there are only nine with women as head coaches (Donnelly, Banwell, di Carlo, & Kriger, 2016).

At the higher levels of sport, and at the higher levels of coaching certification, the number of women coaches decreases (Donnelly, et al., 2016). In interuniversity sport in Ontario, 2014–

2015, there were 305 men head coaches (83%), and 64 women head coaches (17%). In the

Ontario Colleges, there were 134 men head coaches (91%) and 13 women head coaches (9%)

20 (Donnelly, et al., 2016). In professional sport leagues in North America, the National Football

League (NFL) had the highest ever number of women on the coaching staff of teams in 2016-

2017 -- a total of two women (Lapchick & Marfatia, 2017). For the first time in NBA history, there were three women assistant coaches in the 2017-2018 season (Lapchick et al., 2018).

In university sports in the USA, the few women head coaches of men’s teams are in sports viewed as 'gender neutral', such as Cross Country/Track and Field, and Volleyball

(Manley, Greenless, Thelwell & Smith, 2010). Due to the long-established tradition of men holding power and control in sport, and through the continued acceptance of the ‘status quo’

(Norman, 2010; Whisenant, Miller & Pedersen, 2005), sport leadership has traditionally been seen as “off-limits” to women, and that tradition still appears to restrict their possibility of advancement in sport leadership. This tradition is evident in research on the preferences of athletes regarding who coaches them: men athletes -- and many women athletes -- continue to prefer men coaches over women coaches (Cornelius, Habif & Van Raalte, 2001). Because sport is so embedded in the male sphere, there is often a sense that men coaches are more qualified than women coaches, even when both have identical qualifications and experiences. This has established a powerful tradition of social reproduction -- one that is now continually being challenged, but is proving to be more difficult to resist in sport than in other areas of endeavour.

This section suggests that some of the losses from the early 1970s in women's leadership in sport are being regained as a result of sustained and ongoing challenges by women and some men allies. As the following section indicates, there is far less data on women in officiating.

2.3.3 Sport Officials

2.3.3.1 Women officials: As in other areas of sport leadership, women in officiating appear to be experiencing similar dilemmas of underrepresentation, limited ability to advance in

21 their careers, and a failure to be taken seriously. For example, women officials may feel that they have to appear more ‘masculine’ in order to be taken seriously in the role. Sarah Thomas, the first and (so far) only woman official in the National Football League (NFL) had to follow a path pioneered by so many women before her, navigating a system that was not made for women.

Thomas had to negotiate the uniform, because the NFL only supplied officiating uniforms made for men. She also felt that, in order to fit in, it was necessary to keep her hair covered with a hat and to moderate the amount of makeup she wears (McCalmont, 2015). In other words, she felt constrained to hide her physical body in order to fit into the men’s sporting world, and to be taken seriously as a fellow official. Although women officials in professional soccer in Europe are becoming more common, women officials are incredibly rare in men’s professional team sports in North America: one woman official in the NFL, 18 women officials in the NBA, 0 women officials in MLS, 0 women on-ice officials in the NHL, 0 women officials in the MLB.

These few have made remarkable progress, overcoming major barriers on the path toward gender equality in a male-dominated occupation (Rainey, 1995). The 18 women officials in the NBA in

2017-2018 were preceded by only one woman official in 2016-17 (Lapchick, Estrella, Stewart, &

Gerhart, 2018). There was one woman on ice official in the NHL in 1995; however, she did not officiate for long and there have been no women on ice officials since. In baseball, it has been 47 years since the only woman umpire worked in MLB (Lapchick, R., Davison, E., Grant, C., &

Quirarte, R, 2016; Lapchick, R., Neelands, B., Estrella, B., Rainey, P., & Gerhart, Z., 2018), although Pam Postema officiated at a spring training game in 1988.

Although there is limited research on women officials in sport, a few studies provide some insights. For years, it was argued that women would not be able to officiate in men’s sporting leagues, and one study began to show the problems that occurred when the opportunity

22 became available for women (Forbes, Edwards & Fleming, 2015). In their study of the experiences of women football (soccer) officials at men’s and boy’s matches in the United

Kingdom, the Forbes, et al. (2015) ethnographic study highlighted women’s experiences of sexism, abuse and marginalization in predominantly male football clubs. A sample of women officials in U.S. basketball explained that the abuse and criticism they received tended to target their gender (Todey, (2011) cited in Tingle et al., 2014). In the Tingle, at al. (2014) interviews with former women officials, they pointed out that they experienced little or no sense of community during their work in sport, because they perceived that community as a hostile environment. This played a significant role in their decisions to drop out of officiating (Tingle et al., 2014).

The hostile environments that they faced were probably intended to, and certainly did give many of the women the sense that they did not belong and/or that their male counterparts did not want them to be in officiating, or competing with them for officiating assignments

(Tingle et al., 2014). Evidently, the presence of women participants (as coaches, players or officials) in traditionally male sporting cultures represents a threat to the systemic hegemonic masculinity of sport, and the resistance to their presence results in many women officials feeling constrained to drop out. Former women officials also reported an increase in abuse from spectators due to their gender (Tingle et al., 2014).

The available research on women officials suggests that their experiences are different from their male counterparts, especially in relation to boys' and men's team sports. This does not mean that men officials are not harassed and abused, and they also have high drop-out rates, but it seems that women officials, even if they gain an opportunity to work in boys' and men's sports, are more specifically targeted for abuse in the hegemonically masculine world. The hostile

23 environment that is created gives women the sense that they do not belong; they are not welcome or wanted as officials (Tingle et al., 2014).

2.3.3.2 Officials in General: Officials in organized team sports are there to keep the game in control, to help avoid injuries, and to ensure the game is played in a safe and fair manner

(Hockey Canada Shared Respect, N.D.). The role of an official, in hockey for example, can be very challenging due to the complexity and speed of the game. Officials must take all aspects of each game into account, having to make decisions very quickly, perform several tasks such as evaluating, judging and monitoring actions in play, and solving problems and any disputes in a timely fashion. In each game or match the officials interact with athletes, coaches, colleagues and spectators (Anderson & Pierce, 2009). The job can be hostile due to the nature of sporting events. Officials are often criticized for their decisions, especially decisions that go against the home team; they are not considered to be the ‘good guys’ on the playing surface (Guillén &

Feltz, 2011).

Despite the integral role officials have in relation to sports, there is little scholarship investigating officials in sport; apart from the two studies cited in the previous section, the majority of research focuses on men’s experiences, with a particular focus on the drop-out rates of officials (e.g., Titlebaum, Haberlin & Titlebaum, 2009). Studies show that the drop-out rate for officials has increased because of increasing stress resulting from abuse (Anshel & Weinberg,

1999; Dorsch & Paskevic, 2007; Folkesson, Nyberg, Archer & Norlander, 2002; Forbes &

Livingston, 2013; Goldsmith & Williams, 1992; Kaissidis & Anshel 1993; Livingston & Forbes,

2007). Self-reports from officials highlight their interpersonal conflict with players, coaches and spectators, and how these resulted in stress and burnout, eventually leading them to decide to leave officiating (Titlebaum, Haberlin & Titlebaum, 2009).

24 2.3.3.3 Violence and Harassment: Violence is a concern for many officials. Ackery, Tator

& Schneider (2012) conducted web-based surveys with officials from different levels of hockey across Canada. The findings indicated that more than 90% of officials have experienced being targets of aggression and anger associated with their work. The officials also agreed that coaches were the individuals most responsible for that aggression, anger and abuse (Ackery et al., 2012).

The officials suggested that, to increase safety on the ice, more education and rigorous enforcement of discipline is needed for all involved (Ackery et al., 2012). Abusive behaviour has not been well regulated, and the consequences for perpetrators have not been consistent (Rainey

& Duggan, 1998). Those involved in sport need to be held accountable for the actions that occur in sport, especially in relation to the treatment of officials. Current research on officials indicates that the abuse and mistreatment they face in their careers are a key indicator of the dropout rate

(Ackery, Tator & Snider, 2012; Forbes & Livingston, 2013; Livingston & Forbes, 2007).

This relationship between abusive treatment and dropping out is evident in other sports.

After analyzing survey data from 1,718 sports officials, Dosseville, Rioult and Labarde, (2007) found that the intention to drop out of officiating was related to their experiences of abusive behaviour, which affected their motivation to continue. A similar study found that the abuse from players, coaches, and spectators that officials in basketball suffered was both physical and mental

(Rainey & Duggan, 1998). The same source of abuse -- coaches, athletes and spectators -- appeared in majority of studies conducted in different sports (Dell, Gervis & Rhind, 2014).

In the past decade, there has been an increase in the number of codes of conduct, agreements and other initiatives in an attempt to ensure that respect and safety are granted to all those involved in sport. Hockey Canada created an eight-point initiative titled, Shared Respect:

25 Players, Coaches, Officials and Parents. The aim is to “educate and encourage greater respect between all participants in the game:”

1. The safety of the participants in the game is more important than the final score.

2. I value the contribution of the coach in developing the players’ talents, even though I may

not always agree with their methods.

3. I understand that officials do not make the hockey rules, they only apply them.

4. I understand that children learn from adults, and my behavior reflects what I want

children to learn.

5. I understand that officials are responsible to ensure that the game is played in a safe and

fair manner for all participants.

6. I understand that players, coaches and officials are learning the game, and mistakes will

be made in the learning process.

7. I may not cheer for the opposition team, but I will also not cheer against them or verbally

abuse them.

8. I understand that the biggest reason for players and officials quitting the game is abuse

(Hockey Canada Shared Respect, N. D.).

Despite this and other initiatives, many officials are still not respected. The majority of codes of conduct in sport include statements about the treatment of officials, but do not outline any consequences for the participants who do not abide by codes. There is a need for established codes of behaviour, enforced across all sports, to ensure safety, fairness and fun (Ackery et al.,

2012). The fact that the Shared Respect initiative concludes with, “…the biggest reason for players and officials quitting the game is abuse,” indicates that this research finding is widely known. There is an evident need for an enforceable policy to protect officials. Since Hockey

26 Canada has highlighted the connection between abuse and dropping out, the question remains why do officials continue to drop out at high rates, and why has Hockey Canada not taken the steps to ensure compliance? Why are there currently no policies in place to support the rights and safety of officials?

2.3.3.4 Dropping out: Sport officials represent a critical aspect of the sporting infrastructure; yet, in the early 2000s, there was a shortage of ice hockey officials in Canada. It was reported that the increased drop-out rates were caused by the abuse and mistreatment the officials received, as mentioned previously. The decrease in the number of officials resulted in competitions being cancelled because of the lack of available game officials (Livingston &

Forbes, 2007). Hockey Canada reported an annual loss of approximately 10,000 officials

(Stevenson, 2001). As Livingston and Forbes (2007) suggested, there is clearly a need to reduce the attrition rates in officiating and to understand what factors will result in a better retention rate for officials.

In a self-report survey study conducted in 2001, Livingston and Forbes (2007) mailed

461 questionnaires to former referees or linespeople in one district hockey association in Ontario, with an approximately 20% response rate. The survey provided an 11-point checklist of possible reasons to indicate why they were no longer working as an official. Abuse was the most frequently cited reason for not returning to officiating the following hockey season. The abuse was reported as coming from the usual suspects: players, fans and coaches (Livingston & Forbes,

2007). Seventy of the 94 respondents provided written explanations describing their reasons for dropping out. Regardless of their certification level or years of experience, they were unhappy with the abuse received and had finally reached their limit (Livingston & Forbes, 2007).

27 Several other studies also showed that, regardless of age or years of experience, women officials cited the following as all contributing to their decisions to drop out: a lack of mentorship and supervision; poor quality training; a lack of recognition; perceived inequalities in the way that policies were applied; and receiving more abuse than their male counterparts (Auger,

Fortier, Thibault & Gravelle, 2010; Forbes & Livingston, 2013; Livingston & Forbes, 2007,

2016). The findings of this research suggest that little has changed.

2.3.4 Careers: Paths, Patterns and Contingencies

In his study of occupations, Everett C. Hughes (1971) outlined key elements of ‘the career’:

“Career, in the most generic sense, refers to the fate of a man (sic) running his life cycle in a particular society at a particular time … The career includes not only the processes and sequences of learning the techniques of the occupation but also the progressive perception of the whole system and of the possible places in it and the accompanying changes in conception of the work and of one’s self relation to it.” (p. 297)

Occupational career patterns generally progress in an orderly fashion, with the individual growing systematically, gradually over time in a relatively predictable manner through a sequence of steps and stages (Haerle, 1974). Characteristics of the individuals who enter into a career are influenced by many factors (Taylor, 1968; Hall, 1969; Gross 1958), including age, sex, social class, education, geographical location, ethnicity, and family background (Haerle,

1974, p. 465).

While 'careers' have traditionally been considered as long term involvement in a paid occupation or profession, in sociology during the 1960s and 1970s, career began to be used in a much wider sense to also include, for example, 'deviant' and criminal careers such as drug user or hustler; leisure, recreational and hobby careers such as collectors, birders and model aircraft builders; and careers in sport, as athletes, volunteers, or those who are paid for part time work in

28 addition to their full time careers. With the exception of a few individuals who work full time in sport, the latter group includes those who work as officials and judges in various sports.

Research often focused on how individuals became involved in a sport career, how they maintained their involvement and advanced in their career, and how they ended their careers.

The focus was often on 'career contingencies' -- the steps that were necessary in order to move on to the next stage in a career -- and several models were developed. For example, Donnelly and

Young (1988) identified four stages in a model that they applied to rock climbers and rugby players, but which has since been widely used to examine a wide range of sport and leisure

'careers':

Presocialization -- includes everything that an individual knows (or believes they know)

about an activity before they actually attempt to become involved;

Selection and recruitment -- includes the choice to become involved, which may be a

result of actively seeking out an activity or being recruited by someone already involved;

Socialization -- involves learning how to do an activity and learning how to be someone

who does that activity -- it often involves unlearning myths and misinformation from the

presocialization stage (socialization continues as individuals progress to higher levels in

their 'careers'); and

Acceptance/ostracism -- involves whether or not an individual has learned both the

appropriate skills and the appropriate identity in order to be accepted as a fellow

participant; in other words, whether established participants encourage you to continue,

or discourage you from participating.

David Furst (1991) used Prus' (1977, 1984) four stage model to study the career contingencies of interuniversity sport officials. Prus' model includes: (1) initial involvement, as a

29 result of 'seekership' (searching for the activity), recruitment, or 'closure' (whereby an individual feels an obligation to become involved); (2) continuity; (3) disinvolvement; and (4) possible reinvolvement. Prus' model also provides a frame for this study, especially Chapter 4, 'Career

Patterns and Career Contingencies'. Furst's (1991) findings (1991) are comparable in some ways to those in this study but, as with most of the already limited body of research, the study focuses on men officials.

Although the concept of career and the study of contingencies has rarely been used in the sociology of sport for the last 20 years or so, the career contingencies approach still has value, and may help to interpret the experiences of women in hockey officiating in comparison to, and in relation to men. Women officials, as shown in previous research, face different challenges and barriers (contingencies) than men in their attempts to become involved in officiating, in their training/certification experiences, and in career progression in this traditionally male-dominated field. The contingencies in this case may be particularly difficult, not only in terms of men feeling that their traditional spaces and skills are being challenged, but also in that in order to progress, women officials have to be given officiating assignment that would previously have been given to men. Other contingencies that apply more to women than men concern domestic and, emotional and reproductive labour -- the so-called 'second shift'.

2.3.4.1 Second Shift: The concept of “second shift” refers to women working a full-time career and then, usually during evenings and weekends, also carrying out domestic duties, child- care, and tending to the family (Hochschild & Machung, 1989). For many women, there may be a work - family conflict (Dixon & Bruening, 2007). While increasing numbers of women are in full time work, and men have increased their share of the unpaid work previously carried out by women, the evidence suggests that women still carry out a greater share of that unpaid work

30 (Moyser & Burlock, 2018). The organizational level constraints women face may include job pressures and job stress, work and hours of scheduled work, and the work-family culture of an organization. Bruening and Dixon (2008) studied work - family conflict for women coaches, which may be compared to that experienced by women officials. The demands of coaching, and officiating, include the expectation of spending many hours away from home, which may contribute to significant work - family conflict for women in these positions (Dixon & Bruening,

2007). Recent studies show that women coaches typically have heightened responsibilities for family, whereas in most male-dominated jobs, the underlying assumption is that the employee has someone (a woman) to care for and tend to the family and children. As a consequence, those jobs have fewer built in supports (Dodds, 2003), making it more difficult for women in male- dominated jobs such as coaching and officiating. Traditional gender ideology for women coaches is based in traditional gender expectations – what a woman is supposed to do, and not do, with regard to family and work (Dixon & Bruening, 2007). These gendered norms tend to impact women disproportionately, through feelings of guilt, stress, shame and burnout from working long hours and being away from children and home responsibilities (Garey, 1999).

Women find it more difficult to negotiate a balance between being work-centred and home-centred, whereas men are often more easily able to be work-centred, giving them a significant career advantage over women (Hakim, 2007). Therefore, the career path for women, who choose and are able to have children is largely influenced by external factors, whereas men are often able to follow the patterns and processes as outlined previously.

Thompson (1999) outlines the stories of women’s labour in facilitating the sport and leisure involvement of their husbands and sons. Women’s domestic work and labour provides others, such as their children and partners, the ability to participate in sport (Thompson, 1999, p.

31 7). Women’s role in sport has often been focused on building opportunities for others, while supressing their own opportunities. With a better understanding and recognition of the complexities involved for women in careers such as officiating and coaching, we may gain a better understanding of how to organize paid and unpaid work in ways that afford women greater opportunities (Thompson, 1999). Examining the experiences of women ice hockey officials in terms of the career contingency model adds to the body of knowledge in the sociologies of sport, work and occupations, and gender.

2.4 Conclusion After briefly locating gender and sport in political and historical context, this chapter grounded the thesis in critical feminist theory, and then reviewed literatures relating to: women in leadership positions in general and more specifically in sport; the quite limited literature relating to sports officials; and concluded with a brief examination of the literature on careers and career contingencies. The latter literature, in addition to critical feminist theory, provides a framework for the interpretation of data collected for this thesis.

32 Chapter Three: Methods

3.0 Introduction In order to explore the gender relations among ice hockey officials, and the experiences of women officials in ice hockey, I utilized a qualitative multi-methods approach, incorporating

(1) interviews with women officials, (2) observations of women's hockey games, and (3) analysis of relevant and publicly accessible documents produced by hockey organizations and leagues.

These methods provided an opportunity to explore the regulations that govern women and men officials, for women officials to speak about their experiences, and to observe the experiences of women referees in game situations.

This chapter is divided into four main sections; (1) overview of methods (2) conducting the research; (3) the ethical considerations; and (4) data analysis.

3.1 Methods For the purpose of this study, I employed observations, semi-structured interviews and document analysis as the preferred methodological mix in order to, as accurately as possible,

“examine the conclusions drawn by triangulating with several sources of data” (Hall & Rist,

1999, p. 6). Methodological triangulation refers to the use of multiple methods in an attempt to gain more complete and detailed data upon which to base interpretations (Hall & Rist, 1999).

Using the three methods, the questions asked during the semi-structured interviews benefited from data previously collected during game observations and document analysis.

3.2 Document analysis: Document analysis involves a systematic procedure for reviewing and evaluating documents (Bowen, 2009). In the process, data are examined and interpreted in order to elicit an understanding of the meanings intended by the documents (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). This analysis includes 'missing' data -- what is not included in the documents (e.g., feminine or

33 gender-neutral pronouns in documents that refer to both women and men officials). The purpose of document analysis is to examine key information and themes in published sources and extract the main points (Hall & Rist, 1999).

Document analysis is not as subject to selective memory and social bias, which is the potential for other qualitative methods, although it is necessary to be conscious of biases that may be evident in the production of the documents. However, the researcher must be conscious and critical about how they interpret documents, what they code and where they apply relevant information (Hall & Rist, 1999). This method is often used in conjunction with other qualitative research methods as a means of triangulation (Denzin, 1970, p. 291). Documents often provide contextual data pointing to the ways in which the participants operate. This can assist the research, situating it in an historical context and/or help to locate the phenomena currently under investigation (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). It has also been suggested that document analyses may assist in providing more information that is relevant to the interviews (Goldstein & Reiboldt,

2004), or help to frame the form of the interviews (as well as enabling tracking and the confirmation of data) (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). When employed together with observations and interviews, document analysis helps to triangulate data in a researcher's attempt to provide evidence that “breeds credibility” (Eisner, 1991, p. 110).

3.3 Observations: Observations are commonly used in qualitative research methods when the focus of research is on understanding actions, roles and behaviours (Walshe, Ewing & Griffiths, 2012).

Complete (i.e., non-participant) observation allows researchers to examine peoples' lives in situ

(Smith & Caddick, 2012), which is important because “what people say they do is not always the same as what they do. What they do varies with circumstances and setting” (O'Reilly, 2012, p.

12). Observations assist in providing a contextual lens to observed actions, interactions and

34 emotions (Sparks & Smith, 2014). By being a complete observer, the researcher takes on the role of being a ‘fly on the wall’. That is, they are not actively participating in the field, rather they are observing what is happening and how it is happening (Sparks & Smith, 2014). As Sparks and

Smith (2014) note, when conducting interviews, it is often wise to observe the settings in which those being interviewed participate, and to make notes on those settings. This enables the researcher to record some of the routines and features of everyday life that may be unremarkable to participants -- so routine that interviewees might not feel they are worth commenting on. Prior observations permit interviewers to raise questions about those routine practices.

There are several benefits to using observations, as described above. Nevertheless, there are limitations that are important to note, and be cognisant of before going into the field. The first concerns the need to consider the behaviours that might be taking place out of sight. Hall and Rist (1999, p. 8) point out that “the observational picture on any spectacle is always incomplete” in that the researcher may not always be in the right place at the right time, or may be excluded from certain locations. For example, I was not able to observe interactions that occurred in the officials' locker rooms, and probably missed many of the interactions that occurred between the ice and the lockers room. The second limitation concerns the researcher's biases and prior expectations, and the continual need for reflexivity when working toward accurately interpreting the meaning of their observations. The third limitation concerns the fact that several interpretations of observed behaviours and incidents may be possible, even of a simple gesture or sigh (Hall & Rist, 1999). Therefore, it is better to conduct multiple observations of the settings to gain a better understanding to the actions and interactions, and what they mean.

35 Observational data is traditionally recorded by taking hand-written real-time notes while in the field (field notes), now often supplemented with the use digital recording devices (Sparks

& Smith, 2014; Phillippi & Lauderdale, 2018). Fortune & Mair (2011) note that it can often be helpful to prepare an observational guide of things to keep in mind before going into the field.

Field notes serve many functions; really detailed notes aid in constructing 'thick', rich descriptions of the study context (Phillippi & Lauderdale, 2018). The researcher must accurately record the observed data, always remaining cautious that they are not injecting their subjectivity into the perceived situation (Hall & Rist, 1999). Acknowledging all personal reactions, emotions and feelings in a separate section of the record may help, since these can be compared to the field notes and their interpretation (Hall & Rist, 1999).

3.4 Interviews: The third method utilized was semi-structed interviews. Interviews allow the researcher to develop a greater understanding of how people attach meaning to their experiences (Denzin,

2001). They can be used to collect information from individuals about their personal practices and experiences, beliefs or opinions (Harrell & Bradley, 2009). Semi-structured interviews follow a systematic and consistent order, while giving the interviewer the freedom to probe responses and proceed beyond the standardized questions (Berg, 2004). The fluidity to ask formalized, standardized questions, in addition to the freedom to branch out if other themes arise, may generate valuable information for the study, often data that the researcher might not have expected. This flexible means of collecting data also provides the “participant with the opportunity to lead the direction and pace of the interview” (Sparks & Smith, 2014, p. 84).

An interview guide serves as a directional tool, one that aids in collecting relevant information about the topic of interest and helps to maintain some consistency, but also provides the opportunity to ask open-ended questions which give the participant the opportunity to speak

36 about their experiences, thoughts and feelings (Sparks & Smith, 2014). While the interview guide allows the interviewer some discretion regarding the order in which questions and topics are addressed, the questions and themes are relatively standardized, and probes may be inserted to ensure that the questions and themes are addressed as comprehensively as possible (Harrell &

Bradley, 2009). Interviews also have the potential to provide insights into the ‘private troubles’ of individuals and how these are related to broader social structures and processes (Sundin &

Fahy, 2008, citing C. Wright Mills’ The Sociological Imagination). The ‘private troubles’ are unlikely to be evident during game observations; for example, women officials facing challenges associated with childcare and motherhood. Such challenges may only be revealed during the trusted conversation possible during an open-ended interview.

3.5 Conducting the Research

3.5.1 Document analysis: Prior to carrying out observations and interviews, I conducted an analysis of relevant and publicly accessible documents. While documents can be sources of rich data, it is important that researchers look at them critically (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). The documents included: annual reports by Hockey Canada from 2014 to 2018; the 2014 revised policy document from Hockey

Canada; the Hockey Canada Officiating Manual (2014); and rules and regulations documents produced between 2014 and 2018 by national, provincial and interuniversity hockey organizations that govern and assign officials within the leagues they govern.

First, I compiled relevant documents and conducted a superficial examination. In doing so, I familiarized myself with the documents and made initial notes on information that seemed immediately relevant. Second, I carried out a thorough examination of the documents, focusing on the sections that were most relevant to officials. Lastly, I conducted a detailed analysis of the

37 documents, recording information and identifying questions I had, and created a narrative that I would then be able to use to generate questions for the interviews.

3.5.2 Observations/ fieldwork:

To better understand the actions, interactions and experiences of the officials on the ice, I conducted observational fieldwork at hockey arenas in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). I observed 15 women's hockey games, 14 of which had at least one woman official, seven had all women officials (see Table 1). Observations were from the position of a spectator in the stands, focusing on the women officials and their interactions with all relevant actors, which included coaches, players, fellow spectators and on-ice and off-ice officials; and those actors' interactions with the women officials.

Observation Number of Men Women Men Women game officials on Ice referee referee linesperson linesperson 1 3 0 1 0 2 2 3 0 1 0 2 3 3 0 1 0 2 4 3 1 0 2 0 5 3 1 0 0 2 6 3 0 1 0 2 7 3 0 1 0 2 8 3 1 0 0 2 9 3 0 1 0 2 10 3 1 0 0 2 11 3 1 0 1 1 12 4 0 2 0 2 13 4 1 1 0 2 14 4 1 1 1 1 15 4 1 1 2 0 Total: 49 8 11 6 24 Table1: Gender Composition of Officiating Crews in the Games Observed As Smith and Caddick (2012) note, ‘complete’ or ‘non-participant’ observers are not actively involved in fieldwork settings although, in this case, my role was the same as that of other spectators at the game. I arrived at the arena, purchased a ticket and items from the

38 concession stand, and sat in a seat among the other spectators. I participated to some extent in spectator behaviour; however, in order to focus on data collection, my focus was on the two-way interactions involving the officials with each other, and with players, coaches, and fellow spectators during the game. Ethical consent was not required for this phase of the research because the observations were carried out in a public setting, where I participated in the overall experience, just as the other spectators around me, and where none of the participants have any expectation of privacy. During each game, I situated myself among the crowd, locating myself between the home and away fans. I sat behind the score keeper and penalty boxes, directly facing both team benches, and high enough to see over the glass. This allowed me a complete view of the ice surface, and the opportunity to observe most of the relevant interactions. Sitting above the glass removed a barrier to sounds, assisting me often to hear what was being said on and off the ice. By sitting in the crowd with the other spectators, I was also able to hear comments that were shouted aloud and see actions made by spectators.

I wrote real-time notes while in the field using my personal cellphone ‘notes’ application in order to be discrete. I also occasionally made audio recordings, capturing the chants and any comments spectators made towards officials. Before beginning fieldwork observations, I created an observational guide (Appendix G) to help facilitate my thought process. This posed basic questions, such as: who, what, where, when, why (Holloway, 1997). The fieldnotes recorded my positioning at each game, approximately how many spectators were around me, and all of the interactions I was able to see between officials and the other actors throughout the game. I also recorded my perception of the officials' gender, based solely on the person's appearance and presentation of self, and the official's name, which was announced before each game began.

Following each game, I spent approximately 30-45 minutes writing reflective fieldnotes and key

39 take-away points from the game. These notes were often posed as questions regarding situations that had occurred, who made comments I could hear, and similarities or differences between each game. Before each new game I observed, I re-read my previous fieldnotes to increase my awareness of key points for observation (i.e., observations that were similar to those made previously, and observations that were new).

3.5.2.1 Actors observed – Officials: Throughout my fieldwork at 15 women's games I observed 49 officials at work (see Figure 1). Of the 19 referee’s that were observed, eight referees appeared to be men, 11 appeared to be women. Of the 15 games observed, four of the games used a four-person officiating system and 11 of the games used a three-person officiating system. Of the 49 total officials observed, 35 were observed in more than one game -- the pool of qualified officials at this level of the game is relatively low. Many officials work multiple games each weekend across the GTA. Of the 30 linespeople observed, six of them appeared to be men while 24 of them appeared to be women. It was not possible to determine the exact certification level of each official; however, in order to officiate at the level hockey that was observed, it is mandatory to have a minimum of level III certification.

3.5.2.2 Actors observed – Spectators / fans: The number of spectators and fans at each game varied. There were approximately 50-75 people at most games. Three of the games were scheduled as special events (e.g., promotional events or held in conjunction with graduation ceremonies). The number of spectators at the special event games ranged between approximately

100-250. These estimates are based on the number of people I was able to see and on a rough count that I made. The gender of the spectators was not specifically counted or referenced, as this could not be done in any systematic way. However, every effort was made to reference the gender of those who made loud comments directed towards the officials. This was done by

40 hearing and recording the comment, and then determining if the voice sounded like a man or woman, based on the pitch, tone and enunciation; this was backed up by an attempt to see who made the comment.

3.5.2.3 Actors observed – Players: All of the hockey players observed were women, because the games took place in women-only leagues under the protocol of the organizations.

The players ranged in age from 17 to 26 years. The age range was determined before each game from the program distributed to spectators. The programs included the rosters of each team, the players' dates of birth, and their hometown. I recorded the relevant information in my fieldnotes.

3.5.2.4 Actors observed – Coaches: The genders of the head coaches was observed from their appearance and presentation of self, and from their names in the distributed programs. Of the 30 head coaches observed, 18 appeared to be women and 12 appeared to be men. Data were not collected for the assistant coaches, trainers, or other personnel who might have been on the team benches because officials routinely interact with the head coach.

3.5.3 Interviews – Participants: The 12 interview participants age ranged in age from 20 to 65 years. Their years of experience ranged from three to 40 years as an official. Eight of the officials held Hockey

Canada level III certification, and four held level IV certification. As shown in Table 2, the number of women officials at the higher levels of certification is quite limited. Therefore, in order to maintain the confidentiality guaranteed to the participants in the research ethics protocol for this study, I do not disclose the province where they are engaged in officiating. However, the interview participants are from across Canada (from British Columbia to Prince Edward Island).

All participants interviewed have full-time careers, and work as officials during evenings and weekends. They have all officiated at both boys'/men’s and girls'/women’s hockey games in some capacity.

41 Level I Level Level Level Level Level Other Total II III IV V VI British M 2124 1225 401 79 29 13 -- 3871 Columbia F 268 116 37 6 ------427 4298 Alberta M 2505 2332 315 66 22 10 56 5306 F 200 157 19 4 1 -- 2 383 5689 Saskatchewan M 2032 648 208 51 19 8 4 2970 F 213 47 8 5 2 -- -- 275 3245 Manitoba M 550 301 545 34 9 3 -- 1442 F 80 36 24 3 ------143 1585 Northwestern M 65 37 87 30 12 2 -- 233 Ontario F 10 3 5 1 ------19 252 Eastern M 334 525 325 41 17 5 -- 1247 Ontario F 33 28 3 1 1 -- -- 66 1313 Ontario M 1158 2946 1550 479 149 21 -- 6303 Hockey F 101 157 26 2 1 -- -- 287 Federation 6590 Quebec M 1006 1852 1369 91 12 9 -- 4339 F 48 51 45 17 3 -- -- 164 4503 New M 471 270 301 58 33 8 9 1150 Brunswick F 36 18 6 1 1 -- -- 62 1212 Nova Scotia M 221 179 386 45 11 7 -- 849 F 35 21 24 5 1 -- -- 86 935 PEI M 106 69 167 11 5 5 -- 363 F 20 5 18 1 ------44 407 Newfoundland M 282 161 292 47 13 2 -- 797 and Labrador F 32 15 16 2 ------65 862 Hockey North M 9 36 15 6 1 -- -- 67 F -- 4 -- 1 ------5 72 Hockey M 10863 10581 5961 1038 332 93 69 28937 Canada F 1076 658 231 49 10 -- 2 2026 TOTAL 11939 11239 6192 1087 342 93 71 30963 Table 2: Hockey Canada Certification officials by Gender, 2018-2019

3.5.4 Consent: During the game observations, I began to recruit interview participants.

The eligibility requirements for interview participants included individuals: 1) over 18 years of

42 age; 2) who identify as a woman; 3) who have been involved in officiating ice hockey at any level; and 4) who hold or have held Hockey Canada Certification between levels II and VI. The specific league where the officials work (OWHA, OMA, BCHL, etc.) is not identified as it might lead to breach of confidentiality. Participants who were recruited were current linespeople and referees, and retired officials. Initially I sent a recruitment email to women officials I met through previous experiences when working at hockey games, and through other connections to hockey leagues via family and friends (Appendix C). I also posted an open call on relevant social media platforms using Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn and Facebook, and by contacting officials' social media groups directly (Appendix D). These diverse methods of recruitment were used, rather than relying on 'snowball sampling', because of concerns about confidentiality that can easily be breached when interviewing individuals who are part of the same network and are known to each other. Individuals who agreed to be interviewed were sent a consent form by email, to be read and signed before conducting an interview (Appendix E).

3.5.5 Procedure: I conducted 12 semi-structed interviews, using an interview guide

(Appendix F), with women who are currently involved, or were previously involved in officiating ice hockey in some capacity. Further demographic information (level, years of experiences, active or retired official, etc.) is not disclosed for each official as it may result in identification of participants due to the relatively small pool of women officials at the higher levels. Interviews lasted between 35 and 135 minutes. Ten of the interviews were conducted by phone, and two others via video calls; this procedure was adopted for several reasons. By using a phone or computer I was able to interview women from across Canada, women who lead busy lives and appreciated being able to schedule the interview at their convenience (Sparks & Smith,

2014). Also, some research has shown that individuals may provide information during

43 telephone interviews that they may they may have been more reluctant to share face-to-face

(Hanna, 2012). For Example, Hanna (2012) references Holt (2010), suggesting that although telephone interviews may lose some of the nuances associated with face-to-face interaction, this loss allows the researcher to ‘stay at the level of text’ and avoid imposing additional contextual information on the data.

All participants completed a consent form (Appendix E) via e-mail prior to being interviewed, and were given the opportunity to ask questions before the interview. Each participant was given the opportunity to select their own pseudonym; five participants asked me to provide a pseudonym for them, four selected their own pseudonym, and three chose not to change their name. Each participant was asked if the interview could be recorded; all participants gave consent for recording. Brief notes were made throughout the interviews and detailed notes and transcripts were made directly following each interview.

Before starting the interview, I gave a brief overview of the project including my main research questions, and I provided some relevant background information about myself to help build rapport. I encouraged the participants to speak as freely as they would like, and to share as much or as little as they felt comfortable to do. The first set of questions aimed at building rapport with the participants. Each interview began by asking generic questions about the participant; their background in sport, how long have they been officiating, their current certification level, and what they enjoy most about being an official. Starting with broad with personal experiences helps participants to feel more comfortable, and allows the researcher an opportunity to begin to understand more about them (Sparks & Smith, 2014). From there, I moved to more specific questions about officiating, asking each participant to share their experiences as a woman ice hockey official (Appendix F). Finally, I asked participants if they

44 had anything else they would like to share, giving them the opportunity to talk about anything that might not have been covered previously, or that they felt was important to mention. The general structure of the interviews was similar, but the overall discussions were quite diverse. I asked probes if I felt that the individual could clarify or provide more details in their answer to a certain question. The direction and the flow of the interviews were determined by the participants; and as I became more comfortable with the process, the interviews became more fluid and less rigid.

My overall interview style was flexible and conversational. This style has been shown to potentially increase the accuracy of the data obtained, as the questions are posed in a way that each participant is able to understand. In doing so, conversations facilitate a “standardization of the meaning of each question” (Bell, Fahmy & Gordon, 2014, p. 195). This is generally not possible when interviews adhere strictly to scripts. To this end, conversational interviews assist in comfort and fluidity, and allow participants the opportunity to correctly interpret the questions

(Bell, Fahmy & Gordon, 2014).

3.6 Data Analysis Thematic analysis was the preferred means of data analysis for the observation and interview data, supplemented by the numerical data, policies and regulations from the document analysis. Braun and Clarke (2006) as outlined in Sparks and Smith (2014, p. 124) describe thematic analysis as a “method that minimally organises and describes the data collected in rich detail by identifying, analysing, interpreting, and reporting patterns.” Thematic analysis is flexible and does not seek to quantify the themes (Sparks & Smith, 2014). It highlights the similarities and differences across a data set, with a strong emphasis on interpretation, employing a six-phase approach: (1) immersion, (2) generating initial codes, (3) searching for and identifying themes, (4) reviewing themes, (5) defining and naming themes and (6) writing the

45 report (Braun & Clarke, 2006 in Sparks & Smith, 2014, p. 124). In the immersion phase, the researcher becomes familiar with the data set, reviewing and re-reading the data numerous times, adding quick notes where necessary. During and following the immersion phase the researcher begins to generate initial codes from the data, coding across the entire data set and identifying and producing a list of different codes. The data applicable to each code are also organized. In the third step, broad themes are identified by organising the various codes into possible themes.

There are two steps involved in reviewing themes: first, to check if the themes work in relation to the codes; second, to determine and confirm the main themes, ensuring that all data relevant to the themes have been included. The fifth step involves defining and naming the themes; and searching for similarities between them in order to combine and possibly re-name some of the related themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006 in Sparks & Smith, 2014). The final step, writing the report, provides another opportunity to refine the analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006 in Sparks &

Smith, 2014).

3.6.1 Data analysis procedure: Thematic analysis was applied to both observations and interviews. The observation fieldnotes were transcribed, and the digital recordings of interviews were transcribed verbatim. I applied a thematic analysis approach, as outlined by Sparks and

Smith (2014) referencing Braun and Clarke (2006), as outlined above. The two data sets were related in that I had observed a number of things that the interview participants subsequently talked about. However, there were also differences, primarily because I did not observe women officials at any boys'/men's games. Using the six-step approach (Braun & Clarke, 2006), I began by reading through my observation fieldnotes and interview transcriptions three times each, making notes and highlighting item of interest.

46 A fourth reading was used to generate the initial codes, noted in the page margins. These were used to create a list of codes in a word processing document. From the observations, the initial codes were broad (e.g., generic official comments, gender specific comments, coaches’ interactions, athlete interactions). From the interviews, initial codes referred to structure, time constraints, sexism and enjoyment).

The codes were reviewed in order to identify broad themes (e.g., the codes for ‘mom’,

‘kids’, and ‘full-time work’ were included under the theme ‘time-constraints/motherhood').

Relevant quotes from the interviews and relevant observation data were attached to each of the themes. These themes were reviewed for similarities and overlap, especially when the same quote or observed incident had been used for more than one theme. When appropriate themes were merged into a larger theme (e.g., 'age' was initially a single theme, but was subsequently merged into a larger theme I labeled ‘human condition’, encompassing human attributes

(physically and emotionally). To assist in identifying and labeling themes, Sparks and Smith

(2014) encourage researchers to 'write the story' told by the themes. During this step, subthemes were created within, for example, the overall theme ‘Systemic Barrier’; the subthemes included,

‘opportunities’, ‘training/ education’, ‘representation’ and ‘payrates’. Following this, I removed any data that were not immediately relevant to my research questions. These coded data were stored for possible use in future research.

3.7 Ethical considerations: Due to the nature of this project, the level of risk is relatively low. Participants were made aware through the consent form, and in a verbal explanation before the interviews, that: 'they were not obliged to answer any questions; they could skip certain topics of discussion at their request; and that they could stop the interview at any point'. Social and reputational risks were a concern in that participants may have disclosed views or experiences critical of the organizations

47 or leagues for whom they work as officials. Participants were reminded that every effort is being made to protect their identity, and that no information would be used that might identify an individual and affect her ongoing participation in the work of officiating. Participants were reminded throughout the interview process that no identifying information will be used in the final report (thesis), or when presenting or publishing or presenting the data. In addition, information that participants provided about their organizations and leagues are not connected directly to their identity. Officials only became participants once they read, signed and submitted the consent form (Appendix E).

As noted, the participants were sent a copy of the consent form in advance of the interview.

The form describes in detail: the goals of the project; the participants’ right to refuse to answer questions, and to withdraw from the study at any time; the steps to be taken to protect their confidentiality; and contact information should the participants wish to follow up at any time.

To ensure confidentiality the following steps were taken: (1) I conducted and transcribed the interviews myself. (2) Pseudonyms were provided by the participants, and given to those who asked for one to be created for them. (As noted, some participants did not want to use a pseudonym.) Specific locations and organizations were not named, with the exception that observations took place at games played in the GTA, and with the identification of Hockey

Canada as the overall governing organization, in order to maintain confidentiality because of the limited number of women officials at the higher levels of certification. (3) Member checking was used with each participant. Once an interview was transcribed a copy was sent to the interviewee, asking the participants for their approval of the content. None of the participants asked for any changes.

48 3.8 Conclusion

Using methodological triangulation, I was able to obtain a rich set of data from document analyses, observations of officials’ interactions with key actors in real-time, and from hearing directly the experiences 12 women officials from across Canada. The document analyses provided insights into the current policies, payrates, certification courses and inequalities between women and men. During the interviews, I supplemented the questions to be asked in relation to the aims of the study with information obtained from the document analysis and with my observations of in-game interactions involving officials. For example, without the document analysis, information about the significantly fewer numbers of women at higher levels of certification, and the differences in rates of pay for men and women officials, were less likely to have been emphasized during the interviews. Ultimately, these became important themes in this study. All three methods provided data that are rich, thick and informative, and which supplemented each other in the best principles of triangulation. As a result, the multi-method qualitative approach resulted in data that spoke to the experiences of women ice hockey officials, data that are explored in the next chapters.

49 Chapter 4: Career Paths and Career Contingencies

4.0 Introduction The results of this study show that career paths for women ice hockey officials differ from their men colleagues due to the hegemonic structures that exist. In this chapter, I outline the career paths and career contingencies for women ice hockey officials, noting where they differ from men's. At the micro and meso levels, the impact of the hegemonic structures has direct influence on the women’s ability to advance in officiating in Canada. This chapter explores the typical chronological career path of an official, following Prus’ career contingency model

(1984). As in Prus' framework: (1) the pre-official experiences are explored; followed by (2) an account of continuity as an official, with a particular focus on career contingencies such as (a) the exclusion of women at sites of training and education, and (b) the challenges and limitations to advancing in their careers as officials; (3) disinvolvement -- quitting/ dropping-out and the retirement of women officials; and (4) the hope for and possibility of re-involvement as an official.

4.1 Pre- officiating experiences

According to Prus (1984), there are three basic processes by which people become involved in a career; (1) seekership, (2) recruitment and/or (3) closure. These processes may all be involved, they are not mutually exclusive. Seekership is a “self-defined attraction towards, or fascination with, a particular phenomenon" (Prus, 1984, p. 200), and leads to people seeking out a career based on their own interests (Furst, 1991). At the beginning of every interview, I asked the participants about their background in sport and how they became an ice hockey official.

Many of the women I spoke with played hockey when they were younger, then made the transition into officiating during their teenage years or early 20s. Those who did not play hockey

50 in their youth explained that their brothers played, so they were “used to watching the game constantly" (Jamie*). Given that age, sex, social class, education and geographical location often influence career choices (Haerle, 1975), one official (55+*) explained her introduction to hockey as follows:

I started playing on my brother’s team because there was no girls' team. So, when I started I played goal[ie] because then they couldn’t tell I was a girl.

Her gender, her age, and her geographical location, all factored into the lack of availability of girls' hockey. This was not uncommon, as many of the officials shared the experience of not having a girl’s hockey team to play on, forcing them to play on a boys’ team. Stacy* did not play ice hockey growing up, however the “closest thing [she] played to hockey was ringette.” She further explained that her small town did not have girl’s hockey so she never had the opportunity to play.

Those who did grow up playing the sport explained that once their playing careers were over -- at CIS/U SPORTS (Canadian university), college, or the highest available level of women’s hockey in their geographical area -- they transitioned into officiating:

I played [CIS/U SPORTS] hockey for 5 years, then after I graduated, I played men’s league for a while and then took a full year off and then started officiating pretty regular (Vanessa*).

All of the participants sought out their careers in officiating, either starting from adolescence as an athlete and transitioning into officiating, or starting as a spectator and consumer of the game and moving into officiating when they were older.

Prus identifies the second pre-career process as recruitment: “others encourage or facilitate one’s involvement in some phenomena" (Prus, 1984, p. 301). Several of the officials

51 shared the view that their transition into officiating was a natural and fluid evolution, because they were previously athletes in the sport. However, Teresa* had a different path to officiating:

I was not an athlete when I was younger … it just kind of emerged out of convenience and it turned into this great love affair… It’s a rather embarrassing story; I was dating a guy and I didn’t really know much about hockey at all and I was hanging out with him and he was a hockey ref and he was like “ohh take the clinic.” I was like “okay” and I did and then, but the best part about that story… the assignor of female hockey phoned me up a few months later, and was like “hey, I see you got your card, do you want to do some games?” And I was like “I really do want to do some games, but you should know I don’t know how to skate” so he said “well, that’s fine just use the players and boards to stop, you’ll be fine,” and that’s how I got started.

The influence of men on women’s participation in or consumption of sport is a common theme, usually involving fathers, grandfathers, boyfriends, brothers, and sons (Farrell, Fink & Fields,

2011). Many women participate in or consume sport at the suggestion of men in their lives. This results in women cheering for and participating on the same teams as their fathers, brothers, husbands, boyfriends, etc.

Stacy* did not have much autonomy in the decision to become an official. Her small town was facing a shortage of officials for the younger youth hockey, and she had the skating ability from her background in ringette, so her mother signed her up for an officiating clinic:

I was so young that I didn’t even understand the clinic to be honest or I didn’t even understand hockey, I wasn’t even playing hockey yet. Umm, I watched my brother play hockey but I still didn’t pay attention, right? Like I was 10 or 11 or something. But um, I went and did it and they didn’t care what I had done or what I did wrong, they were just happy to have a ref out there.

The influence ('recruitment') of a partner or a parent, as in both of these cases further encouraged the women to continue officiating for several years.

The third pre-career stage in Prus’ (1984) model is closure. Closure refers to the

“involvement in a career to attain a goal not attainable by other means” (p. 200). In this case, officiating to earn money, to keep fit, or for recognition of sport involvement would be examples

52 of closure. This idea was mentioned by a number of the participants when asked what that they like about officiating. Ten of the twelve participants mentioned that making extra money was a positive aspect of the career for them. Debbie* mentioned that the extra money she made while she was a younger official helped to pay for her college tuition fees. However, none of the participants identified this as a significant factor contributing to their involvement in officiating.

4.2 Continuity

This section focuses on the process of becoming an official, with a particular focus on the career contingencies of education and training -- particularly differences between men's and women's conditions of work -- and career progress. The first section on training and education is divided into five parts examining the steps and stages of training and education officials undertake in this career path. (1) I will outline the certification process, detailing the certification requirements and the participants' experiences at the courses; (2) identify the preparation that is required and the components that are missing for women; (3) examine the four-person system of officiating; (4) reveal the pay rates for U SPORTS hockey officials; and (5) explain the sites of learning that are in place for officials, highlighting the social exclusion that exists in these spaces. This is followed by a review of the contingencies involved in career progress.

4.2.1 Training and Education: Occupational career patterns generally progress in an orderly fashion, with the individual growing systematically, gradually over time in a relatively predictable manner through a sequence of steps and stages (Haerle, 1974).

4.2.2 Certification Process: Hockey Canada requires officials to have an appropriate level of certification for officiating games. There are six levels, one (I) being the lowest level and six

(VI) being the highest level an official can obtain. Of the 30,963 registered Hockey Canada officials, from level I to level VI, in 2017-2018 hockey season, 2,026 (approximately 6.5%) of

53 them are women. The complete breakdown of the number of officials per certification level is found in appendix H. There are currently no women in Canada with level VI certification, and it was revealed during the interviews that “[we] are not allowed to get a level VI.” There is no women’s hockey played regularly in Canada that requires the highest level of certification; only men’s hockey requires level VI and, as noted, no women are permitted to officiate men’s hockey at the highest level. It was not until 2014-15 season that women received a chance to earn level

V certification. Debbie*, who retired at the highest level she could obtain, which was level IV at the time, provided this insight:

… In 2015, Hockey Canada now allowed female officials to become a level V, but male officials are allowed to go on to as high as a level VI. So, even when I became my level IV, the male officials back then were allowed to go as level VI. So, there is a little bit of an equality difference. Why female officials cannot obtain a level VI and Hockey Canada said they have to stay at a level V?

I asked her why this might be, and she explained:

Hockey Canada has said we don’t need it as a female because they don’t think we are going to that highest level at this time. They just said we are not basically heading to the NHL at this time, so we don’t need a level VI. We aren’t involved at the OHL as women officials, so we don’t need a level 6 and the IIHF [international hockey] is only asking for a level V at this time.

There are gender differences in the allotment of the certification levels, whereby women are discriminated against by not being allowed to obtain the same level of certification that men are allowed and able to receive. There are only 10 women in Canada with level V certification compared to 332 men (Hockey Canada Annual Report, 2018). There are currently 93 men with level VI certification in Canada, and no women. I reached out to Hockey Canada’s officiating director to ask why this is the case, but never received a response.

4.2.3 Certification Requirements and Courses: For each level of certification there are different requirements, expectations and evaluations. The Hockey Canada Officiating Manual,

54 last revised in 2014, outlines the requirements for each level (Appendix F). To obtain level III certification and higher, the person must be invited to attend the certification course by their regional Referee-in-Chief (RIC). There are high rates of drop-out between those who receive level II and level III certification. It is not clear to why the drop-outs occur; however, some years ago Hockey Canada reported an annual loss of approximately 10,000 officials (Stevenson, 2001), with many of those stemming from the early certification courses. There are several factors why officials may not continue, and these are discussed in a later section. Those who have been selected to train to officiate at the higher levels are required to attend the relevant courses, which are not scheduled as frequently as level I and level II courses. For people who live further away from major metropolitan centres, access to the higher levels of certification courses becomes difficult. Jacqueline* said:

…Where I live is very limited … so I had to travel like 12 hours to the nearest level III course…

This was a common response; the participants pointed to the extra time and added expenses for them to attend these courses annually, especially when they are required to travel for several hours.

Once officials are invited to the select courses, Hockey Canada outlines the requirements that must be met in order to achieve that level of certification (as shown in Appendix G). When I asked the participants about their experiences at the courses, the most frequent answer concerned the few women who were on the course with them: “it was me and another girl…” (Stacy*); “I was the only woman in the class” (Lisa*); “There were three women in the clinic of the 70 people” (Amanda*). When Jacqueline was asked about her certification course experiences, she said:

55 …it was strictly held that the boys had to pass the 80% mark, where the girls just had to show up, pay the money, take the test, even if you failed you get the certification anyway.

Women officials may not be taken seriously at the certification courses. Jacqueline* continued to explain her thoughts about why that is the case:

…To have more women with level III I think, and like some of the girls there were really young um and they didn’t really have... and me included, I don’t have a lot of experience. So, they are just like yup here you go, here’s your certification, have fun this season, see you later kind of thing.

The Hockey Canada documents regarding certification courses outline the requirements to obtain each level of certification, noting that all officials must achieve the same passing mark: “must obtain a minimum of 80% on a written national examination” (Hockey Canada Officiating

Manual, 2014). Thus, this is not a gender specific requirement. However, another official shared a similar experience, noting that "the girls' just received their certifications; the mark was not taken seriously". This is may indicate Hockey Canada is attempting to include more women officials, but at the same time the testing for women officials is not taken as seriously. They are not held to the same standards, perhaps because women's hockey itself is not perceived to be as important.

However, given that women's hockey exists and is growing, and that the optics of having only men officials for girls' and women's games is problematic, this double standard for higher level officiating certification programmes is reminiscent of the phenomenon of the “quota woman” (Dahlerup, 2008). In other words, there is a set number of women who must fill positions or, in this case, specific levels of officiating certification. Thus, it may be argued that quotas will facilitate an increase in the number of under- or un-qualified women officials in positions in which they will potentially fail because they have not achieved an appropriate pass mark on their officiating tests. This, in turn, helps to reinforce the stereotype that women are not

56 capable of doing the job, and of being known as a “quota woman” who only gained the position because Hockey Canada are filling a quota requirement. I have not been able to determine whether Hockey Canada has a quota protocol indicating how many positions/certifications must be held by women. However, the participants' reports regarding testing does raise the question of the existence of an unwritten protocol.

4.2.4 Preparation: Hockey Canada outlines the “Qualities of an Official” in the

Officiating Manual (2014), prescribing the 12 qualities officials should have. The document explains that:

The key to success is to build on your strengths. Identify the areas where you have exceptional abilities and maximize their impact. At the same time, identify any areas of weakness and work on them. You may never be the greatest skater, but you are capable of improvement. Do everything you can to minimize your weaknesses (p. 15).

In being able to minimize weaknesses, it is presumed that officials must work on all 12 qualities

(p.13):

1. Knowledge of the rules of the game 2. Appearance and presence 3. Positioning 4. Procedures 5. Reaction to pressure 6. Feel for the game (penalty selection) 7. Fitness 8. Skating ability 9. Signals 10. Attitude 11. Rapport and communication 12. Judgment / consistency / standards

Each point is described in detail, underpinning the expectations and achievement factors. More points are discussed subsequently; however, for the purpose of this section I provide a broad overview of the overall Officiating Manual and the structure of the courses that are reportedly

57 not inclusive for women officials. Many of the women interviewed discussed this lack of inclusion:

I feel that we need to have like our own separate course [for women], because like a lot of the procedures they give us are about big men and things and how a man would deal with it. As a female, I have to do things much differently than a male official can do (Jacqueline*)

Most of the material in the manual does not address how women might deal with any of the situations outlined. There are many situations that women may have to approach differently in comparison to their male colleagues. For example, their approach to fights and altercations may be different. Participants often mentioned that, because there were often size and strength differences between them and the players, they have to be more strategic in terms of their positionality; as opposed to their male colleagues who are able to follow the steps outlined in the manual and are given opportunities to practice these situations in officiating courses. The implementation of separate courses for women officials, as Jacqueline* and others mentioned, could help to focus more specifically on officiating from a woman’s perspective, especially if the courses are taught by women officials. Many of the participants also mentioned that they had to learn to communicate differently in order to have men coaches and players take them seriously.

This is discussed further below, but it also speaks to the importance of women being taught how to navigate the male dominated spaces of ice hockey. One of the participating officials mentioned how her feeling of not being prepared or of being uneducated negated her ability to advance:

My RIC called me and said “hey, Hockey Canada picked you to go to this national event” and I was so excited, but nobody prepared me for what that was going to look like, or how I should physically or mentally prepare to go to that. So, I think that would be one aspect, is actually preparing people for the level of umm hockey that they are going to be introduced too. Well [my province] wasn’t even there, you know, it was a national

58 championship, and [my province] wasn’t there, so it wasn’t the hockey I have been exposed too. Right? Like I was qualified to ref that level of hockey in [my province] but, reffing the [other provinces'] teams, it was another step up. I left that event quite embarrassed because I was not strong enough to fulfill my role. So, I think that preparation and assessing the skill level of where you’re sending somebody is a big thing. Hockey Canada never called me again. I never got another opportunity after that. And when I look back on that, I’m like wow, that was my opportunity to, to like be exposed and be seen and get some good coaching and it was actually a really crappy experience (Jamie*)

If this individual had received appropriate training and preparation, then she might have been better prepared for the experience and thus have been more likely to be invited to another high- level championship tournament. While it cannot be determined if that was the only determinant of her not being invited again, nevertheless, she considered that her evident lack of preparedness, and her feeling undereducated for the experience, resulted in her not being invited again. Further consideration of the training and education process specifically for women officials would help better prepare them for the different situations they are obliged to navigate; these are now being overlooked in the current training courses.

4.2.5 The Four-person System of Officiating: The majority of women’s hockey games are officiated by a referee and two linespersons -- the three-person system. The IIHF and CWHL use a four-person system (two referees and two lines-people) for women's games and, for the first time in the 2018-2019 season, all leagues in university women’s hockey implemented the use of a four-person system (mainly during play-offs as a pilot, and becoming mandatory for the 2019-

2020 season). Many of the participants explained how they were not trained or prepared for this when they were obliged to change to a four-person system. Amanda* recalled one time she had officiated a game using a four-person system at a national championship tournament:

In 2017 [I went to do a calibre of hockey] nationals as a referee and it was all a four-man system. And they all criticized my positioning pretty hard, that’s something you would

59 try to work on every game, but in my closing interview I said to the guy, “let’s be honest, I did one four-man game in my life before I came here, haha” because there just wasn’t four man. It’s starting to change, but yeah, it’s really foreign to get taught it….

Jacqueline* explained her certification course experience, and how the women were not taught the four-person system:

… The boys got to four-man officiating systems. The girls only got to do three-man officiating systems. That was my biggest, like I was really not happy with that because um I want to learn how to do a four-man officiating system and of course we aren’t allowed that most of the time…

With the change in protocol and four-person systems being used more frequently, it is necessary to ensure that women officials are taught the relevant positioning at certification course, and allowed to build experience in the same way as men.

At the Canadian university level, a four-person system has been used in men's hockey since 2007-2008 season. Ten years later, a four-person system is being introduced in women’s games. Debbie*, explained that this largely has to do with budgets because women’s hockey generally received less funding; it was too costly to have to pay four officials.

The U SPORTS Playing Regulations for men’s and women’s hockey for the 2018-2019 season outline the certification requirements for officials. For men's national championship games, referees must have officiated at least three U SPORT league or playoff games in the current season in order to be eligible for selection; and they must have a Hockey Canada

Officiating Level VI certification for referees and Hockey Canada Officiating Level IV

(minimum) certification for lines-people (U SPORT Playing Regulations- Men’s Hockey, 2019).

For the women's games, officials must have experience officiating U SPORT women's ice hockey, have been recommended by the U SPORT Women’s Hockey Coaches' Association,

60 have Hockey Canada Officiating Level IV (minimum) certification for referees and Hockey

Canada Officiating Level III (minimum) certification for linespersons (U SPORT Playing

Regulations- Women’s Hockey, 2019). The certification level required for women’s hockey is lower than men’s hockey, despite the hockey itself being an equivalent national championship tournament.

During the regular season for women’s hockey, the regulations in one of the four U

SPORTS conferences requires the officials to have a minimum of Level III certification. Where possible, linespeople will have Level III certification and referees would hold Level IV certification. The implementation of a four-person officiating system in women’s hockey at this level increases the demand for officials who have an appropriate level of certification. This may mean that more women will have the opportunity to officiate at this level of hockey. Women’s hockey does not preclude men from officiating in the leagues at this level, whereas women are precluded from officiating men’s games at the same level. To this end, women are competing for officiating assignments in women's hockey against both other women and men, whereas men are competing for officiating assignments in men's hockey only against other men for the same number of positions.

4.2.6 Pay Rates: This section provides an example of the pay rates for officials, taken from one league/organization. The data were collected through publicly accessible records and documentation from the organization’s website. [Note that women may only officiate women's games in this league, while men may officiate both men's and women's games. This follows the same officiating guidelines as men's major junior hockey, where there are no women officials.]

The officiating fee for U SPORTS for the 2019-20 season for men’s hockey: level VI

61 certification: referees $155/game and linespersons (minimum IV) $80/game; and for women’s hockey: $80/referee/game (minimum Level IV) and $40/linesperson/game (minimum Level III).

The linespersons in the men’s game must have the same certification level as the referees in the women’s games, and make the same wage. The lines-people in the men's games make just over half the amount the referees earn, whereas the line-people in the women’s game earn exactly half. The referees in men’s hockey earn $75.00 more per game, presumably because they must hold a higher level of certification.

Both referees and linespersons in men’s and women’s hockey in Ontario University

Athletics (OUA) hockey are now reimbursed $0.41/km for travel expenses (OUA Annual Men’s

Hockey Update, 2017). The same travel expense rate of $0.41/km has only recently been applied to women's games (OUA Annual Women’s Hockey Update, 2017). For women’s university hockey, before 2016, officials had to travel to and from games without receiving travel expenses.

Because of the relatively small pool of officials with the certification levels required to work the games, some officials had to drive from the GTA as far as Windsor and Kingston without being compensated for their travel expenses (or travel time). One woman official explained that they would often make those long trips because it was understood that the more hours and games an official accumulated, the higher they would be able to advance. Meanwhile, those who officiate men’s university hockey in the same province have always (within living memory) been compensated for their travel. One official shared her involvement in the struggle for officials in women’s hockey to receive travel expenses:

… I wanted it to be equal to what men were getting paid. So, I fought for it and with the [organization A] governors at the office sitting down with contracts and such … So, once I did my homework and found out what the officials on the men’s side were getting paid, I went to the board of the [organization A] and [organization B] and proposed we get paid the same. Umm but the thing was that each time we proposed an increase, you have to know that there is budget for it, so what happened, there was never a budget for this in

62 the female sport for the equality of pay so over the years, each year we went back and negotiated for more and more and more and now we are being paid the same rate for the men’s sport as games and travels fees … So basically, it was a negotiation between [organization A] and [organization B] moving forward and we negotiated that as the years progressed to get to where we are today.

This official further explained that the introduction of the fourth official in women’s hockey (as noted, it had been in men's hockey for a number of years before being introduced to the women's game) now adds an extra cost; therefore, this individual is back at the negotiating table with the organizations to ensure that the budget is adequate and contracts are signed before the upcoming season.

In Ontario, men’s and women’s sports at the university level are supposed to receive the same amount of funding per season. However, women’s hockey was not able to change to a four- person system of officiating until the 2018-19 play-off season due to funding restrictions, and the lack of funds to compensate the extra official. Regardless, the pay rates are higher for those who officiate in men’s hockey than women’s hockey at the same calibre, further contributing to the gender wage gap that is still prevalent for women in this career.

4.2.7 Sites of Learning: Historically, women's place in sport has been constrained by societal attitudes (Birrell, 1988); traditionally, their place was on the sidelines. The exclusion of women from organized sport existed for centuries and is, unfortunately, still a fact of life for many women. For Stacy*, a major site of social exclusion exists where the majority of the networking, learning and socialization for officials takes place -- in the changeroom:

… Starting with the changeroom… So, coming on board in a small town in [my province], I was put into a heater room with a cement floor, which is difficult to put skates on in there. And then, so eventually I asked for a rug or something to put down and they finally put a rug outside the room so I could drag it into the heater room to put my skates on and then once the men were dressed I was allowed to walk into the men’s room where the educational conversations occurs about the game. Otherwise you're excluded from learning, like when you're isolated in a heater room, so that’s #1.

63

Other officials described similar experiences when they first started officiating, experiences that tend to happen more in smaller towns with older arenas and facilities. Being excluded from the learning environment, the rapport building, networking and socializing is an isolating experience.

By not being in the changeroom prior to the start of a game, Stacy* spoke about not knowing the names of the men she was officiating with; this resulted in the exclusion she was experiencing carrying over onto the ice. She was not involved in the decision-making processes or the evident team feeling among the officials. Similarly, Teresa* spoke about her changeroom experience where, despite being there with her male colleagues, she shared the feeling of social exclusion:

I walk into a room and there are two guys in there that I’m going to be working with and they know each other and they don’t know me; often they will, you know, chit-chat with each other and not really try to or going out of their way to include me in the conversation and most of the time. Well, I’m a pretty confident person, so I don’t have a problem inserting myself into a conversation, haha but uh, but there are times when I feel kind of like you know, it would be annoying if I did it, or that’s not my place... but then I feel you know, if we go out onto the ice and work as a team, the other two teams out there, you know they have 20 people to lean on, but when I’m out there I have two other people to lean on, and by the time I’m on the ice I don’t even know their names. I think that’s something to be considered….

The officials' changeroom should be a rich site for learning, education, and developing a sense of belonging, and it usually is for men. Individuals develop through education, job training and on the job experiences. Social capital is gained through a network of relationships with peers, supervisors, and others (Sagas & Cunningham, 2004). When women officials are not included in these experiences, they miss out on the learning experiences available to their male colleagues, thus limiting their ability and potential to advance in their officiating careers. This is explored further in the following section; however, it is important to be aware of all the spaces of exclusion for women officials. Following Stacy’s* several years of negative experiences, she

64 found herself in a position to make changes when she became the RIC for a small house league in her community:

And then um becoming a RIC for my community at the house level, which is a fun league for hockey, I could do a lot of different things that aren’t regulated. So, in this position I changed things around and made it a rule that all refs dressed in the dressing rooms together and if you need to change you go into the stall and we can wear clothing that makes us feel comfortable and that kinda thing. That way we can all be educated and be a team in one dressing room. Yeah, like that was a huge part. If you’re not in with the group, changing with the group, you’re not a part of the team really.

As segregation is decreasing with the provision of more co-ed changerooms and the building of new and larger facilities, some women are still experiencing a form of social exclusion by not being included in men's conversations that are taking place. More attention needs to be paid to these sites of exclusion, and the learning limitations that are experienced by some women officials.

4.3 Career Progress

In this second section relating to Continuity (Prus, 1984), consideration of the career contingencies for women officials continues by: (1) explaining the 'system' that governs women officials and (2) their accounts of 'being stuck in the system'. This is followed by the officials' views on (3) competing with younger men officials; (4) leadership of the system; and (5) mentorship. The section concludes by looking at the gendered issues relating to: (6) scheduling and constraints; (7) the 'second shift'; and (8) the 'mommy penalty'.

4.3.1 Introduction to the 'system': The 10,000-hour rule (described by Gladwell, 2008) is popular among many officials. They believe, and are encouraged to believe that progress in their officiating career will result from putting in the time, and accepting all of the games that are offered. This will eventually lead to advancement and to becoming among the best of the best.

65 However, that mentality is now being questioned and Steven Walkom, the Director of

Officiating in the NHL, is attempting to change the system at the top.

The emerging officiating system, at least at the level of the professional game, disregards the number of hours and games officials have worked by changing the focus -- searching for current or former hockey players with the interest in and potential to become officials. The call for officials to attend the NHL Officiating Exposure Combine states:

Looking for a way to earn a living in the NHL? The NHL is holding every summer an NHL Officiating Exposure Combine for current and former hockey players looking to stay in the game, while learning a different side of hockey. Officiating is a fast-paced, high-energy profession with the best view in the arena for games and needs great athletes to serve the game as officials. The Combine’s focus is on high level hockey players with little or no officiating experience. The Combine is accepting ex-college (D1, DII, DIII), University (CIS) and Junior hockey players with or without any professional experience. Several attendees have been hired by the NHL as officials in the past few years. (NHLOA, 2018).

Despite the career path outlined by Hockey Canada’s officiating system, and the ideal of achieving the 12 qualities outlined previously, if an official wants to reach the highest level of hockey (assumed to be the NHL) it may no longer matter if they have 30 years of officiating experience. Unfortunately, for officials currently in the Hockey Canada system, they are still being told that if they gain the experience they will be assigned to better games. As Erin* claims:

[There are very few U SPORT] teams in [my province], so that makes it more difficult to officiate and get those games because there are [relatively few] home games. So, there are opportunities. As long as you kind of do the work at the lower level. And I think that goes both for male and females. You have to put in the work at the minor levels to want to advance.

After recently reviewing the profiles of current NHL officials (www.nhlofficials.com), it is evident that the new system is being enacted. Elite male hockey players (U SPORT, NCAA, national/Olympic, etc.) are being recruited to pursue officiating careers once their playing careers are over. Many began their professional officiating careers in their mid to late twenties,

66 bypassing the early phases of officiating, such as atom, pewee, bantam, and so on, and immediately advancing to officiate at higher levels, despite having little previous experience.

This will be an additional challenge for women officials because of the more limited opportunities for women to become elite players. The only semi-professional women’s hockey league in Canada, the Canadian Women’s Hockey League (CWHL) closed in spring 2019, and the (US-based) National Women's Hockey League (NWHL) is in trouble as a result of a player walkout. There are currently no women officials in the men's professional leagues (NHL, AHL), or in men's Canadian amateur hockey (e.g., U SPORTS) and Canadian Junior hockey, (OHL,

WHL and QMJHL). Having limited access to the highest level of play, the opportunity for women to become officials at the highest level may also become more limited.

The call for the 2019-2020 NHL Officiating Exposure Combine invited both men and women. A tweet by Darren Dreger, a sportscaster for TSN claimed:

The NHL is still accepting applications for its officiating combine in August. More

women than ever have applied. The NHL needs athletes from U SPORTS or the NCAA or

the pro leagues to step forward. There will be women officiating in the NHL.

I have reached out to the contact information listed for the Officiating Exposure Combine to query the accuracy of the tweet, but received no response.

This brief outline of the current structure/system for the highest level of officials prefaces the following section where the research participants outline their experiences and difficulties with regard to career progress.

4.3.2 ‘Stuck’ in the System: I asked the participants for their thoughts about the officiating system, and the open call for women to attend the officiating combine with the aim that one day women will officiate in the NHL. Many of them shared similar insights. Amanda* said:

67 … There is only so far you can go as a female. Like the Olympics are kind of the ultimate end goal for most people, as the door for the NHL isn’t open yet and with the CW[HL] folding we don’t have that avenue anymore either. I’m pretty limited to what I can do here because the calibre of hockey we have [where I live] is pretty low. I don’t have those opportunities because we don’t have the high-level women’s hockey. I’ve been trying to pursue more of the men’s side of things now because I ref at the university women’s level, so I can’t go any higher. I’ve reached my capacity. So, this year I’ve finally gotten into midget and bantam AAA boys [hockey] which was, well they promised me that three years ago and it happened now so um yeah, haha. Ideally, national championships are where I’m at now. My exposure is too low right now to get other championships.”

The women alluded to the fact that an open call is simply that. It could be a public relations exercise to demonstrate that the NHL is attempting to be more inclusive, or perhaps they are serious about having women officiate at that level. However, all the women interviewed shared stories and experiences of constraints that limited their efforts to achieve career progress.

The majority of the officials I spoke with feel trapped, unable to progress despite their ability and years of experience: "I couldn’t move forward anymore here. That’s why I have to travel. I’m stuck (Stacy*).” Many of these constraints echo Haerle’s (1975) study of the career contingencies of professional baseball players. Vanessa* pointed out that there is no elite women’s hockey in her home area, so she does not have that opportunity. For some, travel is necessary in order to gain experience at more elite levels of the game, but for many, travel is not an option due to obligations of family and full-time jobs. This is discussed subsequently in more detail.

In addition to these limiting factors, there is evidence that women officials are not given the same opportunities as men to progress. When asked if they felt they were given the same opportunities to advance, the women officials' responses were similar:

No, because there’s just not as many opportunities available. You know? The female major midget team that is [where I live], might play here once a month in the season, whereas, if you’re a male working boys' major midget, there are two teams [here]. They are always playing and then there’s junior ‘B’ and the W[HL]. There is just so much

68 more hockey, but I feel that there isn’t enough openness towards getting females onto that side of the boys' games, so I feel like there could be more opportunities if they were more open to having female officials as a regular part of their program (Jamie*).

There are significantly fewer girls and women hockey players in Canada. Of the 626,090 players registered by Hockey Canada for 2017-2018 season, 83,711 (7.5%; which is slightly more than the proportion of women officials, 6.5%) are girls and women (Hockey Canada Annual Report,

2018). With significantly fewer girls and women playing hockey (and sport in general), the number of teams and leagues where women have an opportunity to officiate is significantly less, especially given the challenges associated with transferring into the boys' and men’s hockey system:

It’s kind of like everyone thinks it’s a guy’s game and only guys should ref, but that its guys hockey and the guys are the ones getting called up and stuff. I don’t know if it’s because they’ve been around longer in the game, or more mentally strong, not really sure the reasoning on that. I know they’ve been given more of a hand over time than us (*Erin).

Similarly, Megan said:

I haven’t moved up as fast or even at all really on the male side of things. Umm because I’ve gotten lots of female major midget, female prep, female varsity and I’ve ended up getting a female prep final, but then when it comes to the male side of it, I’m barely getting midget varsity, midget tier two games. I just know I haven’t worked quiet as high of a level in male hockey as I have female.

Many other officials shared similar stories about not advancing in boys and men’s hockey. Qualified and capable women are being overlooked and not assigned to games that are assigned to their male colleagues. As previously indicated: a) the number of women officials is significantly lower than the number of men, especially at the higher certification levels [although

6.5% of all Hockey Canada officials are women, at the higher levels the proportions are: III,

3.7%; IV, 4.5%; V, 2.9%] (Appendix G); b) it seems that women are not permitted to register for

Level VI certification courses because, allegedly, no women’s hockey is played at that level in

69 Canada; and c) women officials are not currently considered for work at the more elite levels of men’s hockey (although men routinely officiate women's games). A number of research participants mentioned that, at a certain point in their career, they feel that they are encouraged to become more involved in women’s hockey, despite the fact that the avenue to advancement is through boys' hockey. Teresa* said “it didn’t occur to [her] that [she] wouldn’t have been able to do the boys hockey.” For women officials, the highest level at which they are able to officiate depends primarily on the highest level of women’s hockey played in their geographical area. If there are no university, prep or midget AAA leagues, then they either have to be willing to travel extensively to officiate games at those levels, or work at the lower, younger levels of hockey -- officiating in the men’s hockey leagues in their area is usually not an option.

This career contingency may be seen as a form of access discrimination. Access discrimination operates by excluding women from a men’s organization (Greenhaus, Parasuraman, & Wormley,

1990). Jacqueline* shared her thoughts on this concept:

It’s generally male dominated. Um, we haven’t had a female official in the WHL, we haven’t had one in the AHL, or NHL, and I think it’s because they are reserving those levels because I think they are scared that once they give a female a level 6 certification that she is going to challenge them, like I should be there too, and that will turn into a huge PR nightmare for a lot of those leagues. So, I feel like that if they take away, that [top level of] certification from these women to begin with, there won’t be that challenge.

It does not explicitly state in any documents that I have seen that women are not permitted or not welcomed to officiate in men’s hockey leagues; however, as Vanessa* said, “I think the numbers say it all.” Women are not occupying these spaces. Women are, as noted, now invited to the officiating combine; nevertheless, women have yet to make it past that stage. If they are not given the opportunity to practice, learn, and achieve the highest levels of certification, and be involved even in the lower levels of men’s leagues, then venturing into the highest level of men’s

70 leagues does not seem realistic. In many ways, being invited to the officiating combine is setting up women officials to fail.

As I shared the 2017-18 data on the number of registered officials at the different certification levels with the interview participants, many of the women were shocked and/or surprised when I pointed out how few women officials there were at the higher levels of certification in the different provinces (Table 2). One of the ways that hegemony works, and can be so powerful is because so many people are unaware of the extent of their minority status. To discover that you are one of 10 women in Canada with level V certification in Canada, or that women represent less than 3% of the referees at that level should not be a surprise, since the data are available. However, without the knowledge of how few women officials there are at all levels of certifications (approx. 6.5% of all officials, decreasing at higher levels), they are unlikely to question this, thereby resisting or adding pressure to the system. Following the interviews, some of the women asked where they could locate the information, in order to be better informed and share it with their colleagues.

4.3.3 Younger Men Officials: All 12 officials interviewed referred to the challenges of being a woman official and being ‘overlooked’ or ‘bumped’ to make space for a younger man official. As previously noted, there are many more opportunities for men officials because there are so many more boys and men’s leagues. Jacqueline* shared her current experience:

Generally, our girl officials don’t get the same number of games as the boy officials… Like I’m a level III ref and a guy level III ref gets way more games than I do all the time. Umm so that’s just kind of the dynamics that happens and that’s all across [my province] as well.

The career path for men officials is more direct; there is an actual route for men to follow, if they are ambitious to advance. Women officials are being overlooked in favour of younger men, as Vanessa* explained:

71 ...the RICs see them as more likely to advance. There are places for them to go.... they move up mediocre guys through the system pretty quickly, and they move up exceptional females through the system fairly slowly. So, the mediocre boys who are moving up in the program fairly fast, they are getting more opportunities than more elite female officials. The games I get assigned are like the mediocre games, that’s what I get and that’s kind of all I get. I don’t get the great opportunities that the mediocre guys get.

This is analogous to another career contingency, the homologous reproduction occurring in treatment discrimination (Greenhaus, Parasuraman, & Wormley, 1990), explained further in the following section. Men in positions of power, such as RICs, tend to promote other men rather than women. Stacy* explained how she was affected by this:

I just found that um the boys, the younger teenage boys and even the men, they will get the coaching from the RICs and from fellow referees, whereas for me, they don’t provide the coaching, they won’t communicate or assist you in understanding the game. I found that either I wasn’t developing personally, or um they were not wanting me to develop. Just because I would see them come in and coach the boys and then they would never coach me. And I would be like ‘HEY’, I’m not getting the education so I can do what I need to do. Like why don’t you want your association to be better? The better we are, the better we all look. Yeah. There is a lot of focus on the young boys I find. Like if there is potential in the boys, it goes there.

The teaching, support and opportunities to officiate games are primarily going to men, rather than women officials who are equally qualified for the job. The ‘old boys’ network’ supports the production and reproduction of the hegemonic masculine behaviours that serve as an operating principle within sport organizations that restrict women’s access (Burton, 2014). As the research participants shared these stories and experiences of younger men officials being favoured over them, I sensed their anger and frustration, and heard the disappointment in their tones. Vanessa* sighed:

watching a boy get moved up quicker than you. It sucks. Watching these young cocky kids come into the dressing room and them get bigger games than you.

Similarly, Amanda* said:

They are streamlining the 15 and 16-year-old boys and put them on this fast track. Like maybe this is because they don’t develop women officials.

72

The women officials all shared stories of being sidelined to enable the development of a man official. They shared how the system currently exists for women, reinforcing their claims of treatment discrimination in these organizations.

4.3.4 Leading the System: As noted in the previous section, treatment discrimination is evident in the current officiating system. This occurs when individuals receive fewer organizational resources than they deserve (Greenhaus, Parasuraman, & Wormley, 1990). As

Knoppers (1987) has pointed out, treatment discrimination coincides with the concept of homologous reproduction. Those in positions of power in an organization maintain (reproduce) their influence by permitting only those with similar characteristics to gain access to power and influence (Kanter, 1977). In male dominated organizations (i.e., the vast majority of organizations) women have been and continue to be excluded due to homologous reproduction.

The hegemonic system in this case is deeply anchored with varying levels throughout the

Hockey Canada. It seemingly maintains and socially reproduces a system that fosters and shapes younger and middle-aged men to eventually become leaders.

A gender audit of the branch RIC’s for each province/territory, listed on the Hockey

Canada website, indicated that all of them are men. The individuals in positions of power and decision making over the entire hockey program for each province/territory are also all men. Of the 11 branch members who administer officiating for the girls and women’s hockey programs, three are women (27%), seven are men (64%) and one is unknown (9%). Thus, approximately one quarter of the individuals in charge of officiating girls and women’s hockey are women.

Jamie* shared her insight:

This is a male dominated sport and all the years I’ve been involved in the high- performance program, the person leading that program has always been a man… The guy right now planning the female program in [my province] is great, a very skilled confident

73 official, but he knows nothing about working with women. It’s been kind of a crap experience with him… He’s good because he’s a very confident, high level official, but not necessarily good at balancing all the intricacies that comes with working with women you know. I guess more support for these men who are in these positions of power or getting women into these positions would I think help overall.

Amanda* also claimed that the “director of the women’s program is always a man.” Amanda* later noted that the position to be the director of the women’s program for her centre became available, and a retired woman official applied for the job. She explained how that person would have been ideal for the position. Nevertheless, the position was filled by a man, with no experience officiating in the women’s program. Due to homologous reproduction, a woman was excluded from the hiring process as a result of the ‘old boys’ network' (Aicher & Sagas, 2009).

The 'old boys' network' was discussed by many of the research participants. It works as an aspect of social capital that serves to support men and exclude women (Sagas & Cunningham, 2004).

Social capital is produced and tends to be more important for men than women through the network of relations that exists. Social capital created for men in this environment has varying nuances that the women officials felt were based on favoritism. Vanessa* explained:

It’s such a favoritism thing, and like who you know and if they like you. Umm like the assignors give games to their favorites and friends. And they don’t deviate from that. They don’t take chances, umm so if you’re not in that core group of officials and you’re not in with the assignors, then you’re not getting good games.

This is detrimental to many women’s careers, as the people in the decision-making positions, such as assignors, RICs, directors of programs, and so on, are usually men. I asked Vanessa* how you might become ‘buddies’ with the assignors and gain access to the ‘inner circle’. She said:

Kiss ass. That’s how it is here. Not sure if it’s the same everywhere, but if you’re not willing to drop your pants for them hahaha like if you’re not kind of kissing ass or buddies with them then you’re not getting games.

74

Several of the officials shared similar feelings. The social capital men are building within the organization excludes women; they are not gaining access to the inner circle as fast or as easily as their male colleagues. The ‘inner circle’ and favoritism determine who is assigned to a game and who is not. In some cases, it reproduces a hierarchy on the ice, with men receiving the head referee position and women ‘working for them’ as the lines-people. During the observational phase of the research, this hierarchy occurred in five of the 15 games. The leagues that were observed recommend in their policy that, when possible, women will officiate women’s games.

In the observed games where a man was the referee and the women were lines-people, the league and level of play was the same. Some of the lines-people during those games were observed as referees in other games. I asked the research participants about their experiences regarding those situations. Many of them said that most of men they work with are supportive and they do not notice anything different. Some commented on the observed data, confirming the underrepresentation of women in referee positions, mainly during women’s games. Stacy* shared a different opinion:

… I don’t think the community should be exposed to that over and over again. Like seeing the males in the authoritative or power positions and only seeing women taking the lines-men positions. It’s not that the lines-men are a bad job … Like there needs to be a certain number of women in those head positions and be assigned to the head official positions and be asked. If they aren’t interested then that’s one thing, but take a look at why we aren’t getting, or why we aren’t getting them assigned to us.

There is a belief in the men's network that women are taking positions away from men officials.

Megan* said that:

… For me, there’s a couple officials here that I do not work well with because they don’t think females should be working male games…

75 Women experienced forms of resistance from men officials when some of the women were assigned to games in the men’s league. Power is demonstrated through social practices that perceive men as powerful and women as compliant, and therefore, positions and tasks are constructed to favour men (Ely & Padavic, 2007, p. 1131). When women were assigned to the referee positions the dynamics changed, resulting in resistance. Vanessa* explained that she never really faced anything different in a women's game when she was the referee and a man was her linesperson, but started to notice resistance in a men’s hockey game:

There have times been times that male officials are bummed that women are taking over what they think is their jobs. Like if a woman gets a good game and a woman gets the referee job. Like an example of that, there is a major midget female team and a midget AAA [men’s] team in my town and uh the only time there has been comments made is when I broke the barrier down getting down into the men’s side of things, because they were a little choked because they think that umm they think that I’m taking over their men’s games. Uh because we try to keep the women’s, the best we can, we try to get a full squad of women for those games, which means that we take that away almost completely away from the men. So then for us to go into the midget AAA boy’s games, they don’t really think it’s fair, and they might have a case with that. Like we keep them out of the women’s hockey but then for me to get better, the next step for me is to get into the midget AAA boys hockey um so it is a weird dynamic there for this.

As a follow-up question, I asked Vanessa* how many women’s games versus men’s game there are in the centre where she officiates. She explained that there are significantly more boys' and men’s games than girls' and women's games, especially at the higher level. Thus, the opportunity for men to officiate is still greater. The fear of women taking the job away from men is a result of tradition and the gendering of sport organizations. Debbie*, a veteran, now retired official, also commented:

I got a lot of disrespect, but over my years, I’ve heard so many different comments, and so many different things that would come my way and there were some male counterparts that thought I was taking their jobs.

76 In hockey, men assume power over women, and when that is challenged, there is criticism, ultimately resulting in further exclusion of women (Shaw & Frisby, 2006). Most sport organizations have established “norms socially accepted by the people and are so embedded within the institution of the organization that the thought of change cannot be fathomed” (Walker

& Sartore-Baldwin, 2013, p. 306). The idea of having women occupy the spaces traditionally occupied by men goes against the norm, thereby entitling some men to feel that their territory is being threatened, and trying to prevent women from entering.

The Hockey Canada Officiating Manual (2014) outlines the list of “qualities necessary to be a competent official" (p. 13). Within the document, there is reference to the Law of Return (p.

18):

There is a strange phenomenon that takes place and is important to mention under this quality. It is important for officials to want to do each and every game that they are assigned. If officials do not want to referee at a certain level, then they should refuse those games, but at the same time be prepared to accept the logical consequences of that decision. The problem is that far too often officials will agree to work a game and then by their appearance and actions tell all who watch that they are not happy about having to do that game. The reason could be anything from the fact that they may think that the rink is too dark, or the fans too noisy, to perhaps the most common reason, which would be that the game in question was below them, or inferior to the quality that they should expect at this point in their officiating career. What they fail to understand is the phenomenon called Law of return. If an official arrives to do a game and gives an impression of looking forward to working that game in that rink with everybody there, of being happy to be there, there is a general rule of return that seems to apply. Most often others will respond by saying and feeling that they are happy to have that official there to do the game as well. On the other hand, if an official arrives at a rink complaining about the level of hockey or the size of the rink, more often than not, before the night is out, everyone there is complaining as well. It is a rule that some officials find very difficult to learn. Officials who understand the Law of return can overcome some major weaknesses in other categories.

In other words, if an official turns down a game, or shows displeasure with their assignment, they may not return. For women, this can be detrimental to their careers. If they speak up, and say they deserve better or different games, they may face the repercussion of not

77 being able to return or, feel as though are forced to be silent. This promotes a ‘suck it up’ mentality, that is embedded in hypermasculinity. For the select women who have been able to progress, it was indicated that in order to succeed, one must go along with the governance, ‘buy- into’ the social capital of the ‘old boys’ club’ and be able to work every game requested.

4.3.5 Mentorship: All 12 participants believed that mentoring was a signification aspect of their growth as officials. Erin* said it is “just having that support” which was a common phrase for all the officials. Mentoring is a process that links an experienced individual with someone who may benefit from support and guidance. It can facilitate career development and expand opportunities for those (e.g., women and minority groups) who traditionally face the contingencies posed by organizational barriers (Gunn, 1995, p. 3). As noted previously, because of the size of the network and the presence of powerful individuals, men are able to accumulate higher levels of social capital in sport organizations. Women have limited access to social capital resources such as networks and mentors to enable opportunities for them (Walker & Bopp,

2010). The interviewees identified this as a significant constraint on their abilities to gain access to higher level games. Vanessa* said:

My male mentor has taught me all the skills to officiate and to do a good job officiating and he’s kind of gotten me the games he can get me, but I can’t really see a female mentor being able to push any harder in this ‘old boys club’ to get me into the boys' games you know … I don’t think they’d have much pull in the male’s games …

Thus, women mentors are considered to be less effective with regard to advancement; because of their lower level of social capital they do not have the ‘pull’ men mentors have. Vanessa* continued, claiming:

… I think having more females would be ideal. Like we need female mentors who will advocate for us and have the men who are in charge actually listen to them…

78 Most of the participants said they do not have a woman mentor, or have never had a woman mentor. Rubens and Halperin (1996) argue that mentoring has a particularly beneficial for women and minority groups in business and sport. Having a woman mentor for some would be more beneficial, as they share similar experiences and can connect more personally, as Amanda* and Stacy* both mentioned. Some of the women said it did not matter if the mentor was a man or a woman; they just needed someone to talk to, learn from and gain confidence. Teresa* shared her experience with her mentor:

He was the one I called when I problem, or if I wasn’t sure about a[n officiating] call and I would go home and be worried or have a bad game, I would just call him and talk about it and we would break it down and we would figure out what the mistake was that might have caused things to go south. He was always really super supportive in that way.

Gaining access to a supportive mentor adds a level of reassurance and education. Officials do not have coaches, so having a person to watch and provide feedback is the way that officials learn and progress.

Mentors can also assist in the advancement process if they attend games and conduct assessments for the official to be posted on their Hockey Canada profile. As Vanessa* noted:

… if your mentor is present, and constantly giving you feedback and giving you opportunities to take bigger games, then you’re going to go farther. You won’t go far if your mentor isn’t present, then you’re not getting those evaluations on your Hockey Canada profile, so on paper you’re not getting any better. So, on paper nobody knows who you are…

The presence of a mentor was considered to be an ongoing factor for advancement by many of the interviewed officials. For some it has been difficult to find a mentor who is present and able to give the extra time and effort involved in mentoring; often they are constrained by their own careers (work and hockey), their lives, and by other younger officials they mentor.

79 4.3.6 Scheduling and Constraints: Throughout the 12 interviews, it became evident that scheduling and availability is a key issue for women officials. Women are not able to make officiating ice hockey a full-time career at this time because of the restrictions and barriers outlined previously. The career path is not as defined, or as possible for women as it is for men.

Like most men officials, women have full-time jobs and commitments outside of hockey.

However, women typically have greater responsibility for their families. It is still assumed that, for most men's work, there is someone (a woman) available to manage family-related tasks and duties (Dodds, 2003). This section, and the following two sections, outline the data on scheduling and time constraints for women, which also represent career contingencies/ barriers limiting the possibility of advancement for women officials. As Vanessa* pointed out:

Male official who is my age or even a little younger, they have more of a career path in reffing. So, they can put their careers on hold for a couple years to see if the officiating is going to pan out. Well women don’t have that opportunity. There is less hockey for us to ref, definitely less money, umm there’s just fewer opportunities for us. So, a guy my age can put his career on hold and ref for a few years and maybe make it work or maybe not make it work, but a female doesn’t have the opportunity; the chances of them making it a career is so, so slim.

4.3.7 'Second Shift': The 'second shift' refers to women working a full-time job and then coming home in the evening and at weekends to perform domestic, reproductive and emotional labour in the form of domestic duties, child-care, and tending to the family (Hochschild &

Machung, 1989). For women hockey officials who work-full time, and/or have families, finding time for scheduled games is very difficult. For many women, there may be a work - family conflict (Dixon & Bruening, 2007). Officiating and coaching jobs include high demands, such as the expectation of spending many hours away from home. This absence from the home may contribute to significant work - family conflict for women in these positions (Dixon & Bruening,

80 2007). Stacy* talked about her challenges of the second-shift and the various pressures that she experiences as a mother, a full-time employee and an official:

… like women have families and have kids and it’s hard to be so involved in our sport because we always have the obligation to family or you know, it’s always that second shift…

Thompson (1999, p.3) suggested that “women’s responsibility for domestic labor and child care constrains their full participation in sport.” With women feeling obligated to care for their families and their other commitments, they do not have the flexibility to work as many games as possible. At every level of hockey below the elite level, the officiating system appears to be based on the mutual understanding that the more games a person works, the higher they will advance. For many women, this is not feasible. Jamie* shared:

… You know, like you can’t drop everything and go to the hockey rink suddenly because you have a kid or two kids and your husband or spouse is working, you know. Like minor hockey relies on people to be able to drop everything and go to the hockey rink to fill in a gap and that’s common at the higher levels too. So, you know, that change in flexibility I think contributes to women with kids not getting those types of phone calls…

The phone calls from assignors and RICs, Jamie* explained, are not made as frequently to women who have limited flexibility -- their names are skipped on the list once that person has turned down a game that is offered. Vanessa* agreed. She believes that once a woman turns down a game, they are blacklisted and the chance of getting a call for other or extra games is jeopardized. She said “you have to fight to get back onto the list to get calls.” Younger officials are more flexible than women who work a second-shift. The interviewed women all shared similar stories either about themselves or other women they know who have declined games or have limited availability, and the repercussions that followed. Jamie* observed:

81 … My personal observation from a few women that I know and seen what level they are at and not at or that they really haven’t been able to get back into it [after having their children], it seems that there is a challenge there. I think that the challenge is rooted in the fact that you don’t have the same amount of time anymore…

Time constraints and prior commitments are struggles that mothers, those engaged in elder care, and working women face in their attempts to advance in officiating, and many other careers.

Motherhood has been widely viewed as one of the reasons for inequalities in the workplace, especially in terms of pay and promotions to more senior and leadership positions (Eagly &

Carli, 2007; Gautier, 2002). Geographical location may also be recognized as a career contingency, one that acts as a determinant of which games are available for officiating. For women officials to be selected for higher level women’s games, they may need to travel in order to stay competitive and to advance. Stacy* said, “to advance further means I have to travel more and I kind of declined travelling; family and work, reality. That second shift life.” In other words, she is unable to advance further in officiating because of the circumstances of her life.

4.3.8 The 'Mommy Penalty': During discussions of motherhood, full-time employment and other constraints to scheduling, a few different officials mentioned a policy that legitimately constrains them from advancing. Debbie* first explained:

… Females who want to get married and have children, well they have a child and they want to come back, they might have left at a level III or IV and then gone for two years and now have to come back at a level II, and they are like well if I have to come back at a level II and fight my way all the way back up again, I don’t want to come back…

The policy reads as follows:

Level I or II officials who have taken a year or more off are free to return to the level they were currently certified at. Since the level III clinic is by invite only, any level III officials who misses a year of certification will have to return to a level II and apply for an upgrade. Any level IV, V or VI official who misses a year of certification will have to return to a level III and apply for an upgrade (Hockey Eastern Ontario, N.D.)

82 With this policy, women (and men) officials who advance to level III and above, are constrained to not take any time away, unless they willing to start at the bottom again. Since women are far more likely than men to take periods of time away from officiating, and since the career contingencies regarding advancement are so much more constraining for women officials, this policy might be termed “the mommy penalty” (Eagly & Carli, 2007). As Teresa* said “I had my kids and that really, really hamstrung my career.” This policy results in many women officials not returning after a year off. Jamie* mentioned what she has witnessed, and experienced herself:

I’m identifying an issue where female officials at the higher levels who have had children are not being welcomed in to the program the same way men or my childless peers are, and they are not coming back at all…

Women are more likely to stay involved if they feel supported by the organization (Bruening &

Dixon, 2008). Organizational practices that fail to support the balance of work and family obligations place greater burdens on women than men within those organizations, resulting in higher dropout rates (Bruening & Dixon, 2008). These structures place more stress on women; there are more expectations and consequences that must be considered if they choose between having children and advancing their career in a high pressure/low support environment (Dixon &

Saga, 2007). Similar to coaching, officiating has not been a profession that is very family- friendly given the scheduling of practices and games at nights and weekends, and the travel requirements (Bruening & Dixon, 2007). As a result, the current system continues to privilege men officials.

4.4 Disinvolvement / Reinvolvement

Prus' (1984) third and fourth career stages are combined here, because disinvolvement

(quitting) is sometimes accompanied by a desire to become re-involved. For example, women

83 who take time off to have children often do so with an intent to return to officiating when possible. As evidenced in the previous section, that intent may be thwarted by the 'second shift' and by the policy relating to the 'mommy trap', requiring officials to begin the higher level certification process all over again. In the two sections below, data concerning the process of quitting/dropping out/retiring are examined; and in the final section, the question of why so many women continue to work as officials the following season despite all of the frustrations, stalled careers, and abuse they experience. For those who continually think about leaving officiating, each new season becomes a re-involvement.

4.4.1 Quitting/ drop-out/ retirement: In the 2016-2017 season, Hockey Canada listed

2,362 women who were certified officials. Between the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 hockey season, 338 of those women officials left and were not replaced by incoming officials, a 14.3% decline bringing the total down to 2,024 (Hockey Canada Annual Report, 2017, 2018). From

2016-2017 season to 2017-2018 season, there was a loss of 119 men officials who were not replaced by incoming officials. Given that there were 29, 056 men officials in 2016-2017, the reduction to 28,937 in 2017-2018 season represents a 0.41% decline (Hockey Canada Annual

Report, 2017, 2018). Hockey Canada gave no reasons for this significant decline in the number of women officials; however, information provided by the participants in this study help to add context to these data. Of the 12 interviews, 10 of the participants shared their thoughts and feelings about quitting, dropping out, or retiring from ice hockey officiating. “It’s a tough road for a woman to travel," Vanessa* said, and most of the 10 think about leaving officiating very often. When asked “have you ever thought about quitting or not returning to be an official,” the answers included: absolutely; all the time; after every game; every month; this whole year; yes;

84 and 100%. Following those responses was generally a laugh and a sigh, then more explanation about why they feel this way. Erin* said:

… I’m getting tired of taking a little too much mental abuse and then this year just felt like I could have done more. I think I feel like I deserved more…

This appeared to be a reoccurring point. Many of the women felt that they were putting in so much and not getting enough out of it to make all the hardship worth it. The officials shared how much time, effort and years of weekends and evenings away from their families and social lives they had put into officiating, with limited advancement in the ranks of officiating. They are not advancing, they are not being assigned to games they believe they deserve, and they are being bypassed by younger men officials who are perceived to have more potential. Jamie* said that she does not think she will be returning next season. She pointed out that that her child plays a factor in her decision and, as noted previously, her time is limited:

I’m not being asked as frequently as I have in the past [to officiate good games], so that has really contributed to me feeling like well do I want to keep giving to hockey when I’m not getting what I want out of it? Like giving me what I need out of it considering the amount of work that I put into it … that situation definitely largely influenced my decision to decide that I’m pretty certain that I won’t be returning next year.

Vanessa* also said that she believes she will not be returning next season, for many reasons. She also explained about her time commitment and not gaining what she believes she deserves out of the program, after everything she has put into it. When I asked if she thought about quitting, she responded:

Oh yeah 100%, this whole year. Like I mentioned before, I black booked quite a bit of time off this year. I took off most of before Christmas. Came back only after Christmas after I called our RIC in [my province] and told him that I was quitting if I didn’t get bigger games. After I complained to him, I suddenly get hired into midget AAA, umm did provincials, did a bunch of play-off games, just got asked to do a big U18 tournament [out of province], but I, umm yeah, all this year, after every game I did, I said that was

85 going to be my last game or last weekend. At this point, I’m not sure if I’m going to card again next year.

Vanessa's* ultimatum to the RIC worked; he assigned her to games she believed she deserved.

This is another example how sport is 'contested terrain' -- the power struggle here is between the dominant group, in this case men officials, who work diligently to maintain the current power structure, and the subordinate group, the women officials, who try to challenge the power structure (Birrell & McDonald, 2000). Vanessa* later explained that if she had not called the

RIC and advocated for herself, she would not have been assigned to the higher-level games and tournaments, and would have left the program. The power dynamic often serves to disadvantage women who may be hesitant to request better treatment from their male supervisor. Vanessa* noted that not every woman referee, especially if they are younger and newer to the program, would be comfortable advocating for herself to the men in control. By not advocating for themselves, women could be taken advantage of, thus reaffirming masculine hegemony. This, in turn, creates an environment that “represses resistance and oppresses diversity” (Norman, 2011, p. 11). Some previous literature examining officials dropping out did not take gender into account; they primarily referenced psychological and social factors, relating to dropping out.

This study focused on experiences, and different pressures women officials face which result in them dropping out.

4.5 'For the love of the game'

Although many of participants shared their feelings and thoughts about quitting, only two said they do not plan to return next season, and two officials said they never thought about quitting. The remaining eight officials regularly thought about leaving; however, they continue to work game after game, season after season. Following their initial remark on quitting, a laugh

86 and a sigh was followed by an admission that they plan to continue officiating. Stacy* explained that she would simply miss the game too much:

I’d miss being on the ice, I’d miss judging, I’d miss trying to get better. Like yeah, it’s a video game that’s real life, hahaha! It’s my further advancement and understanding of the game. And yeah, getting to know the community. I’d miss the parents, the coaches, the kids. So, I’d miss the sport. I have to come back.

Many of the women shared similar comments. Despite the challenges, harassment and discrimination the women all experienced throughout their careers, they returned every year, knowing exactly what they are signing up for. There is little research exploring why individuals, women and men, are willing to continue to work as officials despite these negative experiences.

Livingston and Forbes (2016) studied factors underpinning retention rates for hockey officials.

They found that one of the most prevalent reasons officials give for remaining in the sport and continuing to officiate games was a cliché: for the love of the game (Livingston & Forbes, 2016).

They did not attempt to explain why this explanation is so prevalent, or why their love of the game would not encourage them to work to change all of the negative experiences they had.

Lisa*, was one of the officials who said she never thought about quitting:

...at some point I will retire, but have I thought about quitting. Like I give up? No. never. No and that’s because you need someone to talk you off the ledge and say hey, yeah that was a horrible game umm but no. And I think this comes from having people around me to talk to. Like do I have bad days at work? And I don’t ever come home and say “I’m quitting”

Lisa's* strong support system and social network helps her to keep things in perspective, and this may be an important recommendation to help more women to enter and remain in the officiating ranks.

87 4.6 Conclusion

To conclude, this chapter explored some of the contingencies, especially barriers and challenges, faced by women officials trying maintain and advance in their hockey officiating careers. Employing Prus' career contingencies model, I first explored the pre-officiating experiences of women officials, followed by an examination of their continuity -- the challenges and limitations to advancing in their careers. The chapter ends with an examination quitting/ dropping-out or retirement of women officials, and a preliminary attempt to question why officials continue their work despite the harassment and abuse they experience.

88 Chapter Five: Experiences

5.0 Introduction

Ice hockey officiating was an important activity in the lives of the 12 women interviewed. Officiating provided the participants in this study with many experiences, both negative and positive, over the years they have been involved. The research results presented in this chapter provide an overview of their game specific experiences: (1) continuing from the question in the previous chapter, about why women officials continue to work despite the many negative experiences, this section begins with more of their shared stories of what they enjoy about officiating; (2) continuing with game specific experiences, this section explores the officials' pregame experiences, also noting the women's views about appearance and female embodiment; (3) the third section outlines their experiences during games, exploring their interactions with the other participants -- men colleagues, spectators, coaches and players; and

(4) the fourth section shows how the data lead to a tentative conclusion that ice hockey is, in

Canada, one of the last bastions of hypermasculine culture, continually reproduced.

5.1 Enjoyment

At the beginning of each interview, I asked the officials what they enjoy most about their work. Many of the officials sounded enthused to share their answers about why they officiate.

Their responses included aspects such as: friendship, meeting new people, travel, exercise, competition, money, staying involved, and ‘giving back’ to the sport. Vanessa* said:

I just wanted to get back into the game. I missed being in elite sport and I wanted to be able to train again and stay in shape and that. I wanted to work towards something, the challenge, and to give back to the game. Just in terms of, of making sure that other kids and girls have sport, and to have the sport we need officials, so I think mostly I missed being involved in elite sport.

89 Many women, as previously mentioned, transitioned into officiating after their playing careers.

Officiating offers a new element of the sport, and for some “having a different side of the game and appreciating a different side of the game" (Megan*) provides an element of challenge and competitiveness that they miss. The participants mentioned travel, new adventures and friendship as important reasons for their continuation in the game. Jamie* was excited to share her experiences:

I’ve got some really cool experiences. Like when the Olympics were in Vancouver, I got to officiate a pre-Olympic exhibition game, it was like China and Sweden and like no one spoke English. It was the coolest thing ever to see people communicating and like just through gestures and screaming and stuff like that. You know, there are so many cool things I’ve been exposed too, and I think that’s what keeps you going. What’s the next adventure going to be? Like where am I going to end up? Who am I going to meet? You know? Some of my closest friends are people I met through officiating and they live across the province and I see them like once a year but I’ve met some quality people.

Many of the officials reminisced about the first game they ever officiated. Lisa* Said:

I remember my first game in 2004 and I remember the first moment I stepped on the ice. I loved it from the moment I stepped on the ice. There is nothing about officiating I don’t like.

More than half of the participants explained how much they love officiating, and the sense of purpose it has provided. These statements are particularly interesting because the women also shared many stories about their experiences of discrimination and sexism, yet they

“love officiating" (Stay*). This idea is developed further as it becomes the foundation for the chapter. Vanessa* concluded her interview by sharing that she is not likely to return to officiating next season due to the overt misogyny that she believes is embedded in the career.

However, she claimed that she “loves officiating and if it weren’t for the politics and bullshit,

[she] would continue as long as [she] can.” Despite the systemic barriers to advancement, and

90 the sexist comments, actions and behaviours they experienced, the women in this study all expressed their love of the game.

5.2 Game Experiences

5.2.1 Before the game: According to the Hockey Canada Officiating Manual (2014), officials should arrive at the rink at least thirty minutes prior to the scheduled game time (p. 26).

Each league, depending on the calibre of hockey, has varying rules about the officials' start time.

Regardless, officials are at the arena in preparation for the game prior to puck-drop. Preparation includes warming up, stretching and speaking with the other officials. During those conversations they get to the know the other officials, and work through expectations and positioning. In addition to this, the participants mentioned the importance of appearance, and the challenges women face with regard to female embodiment.

5.2.2 Appearance: As noted, being early for the game, preparing, and collaborating are all aspects of the official’s duties. In conjunction with those, the Hockey Canada Officiating Manual

(2014) outlines the expectations regarding the appearance of an official (p.16)

The appearance of officials when they arrive at the rink is significant. All officials must take every opportunity to look like they are prepared and that they take officiating seriously. The objective is to look professional.

The appearance of officials when they step onto the ice is the first impression they will make on all who see them. Certainly, this is an important consideration. How they dress and the condition of their equipment make a very strong statement to players, coaches and spectators. Young officials are unlikely to have all the equipment, but they can make sure that when they go onto the ice they look crisp and clean.

Officials must arrive to the arena in professional attire. This usually means a pair of dress pants and a collared shirt. For women, this may also include make-up, the expectations for looking professional being different for men than for women. However, under the scrutiny of the crowd,

91 spectators may criticize women officials for wearing make-up on the ice. During one game that I observed, a man spectator was yelling at a woman linesperson about her eyeliner. He screamed:

That was offside, but you can’t see because your eyeliner is too thick. This isn’t a fashion show, sweetie, it’s a hockey game.

The spectator who yelled was surrounded by other men, who all laughed and nodded, in encouragement. The women spectators near him also smiled and laughed.

Sportswomen face an intriguing paradox, whereby in the western world there is an emphasis on a feminine body that is ideal and conforms to the current societal norms for a woman’s body, but also must meet the societal norms of the stereotypical ‘athletic body’ (i.e., lean, muscular) (Krane, Choi, Baird, Aimar & Kauer 2004). This paradox is most evident when the wider culture and sport culture have different expectations; women cannot meet both sets of expectations at the same time, in this case in the eyes of men spectators. The policy for officials to look professional, crisp and clean is gendered in that it was written by men specifically for men officials; it does not take into account different societal norms for women’s professional appearance.

In another example, women often have longer hair then men. To look crisp, clean and professional there are different expectations for women here as well. Hockey helmets do not accommodate longer hair; therefore, for women who have longer hair, it is visible below the back of their helmets. Most women officials who have longer hair, wear it low, tied back with an elastic, or in a braid to keep it out of the way. During the same observation as above, the spectator who made comments about eyeliner also targeted the official's long blonde ponytail that trailed behind her helmet. He repeatedly referred to her as blondie. The man yelled several times “come on blondie”, “skate blondie” and “make a call, blondie”. This happened over two consecutive games, by the same spectator, as the official worked both of the games scheduled

92 that weekend. Needless to say, her men colleagues did not receive any comments referencing their appearance.

Amanda* also described a 'hair experience':

This one time, my hair was in a braid and I was standing with my back to the bench as I was watching the line and I heard the guys [on the bench] betting each other to pull my hair. During the intermission in the dressing room, I tucked my hair into my helmet. Haha this is something I shouldn’t have to do.

She shared that that is the reality of being a woman in this particular sporting space; hiding her physical body to avoid infantile harassment from men. As women are trying to occupy male- dominated spaces in sport, they feel obliged to hide and reshape their physical bodies in order to fit more easily into men’s world.

For example, Sarah Thomas, the first and only (at the time of writing) woman on-field official to work a play-off game in the National Football League (NFL), also had to navigate a system that was not made for her. Thomas had to negotiate the way her uniform fitted, as the

NFL only made them for men. She also felt that it was necessary to keep her hair covered with a hat, to moderate the amount of makeup she wears, and to wrap her breasts in order to appear less feminine (McCalmont, 2015). Thus, Thomas felt that she had to hide her physical body in order to fit into the men’s sporting world and be taken seriously as a fellow official. This in itself is an aspect of gender and officiating that deserves further research. Women ice hockey officials have shared similar stories, creating a commonality that women officials in different sports feel constrained to hide their bodies in order to appear less 'feminine', to fit in and be taken seriously.

Jacqueline* said:

I’m here to do my job. Umm because that’s the first thing they see; the pony-tail out the back and that’s what they always judge me on.

93 She believed that her pony-tail, as a marker of femininity, resulted in men coaches, players and spectators being prejudiced against her. Women ice hockey officials feel pre-judged on the basis of their feminine bodies.

All of the women interviewed mentioned the differences between their body and a man’s body, particularly when they are officiating in boys' and men's hockey. Size is an argument often used against women ice hockey officials -- their bodies are judged not to be big enough or strong enough to break up the fights in men’s hockey. Vanessa* spoke about the doubts that the men express when they see a woman lines-person:

Your job is to break up scrums and we are smaller, so men likely doubt us when they see us, when our job is to break up like two 200lbs kids, like they are wrestling and they are likely thinking how are these women going to break them up?

Women officials are not specifically taught how to address those situations, as Jacqueline* suggested:

like, even breaking up fights, I am not a huge person, I can’t just go in there and put my body in between, I have to do it with a tactic. I can’t just run in there. And um I think they haven’t really prepared women [officials] to do those kinds of things.

Appropriate education and training for women to navigate these spaces would better prepare them, and potentially begin to ease the doubts that are expressed about them.

The Hockey Canada Officiating Manual (2014) has a major section on the presence of an official (p. 16):

Presence means, does the official look the part and carry themselves in a professional manner?

• Can the official take charge in a difficult situation? • Does the official command respect through his actions and/or mannerisms? • For some officials, their physical size gives them an immediate presence on the ice.

94 • For others, the way they handle and present themselves in all situations during the game will reflect their ability to display their presence.

First, no attempt has been made to remove the gendered language in the second bullet point.

Second, physical size is considered as an immediate form of presence for officials, something that many women and smaller men do not have. All the participants considered their size, being physically smaller, as a negative that restricted them from advancing through the most available route in boys' and men's hockey.

Given the importance of presence to Hockey Canada, Erin* argued that her presence and calm demeanor is sometimes not enough. Not only is her physical stature smaller, her voice and tone are dismissed as not authoritative:

Sometimes I do have to be more aggressive with males because my voice just doesn’t carry. It doesn’t sound authoritative to them in their minds…

Women officials have to be strategic and present in all interactions before, during and after the game in order to be taken seriously by the other stakeholders. Jacqueline* shared a similar experience:

All of my calls, like offside calls, icing calls, all of them were questioned. I have people up in the stands yelling like “what is she doing out there?” “that’s bullshit” and blah blah blah. But my partner would make a call and no problem. Right, like he’s this huge, tall, white guy right, so it’s just like he’s expected, but I’m out there, I’m tiny next to all these players and I get no respect. Umm so I find when I’m officiating girls, I get respect. But when I’m officiating boys, even if that’s peewee, it goes basically out the window, and I basically have to pretend that I’m this macho person out there, and kind of have to hide my personality, just to even get a response out of some people. Umm and I want to be who I am out there, and I want to be umm like the quiet leader that I like to be, but unfortunately, I have to retaliate to their aggressiveness with aggressiveness and that’s not really what I want to do.

Even then, they are seemingly missing presence in the manner that Hockey Canada emphasises.

Many of the participants face challenges taking control because men (fellow officials, players, coaches and spectators) devalue, fail to listen, and disregard their capabilities. [It should be noted

95 that many male officials (boys and men) also lack presence, but they may drop out of officiating or remain at lower levels of the game. Drop-out rates have been recorded at 30% in Canada -- approximately 10,000 officials/year (i.e., more than the total number of women officials)

(https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/abuse-driving-minor-hockey-refs-away-1.262797).]

Some women, as noted in the previous chapter, shared experiences of being isolated from the spaces of teaching and education, not being allowed to dress in the same changeroom as their men colleagues. Lisa* talked about men officials that she has worked with who set the tone before the game:

[Some men officials] totally ignore you. Umm male referee[s], in the high-performance program and their lines[people] because they are such a tight knit group, they will ignore you like what are you? You are just lining my game, kind of thing…

She explained that when she is linesperson and a man is the referee, certain men in this position do not speak or associate with the women lines-people, setting a tone that seems to imply that she works for him. Only a few participants shared experiences of isolation prior to the game.

5.3 During the Game

During a game, women officials interact with various actors in the setting: other officials, often men (especially as referees), spectators, coaches and players. Those interactions are frequently characterized by gender.

5.3.1 Men Colleagues: As noted, women officials face initial and negative pre-judgments based on their bodies and appearance, rather than on Hockey Canada's expectations regarding their overall ability to ensure that the game is played in a safe and fair manner (Hockey Canada

Officiating Manual, 2014). All of the participating officials shared stories about times they received comments that were not welcomed and not fair, leaving them feeling unsafe. Many of these comments were related to their gender, but women officials also pointed out that they

96 receive just as much harassment as their male colleagues. Disturbingly, they attributed this to 'the nature of the sport'.

With regard to the sexist comments, the participants said they are “immune to it now,” going throughout the game with “ear muffs on” because they cannot let it bother them.

Jacqueline's* comments were typical as she talked about the need for a tough skin:

I have to brush it off, like, I’ve had to give one gross misconduct before and like all the other times and I’ll be lining and I’ll get called something and tell my ref and he’ll just be like “oh well you know, toughen up,” or whatever and I’m like, ugh, I’m sorry, I’m sure if you were called those names there would have been a problem.

Jacqueline* further explained that when the man referee dismisses her claim of harassment she is powerless because, technically, a linesperson cannot make penalty calls without discussing it with the referee. If the referee does not support her, then the penalty call is not made. This further marks the power dynamic between the man referee and woman lines-person. Jacqueline* finished the topic by stating:

You get used to the comments after a while. I think that the assumption when I go out to do a men’s game that people think “she won’t be able to do this,” “why do we have a girl doing this game?” that type of thing. Always some type of bias.

Getting used to hearing sexist and demeaning comments appears to be part of the women’s job, and something they have to tolerate if they want to continue officiating.

Other participants shared experiences of patronizing behaviour. For example, Teresa* talked about the time a man referee, who was half her age, explained the offside rule to her:

[the man referee] works in the WHL, he’s like 19 hahaha and a little arrogant to be honest but, I’m just still trying to get back into things [after taking time off to have two children], and he was talking to everyone about how good he is. So I’m 40 and I don’t intimidate easy, but at this time I’m standing here, and I’m doing a shit job and I’m still reeling from how badly I fucked up my very first call in my first game back, and I got out and missed a couple of calls, and after that, the WHL official, who is 19 haha turns to me and says “you know, when its off side, their skates have to be you know….” He’s telling me where their skates have to be. He mansplained offside to me. Like I KNOW THAT! I just fucked up okay, I just didn’t put my arm up when I should have…

97

Solnit (2008) defines mansplaining as when a man assumes that he needs to explain something to a woman since, because she is a woman, she cannot possibly know more about it than he does. In this case, Teresa* had been officiating for as long as the referee had been alive. This incident, during her first game back after having her child, embarrassed her, leading to her think that she should retire for good. Ideally men referees would be supportive and not condescending because the role that men play is crucial in women’s participation as officials. Jacqueline* talked about an encounter with a man referee who told her she did not belong out there:

…male referee was like “well you don’t play men’s hockey so you don’t know what you’re talking about.” And then I’m like “oh okay, sorry,” and the thing is, is that I wish I could stand up to them and be like “you know what, no, I’ve read the same rule book” but I’m always just like “yup I’m sorry. you’re right” you know, kind of that way…

Men officials explaining the rules of the game to women officials, or dismissing a woman as not understanding the rules of game, is not uncommon because many of the participants shared similar stories. Women officials in boys' and men's hockey are at a further disadvantage because the hockey they experienced as players is different than boys' and men’s hockey in terms of the permitted level of physicality [i.e., no checking in women's hockey]. And while not all men officials have played at an elite level of men's hockey, many officials, together with players, coaches and spectators (who may not have played at an elite level of men's hockey) readily comment on what they consider to be women’s inability to officiate a game they presumably never played. Erin* said:

Something that happens somewhat regularly is like a bigger hit or more dangerous hit and the comments that come after are usually “hitting is allowed in this game, didn’t you know that?”

98 Participants described the experience of being talked down to by men, sometimes men in the same positions as them. Lisa* referred to this as “the big swinging dick thing.” It is about power and authority, an I’ll show you mentality, she explained.

Men officials are more likely to gain positions of power and leadership, putting them in a position to determine the behaviours and actions of others, including women. Women officials frequently mentioned the determining role that men colleagues have on their careers. And while some of the women did report that they have not really had any difficulties with their men colleagues, the data here suggest that this might be the exception rather than the rule.

5.3.2 Spectators: Officials regularly receive negative feedback from spectators with regard to calls they make, or do not make, and their ability to keep up with the play (Guillén &

Feltz, 2011). During all of the games that were observed, spectators played an active role in harassing officials. I heard generic comments such as “come on ref”, “you suck ref”, “I’m blind,

I’m deaf, I wanna be a ref,” “blow the fucking whistle,” and so on. These comments generally always came from a particular type of person -- white, middle-aged men, wearing a ball cap with the logo of one of the teams. The comments were made throughout the game, always criticizing the officiating team. The interviewed officials all shared the view that the comments from the spectators are a part of the game. They all said they do not even hear them anymore because it happens so often. Debbie* explained that the generic comments are uncalled for, but it is something that has routinely been tolerated in spectator team sports. However, it is when those comments turn sexist that they begin to 'hear them', and that it hurts:

It’s just that when we are there, we are easy targets I think. Like we get yelled that we should be back in the kitchen, we should be back in the house, you know, like I should be doing the dishes, this isn’t ringette. It’s when they bring it personally towards you, if they just want to call me a bleep-bleep because you don’t like the call I made, leave it there, but when you want to bring the gender part into, that’s when it hurts as an official. You don’t need to bring the gender card into it. I’m an official, I skate the game and I try to do

99 the best I can for you out there. But when you want to insult me personally, that’s when it hurts the most. And that’s what makes most officials walk off the ice and not come back.

The participants gave examples of the type of things they have heard being yelled at them during games. Jaqueline* said:

I’ve been called every name in the book for sure… I’ve been called a dyke, I’ve been called a bitch, a cunt, I’ve been told I shouldn’t be out there, what is she doing out there? I’ve been spat on. So, like, my three years of officiating I’ve heard some things…

I asked Jaqueline* if she would tell me about the spitting incident:

I put the kid in the box and so life goes on, the game resumes. I start skating and the stands at the arena, well it’s like people can stand over the ice. And I’m skating then I stop at the red line and I hear the *snorting sound and spitting sound* and I’m like ‘oh my gosh’ and I could feel it drop on my shoulder. And I look up and there are a bunch of men standing there, so I can’t pick out which one did it. They are looking at me and laughing. And I’m like ‘oh my gosh’ I can’t clear the stands because there’s no security, there’s nothing. I can’t do anything. I just had to leave it because I wasn’t going to wipe it off with my hand, that’s disgusting. Like gross. So, I was just ‘oh my gosh’. I just had to turn around and had to let it slide. I was 17, my first year reffing.

Jaqueline* felt powerless in that moment. She had no jurisdiction to act and police the situation, because she was a 17 year-year-old woman official in a male-dominated space. Officials may appear to have power, and be in positions of power on the ice controlling the behaviours and actions of those involved. However, several of the participants pointed out that as linespersons they are in fact quite powerless. If incidents occur that violate the rules, or are not really covered by the rules, if the male referee does not support the lines-people, that serves to affirm their lack of power.

Amanda* reported that she constantly hears comments like “go ref some effing girl’s hockey.” She said that those comments come from men players, coaches, and always the fans.

She also mentioned that it was common to hear comments after she makes a call that a male spectator disagrees with suggesting that “she must be on her period because of the calls she’s

100 making.” Ochoa (2019) suggests that this references women as “hysterical,” that a perceived lack of competence or demeanor is tied to their reproductive organs. This is presumably in contrast to men who, rather than being led by their reproductive organs (!), are seemingly more rational and reliable. If a woman official makes a call that a man disagrees with, it must be because she is moody and irrational, and therefore, must be menstruating.

The majority of officials, men and women, including the ones interviewed for this study, report that they have been called “every name in the book” while officiating. During the game observations, I frequently heard gender specific comments from men spectators. At one women's game a group of men, all in matching university sport team’s sweatshirts, shouted “move bitch, get outta the way” to the women officials whenever the puck was near them. This continued loudly throughout the entire game. They also made comments about an official’s appearance being “hot.” During the course of another game, a man referred to the woman referee as “baby” and “Barbie.” He would yell, “are you gunna call that, baby?” or “don’t fall, Barbie”. This spectator would yell the comment, shake his head, often toss his hands into the air, laugh and look around him as if waiting for acknowledgment, which he often got from the other men standing around him. Another man referred to the woman referee as a “chick,” constantly shouting “what is this chick doing?” or “this chick can’t keep up,” as a comment on her physical abilities. Although I never heard a spectator call a woman official a ‘bitch’, this was the term most commonly mentioned in the interviews. Jamie* recalled one reoccurring instance with a man spectator:

He would come to all the games and just scream at me haha and eventually it became very obvious that he didn’t like women officials in the organization and I think he was up there calling us bitches or something…

101 Stacy*, Lisa* and others also mentioned they have been called a ‘bitch’ many times throughout their careers. And while men and women officials are similarly harassed about their eyesight or ability, there is no real parallel to the sexist comments spectators direct towards women officials.

Several of the participating officials mentioned comments they heard when a woman was the referee. These comments were always along the lines of “go back to women’s hockey:”

…It’s the types of comments that are made towards women that are different. Like when a man referees a women’s game no one ever tells them to go back to a men’s game. That doesn’t happen. But I get that. They are never going to make a comment about his emotions or his biological functions… (Amanda*).

The double standard and social norms that allow women to be treated differently and apparently with less respect than men in this field are apparent after speaking with the participants. Megan* laughed as she explained a recent comment she heard from man in the stands during an atom hockey game:

A man in the stands was shouting “we want boy refs doing the boys games. We don’t need a female distracting them;” like these boys are 10. Like they won’t be distracted by men. Ugh for me it was almost funnier than anything else…

The 10-year-old boy hockey players are more than likely taught by women teachers every day in primary school, thus making the concerns of this spectator an unlikely projection of his own distraction, or a proxy for his belief that there is no place for women in boys' and men's hockey.

This view is reflected in rape culture, where blame is shifted from boys and men, who cannot control themselves, to women who are simply there. The fact that a woman official, performing the same job as a man official, is potentially seen as a sexual distraction to boy hockey players is similar to a woman being harassed or assaulted for wearing a short skirt.

The results indicate that spectators clearly contribute to gender discrimination and the harassment of women officials. As noted, all officials are harassed and verbally abused by sport

102 spectators; however, women officials experience an amplified level of mistreatment when the harassment and abuse focuses on their gender.

5.3.3 Coaches: During the interviews, the officials often commented on the effect that coaches have on the actions and demeanour of their players. Several officials suggested that if a coach is respectful and calm, the athletes tend to mirror that behaviour. If a coach is disrespectful and rude, the athletes reflect that behaviour. During the game observations, I did not witness many interactions between officials and coaches. The Hockey Canada Officiating Manual (2014) states:

As a result of Hockey Canada’s focus on fair play and improved communication between officials, coaches and players, the following process has been implemented:

In all games, the officials shall approach each bench and meet the Coaches. This process should not take more than 15 seconds and will be completed prior to the game, at the end of the pre-game warm-up. Officials are also encouraged to shake hands with the Captains where possible. (p. 21)

As a result of this policy, coaches and officials simply shake hands at the beginning and end of each game. For some of the games I observed, these would be the only interactions the officials had with the coaches. In some games, if the coach needed to speak with the official they would put their hand in the air and call the official over to the bench. In these cases, the referee and one lines-person approached the bench together. Once the official spoke with one team's coach, they always followed by speaking with the other team's coach. In seven of the games observed, a woman head coach addressed both men and women officials at ice level, speaking to an official eye-to-eye. In five of the games, a man head coach placed his leg on the lower bench, looking down on the women officials on the ice. In three of the games, the man head coach came to ice level to speak to the male official. It is difficult to think of a more overt demonstration of power

103 differences between a man coach and a woman official. When the participating officials were asked to share their experiences dealing with coaches, Jacqueline* said:

So generally, what will happen with these men coaches, I find that they like to stand up over top of us, or place the one leg on the bench and kind of like look over you. Um, but what I’ve been taught is to ask them to come down and if they refuse to come down then I don’t talk to them and I skate away. Just because that is such a primal and physical power dynamic of having someone over you, so that kind of just heightens the already unbalanced power dynamics that occur. So, what I’ve always been taught and what I always do is to ask them to come down and if they don’t come down, I say they don’t want to talk and I always get the “what are you doing? You need to talk to me” and I’m like no, you’re good, I don’t need to talk to you.” And that usually starts a pretty explosive game after that with the coach because they feel as though I’m a bitch and I’m not giving them the respect they deserve, while they aren’t giving me the respect that I deserve.

Similarly, Megan* shared:

…He was standing up on the higher bench and was physically looking down at me. I get that all the time. I’ve noticed from even watching other games that when a coach is going to talk to a male official, they step down from the bench and politely wave to make the official go over. When a coach wants to talk to me he, he will step up on the bench and wave his arms and yell things like “that was a ridiculous call, get over here I want to talk to you” in the most obnoxious way possible.

These two officials referenced the exact point I had observed during the games. Officials are taught to ask coaches to step down to ice-level in order to talk, specifically to avoid the appearance that they are talking down to officials. It was evident that not all men coaches listen to the request when it is made by women officials, and that men coaches are more likely to play these power games with women officials.

Some of the participating officials mentioned that, in general, they have worked with some very good coaches -- men and women -- and have not experienced any differences in the behaviour of men coaches toward women officials. Jacqueline* described her experiences, both positive and negative, with men coaches:

104 Umm there was one incident where there was a coach on the winning team in a game and he had come up to me after the game. I was in the middle [referee] and I had 2 male linesmen, and he had come up to me and told me that the game was disgraceful and I had to learn to ref better and I was ridiculous and just went on and on and please excuse my language here, but I’m quoting him, he said “you’re a bitch, you need to learn how to ref better” and I’m like okay sir, I’m going to ask you to leave now. So, he turned around and walked out and then turned around at the middle of the ice and yelled, I’m not sure if it was as loud as he can, but loud enough for everyone in the rink and he yelled “f*ck you;” so I kind of had a range of both good and bad experiences.

In those cases, the referee is able to assign a direct misconduct, because such abusive behaviour by coaches toward officials is against the rules, and is not tolerated by Hockey Canada. When the spectators abuse officials, there is not a lot the officials can do because spectator behaviour is not covered under the rules of the game, whereas abusive behaviour by coaches is a breach of the rules and therefore under the purview of the referee.

Megan* described times after a game when she felt scared as the coach approached her:

Half the time male coaches come up to me after the game, especially on the losing side; I’m like scared because I’m like what are they going to say? Are they going to yell at me?

Jacqueline* recalled a time when a male coach was particularly aggressive toward her and her female colleague after a game. The coach, who was also a player's father, did not agree with the outcome of the game and took his feelings out on the officials by yelling and screaming at them.

Following the game, the officials were in the changeroom and before they left the room,

Jaqueline* called her father, who was in the arena watching the game, and asked him to escort her and her woman colleague out of the arena. Jaqueline* remembered that the coach was waiting outside the change room for the officials; however, he was there to apologize and admitted that his behaviour was inappropriate. The officials told him that he would still receive a game misconduct and would be reported to the league, but she said they thanked him for his apology.

105 This story was particularly interesting because the two women were officiating an atom girl’s hockey game, and a male (losing) coach had berated women officials. Men are often in positions of leadership in girls' and women's hockey; it is unfortunate that so many of them do not take their responsibility to their girl/women players seriously, modelling verbally abusive and threatening behaviour, treating women in positions of leadership with so little respect. The officials were afraid to leave on their own because they were not sure what the ‘dad’ coach would do.

Although a number of the participating officials claimed they had not experienced any inappropriate behaviour by coaches, others shared cases of abusive behaviour toward them -- behaviour that should not be tolerated. The relational dynamics between some male coaches and women officials further helps to diminish women's positive experiences and limit their advancement in hockey.

5.3.4 Players: The Hockey Canada Officiating Manual (2014) explains the importance of building rapport and developing good communications with coaches and players (p.19):

Officials who can establish good rapport with players and coaches give themselves a very decided edge in difficult situations or in situations that require the tough sell. An official who can display an openness, a friendly attitude and a good sense of humour has a definite advantage. There have been a few officials who have emerged at the highest levels who have used this quality as their greatest strength. It cannot be ignored. It does not happen by accident. It is very carefully orchestrated by good officials.

It is important to note that in trying to establish rapport, officials must at all times be professional. However, they may want the players and coaches to know that officials can laugh when it is appropriate, even when the joke is on them. They can appreciate a pretty play, a nice goal or a good save. It takes them beyond the stripes and the whistle into being people. However, through it all they must always be viewed as professionals who are impartial and non-partisan.

Officials are expected to comply with these guidelines, and for women officials, rapport building can serve many purposes. A number of the officials felt that such rapport was a way to build trust

106 with players and coaches, encouraging the view that they (women officials) are able to officiate a game appropriately and efficiently. It also means that they can, at times, ‘act like one of the guys’ if they can joke, banter and laugh with the young men players. When I asked the officials about their experiences with players, they all had a number of stories. The majority of their stories concerned boys' and men’s games, and they pointed out the differences, in their experience, between them and officiating girls' and women's games:

… There is something different about the interactions with the guys. I found women hockey players for the most part, can very quiet sharp to me. And I don’t think it’s because I’m being bitchy to them, I’m just doing my thing and stay away from them, but sometimes I find that they can be quite sharp. And I think it’s because they have so much more to prove, you know. They have to work so much harder than their male counterparts and I think maybe that’s part of it. They can’t be seen as easy going with the ref or you know, or having laugh. Whereas the boys are already at that level, they aren’t going to be sent down and can be seen interacting with the referee and that reflects leadership and all these positive skills, where you know women are always having to be on top of everything to make sure they are seen and taken as professionals and working really hard and you know, I think the expectation is a little different for them.

Young women athletes have to maintain a different demeanour than young men because they are subject to different societal norms. Women learn that, in order to be taken seriously, especially in male-dominated areas, they must be composed and professional at all times. Women often face a double bind; if a woman is seen to be 'too friendly', she can be rejected for seeming too

'feminine' (weak, uncertain or ineffectual) and insufficiently masculine (not tough or competent enough). Women leaders thus face a delicate balancing act as they try to avoid seeming too masculine or too feminine. If they are too soft, they may be referred to as a bimbo; if they are too hard, they may be referred to as a bitch. Women learn from a young age not to let their guard down. Young men are able to joke, laugh and not be as serious simply because they do not have to. In most cases they are already taken seriously and have less to prove; a career path may already be there for them.

107 The women officials in these male-dominated spaces shared stories of being flirted with by young men players. Some 10 of the 12 officials interviewed could recall times where they were asked out, sexualized, flirted with and hit on. Vanessa* mentioned that she recently officiated at a high-level men’s game and after the game an athlete approached her. The young man handed her his name, phone number and hotel room number where he was staying in the city. Amanda* told me that she has been asked out on a date in the middle of a game, making it very uncomfortable for her. A number of the women shared similar experiences, usually laughing it off. Teresa* explained that young men would hit on her, with the “hope that it would buy them a favour during the game.” Women officials tolerate this flirting and other heteronormative behaviours because there is nothing they can do to prevent it. Megan* said:

The boys on the team were like hitting on me, you know. And for me, I can’t write that up, because they weren’t crossing a line, they were just flirting, but I wasn’t flirting back; but I didn’t know what to do because they weren’t saying anything to the point where I could report them and suspend them, it was just harmless little things that made me uncomfortable. Like I was just trying to do my job and they were trying to do something else hahaha…

There is nothing in the rule book about flirting, and officiating courses do not teach how to deal with it.

As noted previously, the courses are targeted to men, and although it is less likely that women players will flirt with men officials, the connotations of that situation are quite different, not as serious and far less likely to be raised as an issue in an officiating course. With the emphasis on building rapport and communication between players and officials, it became evident that women officials must also be cognisant of the distinction between flirting and friendliness. This issue is not new to women: those who appear to be 'too friendly' may find that that is mistaken for flirting; those who do not appear to be friendly may find that they are classified as cold or a bitch (Henningsen, 2004).

108 Women officials must maintain a level of professionalism, but also be aware of their positionality as a woman in the male-dominated space. Megan* said:

For me, it’s like walking a very fine line between not flirting back and having to completely shut them down. I’ve experienced that before. Like when female officials completely shut the men down, they kind of almost get mad and then they take it out in the game on the other players and everything goes crazy. That’s where I’ve noticed it…

A little later, Megan* said:

It’s different umm there are times that it is harmless and I can tell everybody is joking. But then there are times I’ve been told by my supervisors to not like flirt with them but like to have to have a good rapport with teams, so if coaches or teams start to go crazy or whatever I can talk them down, so that way I haven’t completely shut them down. I haven’t flirted back, but I haven’t completely shut them down, so I answer in a way that I know I’m not flirting back. What they take it as, can be however they want to take it as. But I know I’m not. So, then I’m like okay, I’m talking to them and if everything goes sideways, I can talk to them.

Several other participating officials described similar strategies in their attempt to find a balance between appearing to be 'too friendly' and building rapport and communication with the players.

This particular form of modified friendliness is encouraged by supervisors because it can be used to have an ‘in’ with the teams if it becomes necessary to de-escalate difficult situations.

Many of the participants described examples of sexism and discrimination they experienced at the hands of young men hockey players. Many of the comments they reported came from younger ages (atom, pewee, bantam). For example, Jamie* said:

I’ve had a young player once say that I should go back to the kitchen and like go back to making lunches or something…

Jamie* noted that the player said it with confidence, as if he says it all the time. These behaviours are learned and reproduced time and time again, making it extremely difficult for women to challenge them. Debbie* mentioned that she heard the “kitchen comments” constantly when she first started over 40 years ago. Meanwhile, Jamie* and others reported still hearing

109 those comments today. Teresa* explained that she tries not to officiate with her feminist hat on, because then she would not enjoy any aspects of the game and would constantly be miserable because of the misogyny, the overt sexism, and the effects those comments may have on her ability to progress in her career. Vanessa* shared an incident that occurred during a bantam hockey game:

…It was a bantam hockey, so like 13-14-year-old boys. I was lining that game so I was at the circle waiting to drop the puck. The centre-man was out of line so I told him to square up. He looked up at me and told me to suck his dick. That’s an easy Gross Misconduct call and out of the game he went. I don't go to work to get harassed and have comments like that said to me. I’m not sure if he would have said that to my male colleague or not. But regardless, that's a Gross [misconduct] and he’s off the ice for the rest of that game and another full game. Those are the easy calls to make. Say something dumb, you’ll get kicked out, easy as that.

Those comments, as many of the officials mentioned, are the easier calls; they fall under the code of misconduct. However, although comments that involve flirting and stereotyping made by boys and men players are common experiences for women officials, they are much more difficult to deal with because they are not explicitly included in the rule book as actions to be penalized. They are, therefore, not likely to be called or penalized because the 'line' is difficult to determine. In the range between 'go back to the kitchen' and 'suck my dick', where is the line whereby a comment can be penalized? The lack of penalties assures the continued use of what might be seen as micro-aggressions.

5.4 One of the Last Bastions

Boys' and men's hockey can be seen as one of the last bastions of sexism. The appeal of hockey is rooted in sacrosanct traditions of the game where fights may be glorified as much as goals. Sexism, homophobia and machismo are often promoted, reproduced and ultimately encouraged precisely because policies and sanctions that enforce change have not been introduced by Hockey Canada. The appeal to tradition bolsters many of the men heavily

110 involved and invested in the sport, making boys' and men's hockey one of the last bastions of masculine hegemony and brute virility, where ‘men can be men’ (Boissinot, Baillargeon &

Irving, 2015, p.133).

Because of its origins and roots in Canada, many Canadian men have come to believe they have an innate understanding of hockey, its rules and traditional culture. The results of this case study of women officials suggest that women may represent a threat to the sacrosanct traditions of hockey. The aggressive and unequal behaviour by many boys and men toward women officials may be a mark of men’s insecurities arising from this perceived threat to masculine culture.

Bruyninckx (2011) pointed out that "Sports.... take place in a sort of separate

[autonomous] sphere, detached from normal rules and regulations in society" (also see Laub,

2011). All the officials mentioned that the actions they observed, the behaviours they experienced and comments they heard would not be accepted in their day-jobs or life outside the arena. Lisa* explained that in her full-time career, people would be dismissed and charges could be implemented for workplace harassment cases; and yet, in hockey it is embedded and implicitly normalized. In turn, because of the more limited opportunities for women to officiate girls' and women's games, because men officials are still claiming many of the prime officiating positions for girls' and women's hockey, and because officiating the much more numerous boys' and men's games is still seen as the road to advancement in officiating, women officials must accept these aspects of the culture of boys' and men's hockey if they choose to continue in the sport. Stacy*, 55+*, Mandy* and others all said, “that’s the way it is” and “there’s nothing I can do about it” after they had described their negative experiences. Erin* said:

111 But for me, I have thick skin, so the bad experiences haven’t affected me, as much as they might affect others. So, I think I’m also blessed with thick skin as it won’t discourage me from reffing.

All 12 officials interviewed mentioned needing to be tough, thick skinned and able to brush off the discrimination they face. From there, they all said they use the discrimination as fuel to work harder, to prove them wrong, all in anticipation of gaining respect and being treated equally to men officials. Erin* explained that point:

It’s pretty belittling, but at the same time it makes me mad and want to work harder just because the way that I am wired haha because I see them respect men but they aren’t respecting me, just because of what’s in my pants, so I’m like well okay haha I’ll work harder…

Women officials remain hopeful that hard work and a tough skin will help them to progress.

As demonstrated, and represented by the number of officials registered in Canada (appendix H) women are missing from the leadership of the officiating system and are absent from the regulatory documents and training manuals. In many Hockey Canada documents, such as the

Officiating Manual (2014), use of masculine pronouns (him/he) represents a failure to recognize women's hockey and women officials, and/or a failure to take it seriously. An intersectional1 approach is absent, not just in terms of pronouns (her/she) or gender-neutral pronouns

(them/they), but also in terms of content and training that specifically deals with appearance, demeanour, tactics and strategies in officiating that apply specifically to women officiating both girls' and women's games and boys' and men's games. And, unlike most workplaces in the 'real world', the conditions of work have not changed to take into account the presence of women

1 People of colour are also largely underrepresented in Hockey Canada’s documents, further reinforcing the white, heteronormative, masculine tradition that hockey continues to portray

112 officials -- for example, change room availability, and the accommodation of maternity and child care leaves.

The women officials participating in this study have shared their lived experiences of being a hockey official, and the complexities they face, and are faced with while navigating this male-dominated sphere. Many of these experiences were confirmed during the game observation phase of data collection. And while not all boys and men who are players, coaches, spectators and officiating colleagues behave in discriminatory ways, and some colleagues were described as allies, the data gathered this study tend to emphasize the negative far more than the positive.

Women officials, often by their very presence, are challenging the sacrosanct traditions of the game. They are in turn being harassed and discriminated against, and reportedly feeling constrained to leave officiating at a high rate.

The first section of this chapter outlined the factors that women officials enjoy, and which keep them working as officials. This is followed by accounts of their experiences of discrimination, and sexist behaviours, actions and attitudes directed toward them. Women ice hockey officials have come to tolerate, but not to accept the mistreatment they experience as they aspire to advance through the ranks of officiating. All of the women officials interviewed shared their passion and love for officiating, regardless of the negative experiences they have had and continue to experience.

113 Chapter Six: Discussion and Conclusion

6.0 Introduction

As indicated in the thesis title, this is an exploratory study of women ice hockey officials and gender relationships in officiating, with a particular focus on the experiences of women officials. This chapter provides (1) a review and discussion/interpretation of the findings, (2) an outline of the limitations of this study, and (3) suggestions for future research and recommendations for policy and practice as it relates to women ice hockey officials.

6.1 Review, Discussion and Interpretation

Through the lens of critical feminist theory, specifically, socialist feminist theory, it is evident that ice hockey in Canada exists as a gendered institution with most processes operating under hegemonic masculine norms (Acker, 1990). These norms constitute a power dynamic that evidently serves to disadvantage girls and women at every level of the game, and particularly in the case of officials. This study of the career paths and experiences of women ice hockey officials provides evidence which appears to confirm that, despite women's involvement in hockey in Canada since the late 19th century, hockey is still largely a male preserve.

6.1.1 Career Paths and Career Contingencies: The career paths and career contingencies framework provides a useful model for outlining the steps and challenges associated with becoming involved and continuing to be involved in a 'career', and for comparing the involvement and continuation of different classes of persons in a 'career'. While a direct comparison of the career paths of men and women hockey officials was beyond the scope of this study, my game observations, the documentary materials reviewed, and particularly the comparisons from the perspectives of the officials interviewed provide some preliminary

114 evidence to suggest that there are real differences in the career paths and contingencies encountered by men and women hockey officials.

However, at the pre-officiating stage there are no reasons, from the evidence presented here, to expect that women and men had different experiences before they became officials. It is likely that both men and women became involved through various forms of 'seekership' and

'recruitment', and that, for some, 'closure' was involved.

The one exception concerns a new form of recruitment to the highest levels of officiating, introduced by the NHL Officiating Exposure Combine. Former elite level players (e.g., professional, major junior and university level), men and possibly women, are being recruited directly for training to officiate at the highest professional levels of the game (viz., the NHL), rather than going through traditional career progress routes that start at the lowest levels and work their way up. In many ways this represents another exception for women -- there are significantly more former men players than women, providing a much larger pool of potential men recruits; and there are many more high level leagues for men than for women, and women are specifically precluded from officiating at men's major junior and university games in Canada

(while there is no specific preclusion for women officiating in the NHL, apart from one exception some years ago, it has never happened). Thus, this new avenue of recruitment into officiating may further marginalize women.

6.1.2 Certification: The different career paths and contingencies for men and women really become evident during their training and development -- part of their continuing involvement as officials. With regard to the training and education of officials, there are six levels of certification. Levels I and II are open -- anyone may sign up for the training sessions leading up to those levels of certification. Officials must be invited to train for Levels III to VI

115 certification; women were not invited to attend Level V training until the 2014-15 season, and women are still not invited to Level VI training.

All of the participants in this study held Level III or higher certification, and it is at the higher levels that the differences for men and women become more marked. As noted, attendance at Level III or higher training is by invitation. It is likely that fewer women than men aspire to Level III and higher certification, but participants in this study commented on what a distinct minority they were at the training sessions (e.g., 'the only women', or 'three of us out of

70'). All of the RICs who make the invitations are men, although there is no specific evidence that they favour men with the invitations. In fact, given that there may be an implicit quota (see below), it is possible that RICs may be inviting as many women as they are able.

Given the earlier discussion of the 'second shift', comments from the women participants concerning the difficulties associated with geography (travel time and distance for some to attend the relatively few Level III and higher training camps) suggest that attendance at training camps may, in some cases, affect women more than men. While some men invitees also experience costs in terms of time and distance, in one car families men traditionally have a priority claim on the vehicle, for work and/or recreation. In families with small children, women are traditionally more likely than men to not take time to attend distant training camps.

Finally, several of the women claimed that, while men had to achieve an 80% mark in order to be awarded Level III certification, any women who attended were automatically awarded their Level III certification. They were not sure whether this was because the training of women officials was not being taken seriously, or whether there was an unofficial quota to certify more women at the higher levels of officiating (perhaps because of the poor optics associated with having all-men officiating crews at higher levels of girls' and women's hockey).

116 Either way, the study participants felt that they were being set up to fail by not being challenged to achieve the same passing mark as men in their Level III training. Any mistakes in their subsequent work as officials could be attributed to the fact that 'women do not belong' in that career, or that they were only there because of a quota.

6.1.3 Preparation: Many of the women officials referred to the inadequacy of their training, and the relatively random way that they were sometimes assigned to higher level games

(perhaps in order to have at least some women officials at a tournament, and again potentially setting them up to fail) as evidence of them being un- or under-prepared as a result of their (lack of) training. Of particular concern was the fact that the officiating manual, and the training sessions were all male-oriented, with no attempt to employ more inclusive pronouns, or to consider differences in size and physicality that may be linked to gender (which would also benefit smaller men). The possibility that there could be other strategies to deal with or prevent fights was something that women officials had to work out for themselves.

In addition, several women attributed their failure to advance in officiating to having been assigned early in their careers to tournaments for which they were un- or under-prepared for the level of play. Once they had developed as a result of more game experience and were better prepared, they no longer received the assignments, or invitations to training camps for higher levels of certification, because of their earlier failures. This may not be exclusively a consequence of gender, but if women officials are assigned to games at levels of play beyond their level of preparation just in order to increase the representation of women officials, then it is a matter of gender. That assignment to games at levels of play beyond their level of preparation often includes games that are played under a four-person officiating system.

117 6.1.4 Four-Person Officiating: The feeling of being under-trained/under-prepared extends to four-person officiating, introduced into the men's game in the mid-2000s, but not until 10 years later in the women's game at the university level. Because women's games are often officiated by mixed gender crews (see Table 1), men officials had been trained and gained experience in the four-person system, while many women had not been trained in, and had not had a chance to build any experience with the system. In fact, one of the officials interviewed expressed her frustration that, during her certification course, men officials had been taught the four-person system while women officials were limited to the three-person system.

6.1.5 Pay rates and expenses: One of the more blatant aspects of gender inequality, and the devaluing of women's hockey, is evident at the interuniversity level in Canada. The pay scale for officials (men and women) at women's interuniversity games is lower than the pay scale for officials (men) at men's interuniversity games. This is justified, in part, by the stipulation that officials at the men's games have a higher minimum level of certification than those at the women's games. It would be surprising to learn that officials at interuniversity women's soccer or basketball games were paid at a lower rate than officials at the men's games in those sports, but somehow it is less surprising for hockey, especially when the situation for reimbursement of travel expenses is considered. While officials for men's interuniversity games had always (within living memory) received travel expenses, officials at women's games did not begin to receive travel expenses until 2016, after a long struggle likely led by women officials.

6.1.6 Sites of learning: Women officials also reported some differences in their experiences related to networking and socialization, especially in what they considered to be a key site of learning, the officials' change room. In some arenas, women officials had to change in a different room (not always a change room), while at others there were reports of exclusion

118 from change room conversations (when, for example, there were two men officials -- who likely knew each other -- and one woman official). This was seen as particularly egregious when, as described in the following section, women would see young men officials being specifically mentored by older men officials in those settings.

The evidence provided by the experienced women officials who were interviewed, supported by some observations and by some documented sources, suggest that as women are becoming officials in ice hockey, there are differences between their experiences and men's experiences in terms of their training and preparation, especially as they begin to move from

Level II to higher levels of certification. These gender differences were compounded by policies in some leagues that prescribed different pay rates and (in the recent past) differences in eligibility to claim travel expenses. Reports of experiences of exclusion or segregation in relation to change rooms added to the sense that women's socialization and networking experiences were often different from those of young men who were becoming hockey officials.

6.1.7 Career Progress: The contingencies continue to be different for men and women officials in terms of their experiences of the possibility to advance in their officiating careers.

The limited opportunities available for women officials to practice and develop their skills are especially evident for those who do not live in large metropolitan centres; and a number of the officials interviewed reported their sense of being 'stuck in the system'. Men officials are routinely being assigned to boys' and men's games (which, with 92.5% of all registered players, represent the vast majority of all games of hockey played in Canada), as well as girls' and women's games, up to the highest levels. Women officials are being assigned to girls' and women's games, and to some of the lower levels of boys' and men's games.

119 The limited opportunities, together with the sense -- noted in the previous section -- that they were sometimes being set up to fail, helps to account for the strikingly low numbers of women officials, especially at the higher levels of certification. Thus, at Level V, there are 332 men and 10 women; at Level IV, there are 1,038 men and 49 women; and at Level III, there are

5,961 men and 231 women.

The male dominated system of officiating is evident numerically, not just by the fact that

93.5% of all referees in Canada are men, but also that the system is headed by men. When checked for this study, all of the provincial RICs in Canada are men. And despite the fact that girls' and women's hockey is one area of the game that is growing, and that Hockey Canada acknowledges the need for women officials, the male dominated system seems to be much more proactive in terms of reproducing itself, which automatically reduces women's opportunities to advance. The women were unanimous in their experiences of young men officials being encouraged, supported and moved through the system much more rapidly than they were. The mentorship that young men were receiving stands in contrast to that experienced by the women participants. Although they identified mentors, both men and women, some felt that the presence of more senior women in the system would provide effective mentorship in terms of career advancement, while others felt that men allies would be more effective mentors.

The final cluster of gendered factors affecting career progress should, in the modern ideal, be similar for both men and women. With the exception of pregnancy and early nurturing, ideally both men and women (in heterosexual partnerships) in an era when it is more common for both partners to be in full time careers, will have scheduling constraints, share the 'second shift', and jointly help to mitigate the constraints of 'the mommy trap'. However, the industrial world was established on the principles of paid (men's work) and unpaid labour (women's work),

120 and those principles are proving to be remarkably resilient in the modern world. The expectations that 'men' could work overtime and long hours, and perhaps enjoy a second job and/or leisure and sport, assumed that there were women who would carry out all of the necessary domestic, reproductive and emotional labours.

And while there is evidence that men are increasingly taking up some (or many) of these unpaid labours, the experiences of the women officials interviewed frequently involved disruptions and limitations to their officiating careers as a result of family related responsibilities.

Women officials believed that they were far more likely than men to have to turn down an assignment because of family obligations and responsibilities, and they were well aware of the consequences -- that turning down an assignment would move them down the call list, making it less likely that that would receive future assignments. Hockey Canada regulations compound this by demoting officials who take more than one year away from officiating -- Level III officials return to Level II, where they have to wait for an invitation to Level III training; Level IV, V and

VI officials have to return to Level III, where they await invitations to the next Level IV training.

6.1.8 Disinvolvement / Reinvolvement: What Prus (1984) refers to as disinvolvement and reinvolvement are, for several of the officials in this study, ongoing processes often associated with maternity leaves. But for 10 of the 12 participants, retirement was constantly on their minds.

6.1.9 Quitting/dropping out/retirement: The rate of dropping out from officiating appears to be high. Unfortunately, there are no good data available on the replacement rate. Apart from the very high rate of dropping out in 2001, when games had to be cancelled, it seems that the drop-out rate and the replacement rate have reached something of an equilibrium. The highest rate of turnover is at the lowest levels of officiating, where novice officials first begin to experience abuse from players, coaches and spectators. A number of surveys, and even Hockey

121 Canada recognize that it is the abuse officials experience that leads them to stop officiating.

Those (men and women) who continue to the higher levels of officiating have found ways of dealing with the abuse, and the participants in this study talked about their coping strategies.

However, as noted even in the small sample of experienced officials interviewed for this study, more than 83% of them frequently thought about quitting. And while, as evident in

Chapter 4 and even more so in Chapter 5, both men and women officials experience abuse on an ongoing basis, the abuse aimed at women officials takes on a particularly sexist character. It is easy to understand how wearing that can be, especially when combined with the ongoing evenings and weekends of travel and work, and with the growing sense that -- because of the various barriers to advancement -- their career as an official is not going anywhere.

Which raises the question of why they have continued to work as officials up to this point, and why some have returned to officiating after maternity and family-related breaks, and some even after vowing to themselves that they will not return the following season.

6.1.10 'For the love of the game': While it is clear that there are good reasons to keep returning to a career that has so many negative features, the answers tend to be far from informative, clichés such -- 'for the love of the game' and 'to give something back to the game'.

Stacy* provided more insight by talking about the things she would miss, but it wasn't until the question about what they enjoyed about officiating that any real insights were given.

6.1.11 Enjoyment: Although the overall focus of this study is critical, focusing on the negative experiences of women officials, especially those that relate to their gender, most were quite enthusiastic about the 'enjoyment question' with some claiming that they "love" officiating.

The list of things they enjoy is quite similar to responses given by athletes -- travel, meeting people, challenges, interesting experiences, friendships, a sense of community, and so on. And it

122 is those responses that hint much more strongly at the reasons for remaining involved despite the negative experiences.

6.2 Experiences This section uses data from the interviews and the observations to discuss the specific game experiences of women officials, before games and during games. The data affirm and supplement data presented in Chapter 4, providing real game examples of the type of sexist harassment and abuse reported by the women officials

6.2.1 Before a game: In addition to the routine meet and greet among officials, together with discussions of things such as positioning, there is no better indication that policies and regulations for officials are written by men for men than pre-game concerns about appearance and 'presence'. A 'crisp', 'clean' and 'professional' appearance may mean different things for men and women, but this is not taken into account in any way in the regulations. And because the use of make-up and hair length has been a frequent target of criticism by men spectators and others, women officials feel constrained to de-emphasize their femininity, even when officiating girls' and women's games.

Similarly, in the Officiating Manual's advice regarding 'presence', no attempt has been made to use gender-neutral pronouns; and while the advice makes mention of officials with a smaller body size, no attempt has been made to generate advice about how women officials may establish presence when officiating girls' and women's games or at as boys' and men's games (or for men officials at girls' and women's games). The advice assumes men officials, officiating at boys' and men's games.

6.2.2 During the game: During the women's hockey games observed, specific observations were made of women officials' interactions with other officials, with spectators,

123 with coaches, and with players. I was able to supplement and question these observations in the subsequent interviews.

The focus in observations and discussions of interactions between officials was on men officials, especially men as referees. And while there were a number of positive comments and observations, there were also comments about some men referees being unsupportive (which often made women officials feel unsafe) and/or patronising -- explaining basic rules, and

'mansplaining' incidents where women officials knew they had blown a call.

While research, primarily on men officials, identifies coaches as the worst offenders in terms of abuse, women officials (at both men's and women's games) report, and I observed/ overheard abusive, harassing, sexist and demeaning comments directed at them -- primarily by men spectators -- which focused on their gender. In other words, while men officials frequently hear abusive comments about their 'poor' decision making and vision, when those comments are directed at women officials they are connected to their gender. Even their presence is questioned at boys' and men's games.

Observations and comments from the women officials revealed some quite distinct differences between their experiences of men coaches and women coaches. For example, men coaches frequently stood on the bench and 'talked down' to women officials (but not men officials), while women coaches established communications from ice level. That intimidating behaviour occasionally carried over to post-game experiences, where some women officials reported that they were sometimes afraid to leave the change room and face the losing (man) coach.

Some male players can be as abusive as spectators and coaches, and it is in the more egregious examples of such abuse that women officials often felt unsupported by a man referee.

124 Sexual comments, ranging from blatant insults to flirting by boys and men players were not uncommon, and some women officials reported the difficulties of negotiating flirtatious behaviour, especially the difficulty of finding the line which would maintain appropriate rapport with the players without going too far in one direction or the other.

The results generally suggest that important changes are needed with regard to policy and training for women officials in the male dominated world of Canadian hockey. These are discussed subsequently in the section on Recommendations.

6.3 Limitations In an exploratory study such as this, there are inevitably limitations. The first concerns the sample of interview participants. Despite making an open call to reach out to and recruit women officials from all provinces, it seems that many of the women officials who met the recruitment criteria were reluctant to go 'on the record' even with the confidentiality assurances.

Women officials from one province in particular expressed hesitation about sharing their experiences with me. They were fearful of sharing their stories because they were concerned about retaliation from the social network of the men officials who hold the power over all officials in that province. In particular they were concerned that they would be recognized and that their chance of continuing or progressing in their careers would be in jeopardy. With few women at the highest levels of certification, the likelihood of the women being identifiable when their stories were shared was potentially high. Therefore, a number of stories that were shared with me when I was in communication with women officials in this province have not been used in order to protect their confidentiality.

Another potential limitation of this project also concerns the relatively small pool of women officials at the higher levels of certification across the country. As a consequence, many of them know each other, and this resulted in some snowball sampling which can, in turn, result

125 in them disclosing similar stories or experiences. It would be more beneficial to ensure as broad a sample as possible, increasing recruiting efforts further across the country. Furthermore, to investigate the experiences of women ice hockey officials, it would be interesting to conduct a deeper examination of more women from across the country and potentially in other countries such as USA.

Due to the small sample size within this study, other aspects of intersectionality, such as social class, race and indigeneity where not covered. In fact, one official specifically requested that aspects of identity other than gender not be discussed because of the potential that it may be more revealing of her identity. Future study recommendations would include a more complete intersectional approach.

As someone who has been involved in officiating, and has a sibling who is a high level official, it was difficult for me to remain reflexive -- to hold back my own thoughts and emotions about the data, and to fully recognize and be aware of the extent to which my own connection with this topic may have influenced the interview process, and my interpretation of the data.

Finally, as with most projects grounded in qualitative research methods, a significant amount of data were collected. This is a limitation in that it leads to sampling of the data, and not all of the participants’ stories, experiences and perspectives were presented in the results chapters. Every effort was made to select representative samples from the transcriptions, but it is important to acknowledge how challenging it was to choose the major themes, and to maintain consistency within those themes, from the many stories and experiences that were shared.

6.4 Policy, Practice and Recommendations

6.4.1 Protecting officials from harassment and abuse: With regard to harassment and abuse experienced by men and especially women officials (in terms of more sexualized

126 harassment and abuse), there are already relevant policies in place. However, they are not being enforced. For example, Hockey Canada’s Policy and Procedures Manual was released in

November 2006, amended May 2007, amended again in July 2008 and the most recent update was in January 2010. The 101-page document outlines committees, program policies and operational policies, describing the beliefs, commitments, values and vision of Hockey Canada.

The declarations within the document are formally made and approved in accordance with the bylaws and the approved budget of Hockey Canada (Hockey Canada Policy and Procedures,

2010).

The current Hockey Canada Policy on the Prevention of Harassment, Bullying and Abuse states:

It is the policy of Hockey Canada that there shall be no abuse and neglect, whether

physical, emotional or sexual of any participant in any of its programs. Hockey Canada

expects every parent, volunteer and staff member to take all reasonable steps to

safeguard the welfare of its participants and protect them from any form of maltreatment.

(Hockey Canada Policy and Procedures, 2008, p. 71)

Further, the policy details the harassment and bulling policy as non-tolerable, exemplifying that all personnel involved in Hockey Canada, such as staff, volunteers, team or on-ice officials, along with parents and guardians, are responsible for making every reasonable effort to uphold the commitment to refrain from harassing, bullying or abusive behaviour (Hockey Canada Policy and Procedures, 2010). It is clear that these policies are not being enforced, at least in the case of officials, and especially in the case of women officials.

In another example, provincial and territorial governments have policies on harassment and abuse prevention in workplaces. For example, the Government of Ontario's Code of Practice to

127 Address Workplace Harassment is a general policy that addresses “workplace harassment to ensure a working environment of dignity and respect and helps keep Ontario’s workplaces healthy and safe” (Code of Practice to Address Workplace Harassment, N.D.). An employer is required to prepare a workplace harassment policy, following the Occupational Health and

Safety Act, outlining a definition of workplace harassment and including examples of behaviours that are considered to be workplace harassment. Given examples included behaviours such as offensive or intimidating comments or jokes; bullying or aggressive behaviour; inappropriate staring; workplace sexual harassment; and isolating or making fun of a worker because of gender identity (Code of Practice to Address Workplace Harassment, N.D.).

With the extensive policy on workplace harassment in Ontario (and other provinces and territories), any actions that are undesirable are intolerable, and are supposed to be dealt with in a manner that is productive and supportive towards the person who is being mistreated. With this point of reference, the officials are certified and regulated by Hockey Canada, and they are performing a job that is compensated by the leagues and organizations that run hockey in Ontario

(or any other province and territory); therefore, they should be protected under these policies. [It should be noted that there is an ongoing debate about whether officials are employees or independent contractors. This may further influence whether or not workplace legislation is applicable, but there are no circumstances under which even independent contractors ought to be assumed to tolerate such workplace harassment and abuse.] Nevertheless, as far as I am aware, the status of officials as employees who are covered under this Code of Practice has not yet been tested in the law.

An alternative solution would be for Hockey Canada to implement an enforceable harassment policy that specifically protects officials, with special consideration given to women

128 officials. Applying the workforce harassment prevention and intervention policy to those working in sport, such as officials, would better protect them against the mistreatment they currently experience from other actors in the sport. Hockey Canada and the various regional governing bodies within Hockey Canada, should support a policy specifically dedicated to officials in order to ensure that a career as an official is safe and satisfying. Officials may leave that career for various reasons, but they should not be leaving because of discrimination and mistreatment.

There is a disconnect between the policies to protect employees and participants in the sporting workforce in comparison to the policies to protect employees in the workforce outside of sport. Acknowledging this disconnect should be part of a conscious approach moving forward.

The findings from this study indicate that women officials experience discrimination, harassment, and an inability to advance in their careers, and have a high drop-out rate due to the mistreatment they experience. Knowing and stating this information is not enough; there must be action in the form of an intervention to keep women officials involved in the sport as long as they are able, and as long as they would like to continue to be involved. Hockey Canada needs to act to protect all officials.

6.4.2 Other Recommendations: In recent years, much scholarship has focused on women's representation in positions of power in sport and outside of sport. In the themes discussed in the literature review, much scholarship is based on the metrics of and reasons for the underrepresentation of women. However, apart from the somewhat contentious issue of quotas, the research provides little information about how to achieve more equitable representation.

Recommendations often re-state the need for equal opportunities, but provide little insight into how it will be achieved. Kidd (2013), writing in relation to coaching, suggests policies to support

129 an equal hiring pool of men and women for coaching positions in order to provide more opportunities for women candidates. He also suggests the need for conversations about the gendered nature of sports and how to make sport more inclusive. Oftentimes, the decisions made by people with the power to make changes toward greater equity do quite the opposite, continuing to reproduce the status quo.

Hockey Canada needs to take a number of steps to better represent and support women officials (in addition to those concerning harassment and abuse outlined above):

(1) Figure out how to get more women involved in officiating and other leadership positions in hockey -- hold the conversations, establish quotas, establish equitable hiring practices for coaches and officials. As noted previously, the implementation of gender quotas is likely the more tangible means of achieving gender equality. Quotas provide an action plan for policy makers, a plan that holds them accountable for achieving the established quota. Gender quotas have been adopted with the aim of increasing the proportion of women candidates for political office (Franceschet, Krook, & Piscopo, 2012), and for many other attempts to achieve greater equality. While quotas may take various forms, they are now widely used in more than one hundred countries (Dahlerup, 2008). Gender quotas suggest that such measures will diversify the types of women elected or hired, raise awareness about women’s issues in policy making, change the gendered nature of the specific sphere of endeavour, and inspire other women to become involved (Dahlerup, 2008).

The concerns and critiques of quotas were noted previously, including the fear that unqualified individuals will be hired or elected. European countries using quotas have suggested that these concerns do eventually blow over, and that the quotas have a substantial positive effect toward achieving gender equality (Dart, 2017). Experience shows that the framing of the

130 narrative supporting the introduction of a quota is particularly important in terms of avoiding negative reactions to the quota. The narrative should emphasize the need to increase diversity and move in the direction of equality.

Quotas have been adopted in some countries to enhance equality in the governance of sport, but they are needed in many more countries and at the next levels of leadership, such as coaching and officiating. As in countries that have established gender quotas for governance

(e.g., the UK and Australia), Sport Canada needs to consult with national sport organizations such as Hockey Canada to establish gender quotas as appropriate, and to enforce the targets established by the quotas with funding being withheld for failure to achieve reasonable targets on time.

(2) Certification and training courses need to be re-designed to better prepare women for their work. Whether separate courses are held, or whether sections of courses are specifically designed for women participants, certification and training courses need to start taking account of the fact that one size does not fit all. Skills such as the four-person system, positioning, how to break up altercations between men players, how to deal with abusive men and the recourses that are available to sanction those abusers2, and navigating the system. In relation to the previous recommendation, several of the women officials who participated in this study recommended that Hockey Canada begin to consider designating more women as RICs, assignors and other positions of power in order to better represent the women officials, and assist in their advancement through the system.

(3) The need for more women mentors became evident when several of the women

2 “Abuse” refers to verbal, physical, and psychological/ emotional forms of abuse and intimidation

131 pointed out that, when their mentor was a man, he could not connect with them on certain issues.

Having women occupy senior and leadership positions will provide further support for women officials. Senior women are also individuals who understand the problems that affect women officials, and sometimes they are prepared to make changes. The example that Stacy* gave

(Chapter 4) of becoming the RIC for a small house league in her community provides an important example of the importance of small changes, especially in areas that are outside the regulations: "I changed things around and made it a rule that all refs dressed in the dressing rooms together and if you need to change you go into the stall and we can wear clothing that makes us feel comfortable and that kinda thing. That way we can all be educated and be a team in one dressing room. Yeah, like that was a huge part. If you’re not in with the group, changing with the group, you’re not a part of the team really."

(4) Practices associated with scheduling, and penalizing officials who are unable to accept an assigned game by moving them to a lower priority for future assignments, must be changed. This is a change that would benefit both women and men officials. As noted, men are increasingly carrying out a share of family-related unpaid labour, and some men are able to take parenting leaves. Having the flexibility to declare that you will accept assignments whenever you are able for, for example, the next one or two years would help to keep both men and women officials more involved. Similarly, the policy of demoting Level III and higher officials who miss a year of certification training needs to be re-considered in order to take into account the real-life circumstances of women and men officials.

6.5 Conclusion

The depth and breadth of scholarship examining the underrepresentation of women in positions leadership and power illustrates the complexity and severity of the issue. Women

132 continue to face inequitable challenges and obstacles while trying to navigate a male dominated system, one that was designed by and for men and never took women into account. It should also be acknowledged and recognized that gender, as an organizing principle in sport needs to be considered along with other aspects of intersectionality such as race, sexual orientation, class and ability (Fink, 2008) as these are all underrepresented characteristics in sport officiating and leadership.

Hockey culture has become a vicious cycle of hypermasculine reproduction, often isolating women from the positions of power and leadership. As identified in this thesis, women officials across Canada experience abusive behaviour, and believe that discrimination prevents them from advancing to higher levels of officiating. The powerful experiences, stories and memories shared by the women officials in this study shaped a narrative of mistreatment, which leads many to leave officiating. In conjunction with the interviews, the observations and document analysis provided insights into the current structure of Hockey Canada’s officiating system, reinforcing the stories the women shared. Further research on women officials in other sports, and in other countries, will help to understand the gendered relationships that exist, encapsulating the current social and political climate for women in positions of leadership and power in sport.

133 References Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, Jobs, Bodies: Gender & Society, 4(2), 139–158. doi:

10.1177/089124390004002002

Ackery, A. D., Tator, C. H., & Snider, C. (2012). Violence in Canadian Amateur

Hockey. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine,22(2), 86-90.

doi:10.1097/jsm.0b013e3182342b69

Acosta, R. V., & Carpenter, L. J. (2004). Women in Intercollegiate Sport. Women in Sport and

Physical Activity Journal, 13(1), 62–89. doi: 10.1123/wspaj.13.1.62

http://myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/23068

7289?accountid=14771

Acosta, R. V., & Carpenter, L. J. (2012). Women in intercollegiate sport: A longitudinal,

national study 35 year update. 1997-2012. Retrieved April 2019, from

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED570883.pdf

Acosta, R. V., & Carpenter, L. J. (2017). 45 Years of Title IX. NCAA,org.

www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/TitleIX45-295-FINAL_WEB.pdf

Adriaanse, J. (2016). Gender diversity in the governance of sport associations: The Sydney

Scoreboard Global Index of Participation. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(1), 149-160.

IWG 'Sydney Scoreboard': www.womensport.jp/original/IWG/IW41.pdf

Aicher, T. J., & Sagas, M. (2009). An examination of homologous reproduction and the effects

of sexism. Journal for the Study of Sports and Athletes in Education, 3(3), 375–386.

Anderson, E. D. (2009). The maintenance of masculinity among stakeholders of sport. Sport

Management Review, 12(1), 3-14.

Anderson K. J., & Pierce D. A. (2009). Officiating bias: the effect of foul differential on foul

calls in NCAA basketball. Journal of Sports Science, 3(2)27, 687–

134 69410.1080/02640410902729733

Anshel, M.H., & Weinberg, R.S. (1999). Re-examining coping among basketball referees

following stressful events: Implications for coping interventions. Journal of Sport

Behavior, 22(2) 141–161

Ashford, L. (2012). Women in Power and Decision Making. Women in the World Today,

https://static.america.gov/uploads/sites/8/2016/05/Global-Womens-Issues_Women-in-

the-World-Today_English_508.pdf

Auger, D., Fortier, J., Thibault, A., & Gravelle, F. (2010). Characteristics and motivations of

sports officials in the province of Québec. International Journal of Sport Management,

Recreation, & Tourism, 5, 29-50.

Bauer, C. C., & Baltes, B. B. (2002). Reducing the effects of gender stereotypes on performance

evaluations. Sex Roles, 47(9/10), 465-476.

Belcher, D., Lee, A. M., Solmon, M. A., & Harrison, L. (2003). The influence of gender related

beliefs and conceptions of ability on women learning the hockey wrist shot. Research

Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74(2), 183-92.

Bell K., Fahmy E., & Gordon D. (2014). Quantitative conversations: the importance of

developing rapport in standardised interviewing. Qual Quant, 2016; 50:193–212.

doi:10.1007/s11135-014-0144-2

Berg, B. L. (2004). A dramaturgical look at interviewing. In B. L. Berg, Qualitative research

methods for the social sciences (pp. 75-122). Pearson Education.

Birrell, S. (2000). Feminist theories for sport. In J. Coakley & E. Dunning Handbook of sports

studies (pp. 62-77). London: SAGE Publications Ltd doi: 10.4135/9781848608382.n4

Birrell, S. J. (1988). Discourses on the Gender/Sport Relationship. Exercise and Sport Sciences

135 Reviews,16. doi:10.1249/00003677-198800160-00017

Birrell, S., & McDonald, M. (2000). Reading sport: Critical essays on power and

representation. Northeastern University Press.

Boissinot, C., Baillargeon, N., & Irving, S. (2015). Hockey and philosophy. University of Ottawa

Press.

Bowen, G. (2009). Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative

Research Journal, 9. 27-40. 10.3316/QRJ0902027.

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in

Psychology, 3 (2) 77-101.

Bray, C. (1988). Sport and social change. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation &

Dance, 59(6), 50-53. doi:10.1080/07303084.1988.10609783

Bruening, J. E., & Dixon, M. A. (2008). Situating work–family negotiations within a life course

perspective: Insights on the gendered experiences of NCAA division I head coaching

mothers. Sex Roles, 58, 10–23.

Bruyninckx, H. (2011, October). Obsession with rules vs. mistrust in being ruled. Paper

presented at the Play the Game Conference, Cologne.

Burton, L. J. (2014). Underrepresentation of women in sport leadership: A review of

research. Sport Management Review, 18(2), 155–165. doi: 10.1016/j.smr.2014.02.004

Canadian Heritage. (2009). Actively engaged: A policy on sport for women and girls. Ottawa,

ON: Retrieved from http://www.pch.gc.ca/pgm/sc/pol/fewom/ws-b-eng.pdf

Canadian Press. (January 8, 2019). Female hockey official says gender cost her opportunity

to referee AJHL games. https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/cassandra-gregory-referee-

1.4970187

136 Carastathis, A. (2014), The Concept of Intersectionality in Feminist Theory. Philosophy

Compass, 9: 304-314. doi:10.1111/phc3.12129

Carli, L., & Eagly, A. (2007). Overcoming resistance to women leaders: The importance of

leadership style. Women and Leadership: The State of Play and Strategies for Change,

127-148.

Chalabaev, A., Sarrazin, P., Fontayne, P., Boiché, J., & Clément-Guillotin, C. (2013). The

influence of sex stereotypes and gender roles on participation and performance in sport

and exercise: Review and future directions. Psychology of sport and exercise, 14(2), 136-

144.

Claringbould, I. (2007). Finding a 'normal' woman: Selection processes for board membership.

Sex Roles, 56, 495-507.

Code of Practice to Address Workplace Harassment (N.D). https://www.ontario.ca/page/code-

practice-address-workplace-harassment

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for

developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.,

http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153

Cornelius, A., Habif, S., & Van Raalte, J. L. (2001). Athletes' attitudes toward and preferences

for male and female coaches. Women in Sport & Physical Activity Journal, 10(1), 73-88.

Dahlerup, D. (2008). Gender quotas – controversial but trendy. International Feminist Journal of

Politics, 10(3), 322-328. doi:10.1080/14616740802185643

Dart, B. (2017). Gender diversity in Canada briefing to the Canadian House of Commons’

Standing Committee on the Status of Women.

137 https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/FEWO/Brief/BR8954011/br-

external/DartBeatrix-e.pdf

Dell, C., Gervis, M., & Rhind, D. (2014). Factors influencing soccer referee’s intentions to

quit the game. Soccer & Society, 17(1), 109-119. doi:10.1080/14660970.2014.919275

Denzin, N. K. (2001). Applied Social Research Methods: Interpretive interactionism. Thousand

Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. doi: 10.4135/9781412984591

Denzin, N. K. (1970). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New

York: Aldine. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315134543

Dewar, A. M. (1991). Incorporation of Resistance?: Towards an Analysis of Women's Responses

to Sexual Oppression in Sport. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 26(1), 15-

23.

Dixon, M. A., & Bruening, J. E. (2007). Work-family conflict in coaching I: A top-down

perspective. Journal of Sport Management, 21(3), 377.

Dixon, M. A., & Sagas, M. (2007). The relationship between organizational support, work-

family conflict, and the job-life satisfaction of university coaches. Research Quarterly for

Exercise and Sport, 78(3), 236–247.

Dodd, P. (2003). Coaching: A significant career step for women entering the professoriate.

Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74 (1), 42-44

Donnelly, P. (1996). Approaches to social inequality in the sociology of sport. Quest, 48(2),

221-242.

Donnelly, P., Banwell, J., di Carlo, D., & Kriger, D. (2016). Women and Girls’ Participation,

Development and Excellence in Sport. Toronto: Centre for Sport Policy Studies (Faculty

of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto)

138 Donnelly, P., Norman, M., & Kidd, B. (2013). Gender equity in Canadian interuniversity sport:

A biennial report (no. 2). Toronto: Centre for Sport Policy Studies (Faculty of

Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto)

Donnelly, P., & Young, K. (1988). The construction and confirmation of identity in sport

subcultures. Sociology of Sport Journal, 5, 223-240.

Dorsch, K.D., & Paskevic, D.M. (2002). Stressful experiences among six certification levels

of ice hockey officials. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8 585–593

Dosseville, F., Rioult, F., & Labarde, S. (2007). Why do sports officials dropout? http://ceur-

ws.org/Vol-1969/paper-02.pdf

Dreger, Darren (@DarrenDreger). "The NHL is still accepting applications for its officiating

combine in August. More women than ever have applied. The NHL needs athletes from

Usport or the NCAA or the pro leagues to step forward. There will be women officiating

in the NHL.” March 20, 2019, 4:34am. Tweet.

Dublin, A. (2004). Bobbie Rosenfeld: The Olympian who could do everything. Toronto: Second

Story Press.

Duncan, M. C., & Brummett, B. (1993). Liberal and radical sources of female empowerment in

sport media. Sociology of Sport Journal, 10, 57-72.

Duvinage C. (2012) The Ancient History of Sports Referees. In: Referees in Sports Contests.

Management, Organisation und ökonomische Analyse, vol 14. Gabler Verlag

Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L.L. (2007). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business

Review, 85(9), 62-71.

Eagly, A., & Sczesny, S. (2009). Stereotypes about women, men, and leaders: Have times

139 changed? In M. Barreto, M. Ryan & T. Schmitt (Eds.), The glass ceiling in the 21st

century: Understanding barriers to gender equality (First Edition ed., 21-39).

Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Eisner, E. W. (1991). The Enlightened Eye: Qualitative Inquiry and the Enhancement of

Educational Practice. Studies in Art Education, 35(2), 121. doi: 10.2307/1320828

Ely, R., & Padavic, I. (2007). A feminist analysis of organizational research on sex differences.

Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1121–1143.

Erlichman, J. (2018). One in 100: Canada's 'embarrassing' lack of female CEOs among top TSX

companies. BNN Bloomberg

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/female-ceos-noticeably-absent-from-canada-s-c-suite-

1.1103584

European Commission. (2007). Decision-making in the largest publicly quoted companies.

Farrell, A., Fink, J. S., & Fields, S. (2011). Women’s sport spectatorship: An exploration of

Men’s influence. Journal of Sport Management, 25(3), 190-201.

doi:10.1123/jsm.25.3.190

Female Referees in Professional Sports. (N.D.). Retrieved January 3, 2018, from

https://femaleofficialshistory.weebly.com/

Fink, J. (2008). Gender and sex diversity in sport organizations. Sex Roles, 58, 146-148.

Folkesson, P., Nyberg, C., Archer, T., Norlander, T. (2002). Soccer referees’ experience

of threat and aggression: Effects of age, experience, and life orientation on outcome of

coping strategy. Aggressive Behavior, 28 317–327

Forbes, A., Edwards, L., & Fleming, S. (2015). ‘Women can’t referee’: Exploring the

140 experiences of female football officials within UK football culture. Soccer & Society, 16(4),

521-539. doi:10.1080/14660970.2014.882829

Forbes, S. L., & Livingston, L. A. (2013). Changing the Call: Rethinking attrition and retention

in ice hockey officiating ranks. Sport in Society, 16, 295-309.

Fortune, D., & Mair, H. (2011). Notes from the sports club: Confessional tales of two

researchers. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 40: 457–484.

Franceschet, S., Krook, M., & Piscopo, J. (2012). The impact of gender quotas. Oxford

University Press.

Fudge, J., & Vosko, L. F. (2001). Gender, Segmentation and the Standard Employment

Relationship in Canadian Labour Law, Legislation and Policy. Economic and Industrial

Democracy, 22(2), 271–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831X01222005\

Furst, D. M. (1991). Career contingencies: Patterns of initial entry and continuity in collegiate

sports officiating. Journal of Sport Behavior, 14(2), 93. Retrieved from

http://myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/13119

41638?accountid=14771

Garey, A. I. (1999). Weaving Work & Motherhood: Women in the political economy.

Temple University Press.

Gautier, A. (2002). 10 top women talk about their lives and their careers. Academy of

Management Journal, 11(3)32-36.

Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: why some people succeed and some don’t. Little Brown & Co.

The Global Gender Gap Report, 2018. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2018.pdf

Goldsmith, P.A., & Williams, J.M. (1992). Perceived stressors for football and volleyball

officials from three rating levels. Journal of Sport Behavior, 15(2) 106–118

141 Goldstein, A. E. & Reiboldt, W. (2004). The multiple roles of low income, minority women in

the family and community: A qualitative investigation. The Qualitative Report, 9(2),

241–265. Retrieved 5 January 2009, from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR9-

2/goldstein.pdf

Green, E., Heborn, S., & Woodward, D. (1990). Women's Leisure, What Leisure?: A Feminist

Analysis. Hampshire: London.

Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S., & Wormley, W. M. (1990). Effects of race on organizational

experience, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Academy of Management

Journal, 33(1), 64–86.

Gross, E. (1958). Work and society. Oxford, England: Thomas Y. Crowell.

Guillén, F., & Feltz, D. L. (2011). A Conceptual Model of Referee Efficacy. Frontiers in

Psychology, 2, 25. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00025

Gunn, Erik (1995), Mentoring: The Democratic Version. Training, 32(8), 64–67.

Haerle, R.K. (1975). Career patterns and career contingencies of professional baseball players:

An occupational analysis. In D.W. Ball and J. W. Loy (Eds.), Sport and the social order:

Contributions to the sociology of sport. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Hakim, C. (2007). Dancing with the devil? Essentialism and other feminist heresies. The British

Journal of Sociology, 58 (1), 123-132.

Hall, M. A. (2018). Muscle on Wheels: Louise Armaindo and the High-Wheel Racers of

Nineteenth-Century America. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.

Hall, M. A. (2016) The Girl and the Game: A History of Women's Sport in Canada. 2nd ed.

Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2016.

Hall, M. A. (2011). The Grads are Playing Tonight!: The Story of the Edmonton Commercial

142 Graduates Basketball Club. University of Alberta.

Hall, A. M. (2004). The game choice: Girls’ and women’s soccer in Canada. In F. Hong, & J.A.

Mangan (Eds) Soccer, Women, Sexual Liberation. Kicking of a New Era. Frank Cass,

London, 149-162.

Hall, A. L., & Rist, R. C. (1999). Integrating multiple qualitative research methods (or avoiding

the precariousness of a one-legged stool). Psychology & Marketing, 16(4), 291. Retrieved

from http://myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/login?url=https://search-proquest-

com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/docview/227728789?accountid=14771

Hall, M. A. (1996). Feminism and sporting bodies: Essays on theory and practice. Champaign,

IL.: Human Kinetics.

Hall, R. (1969). Occupations and the Social Structure. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Hanna, P. (2012). Using internet technologies (such as Skype) as a research medium: A research

note. Qualitative Research, 12: 239–242

Hardin, M., & Greer, J. (2009). The influence of gender-role socialization, media use and

sports participation on perceptions of gender-appropriate sports. Journal of Sport

Behavior, 32, no. 2.

Harrell, M.C., & Bradley, M.A. (2009). Data Collection Methods: Semi-Structured Interview

and Focus Groups. RAND National Defense Research Institute, Santa Monica.

Harter, S. C. (1978). Effectiveness motivation reconsidered: Towards a development model.

Human Development, 21, 34-64.

Henningsen, D. (2004). Flirting with Meaning: An Examination of Miscommunication in

Flirting Interactions. Sex Roles, 50: 481.

https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SERS.0000023068.49352.4b

143 Hockey Canada Annual Rapport, 2018.

https://cdn.agilitycms.com/hockey-canada/Corporate/About/Downloads/2017-18-

hockey-canada-annual-report-e.pdf

Hockey Canada Annual Rapport, 2017.

https://cdn.hockeycanada.ca/hockey-canada/Corporate/About/Downloads/2016-17

annual-report-e.pdf

Hockey Canada Officiating Manual, 2015.

https://az184419.vo.msecnd.net/hockey-canada/Corporate/About/Downloads/2014-

15_annual_report_e.pdf

Hockey Canada Shared Respect (N.D.) https://www.hockeycanada.ca/en-ca/hockey-

programs/officiating/essentials/shared-respect

Hochschild, A. R., & Machung, A. (1989). The second shift: Working parents and the revolution

at home. New York, N.Y: Viking.

Hoffman, A. (1989). Strategies for change: Some thoughts from the Canadian experience. In K.

Dyer (Ed.), Sportswomen towards 2000: A celebration. Proceedings of a Conference held

during Women’s Week in Adelaide, South Australia (pp. 25–34). Richmond, AUS: Hyde

Park Press

Holloway, I. (1997). Basic concepts for qualitative research. Oxford: Blackwell Science.

Hooks, B. (2000a). Feminism is for everybody: Passionate Politics. Boston: South End.

Hooks, B. (2000b). Where we stand: Class Matters. New York: Routledge.

Hooks, B. (2000c). Feminist theory: From margin to center. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.

Hughes, E. C. (1971). The Social Eye. Selected papers: Chicago. Aldine-Atherton.

Ingham, A., Howell, J., & Swetman, R. (1993). Evaluating Sport ''Hero/ines": Contents,

144 Forms, and Social Relations. Quest, 45, 197-210.

IOC (2018). Gender Equality Review Project. IOC.org

https://stillmed.olympic.org/media/Document%20Library/OlympicOrg/News/2018/03/IO

C-Gender-Equality-Report-March-2018.pdf

Kahn, R. L. (1964). Power and conflict in organizations, R. Kahn and E.

Boulding, eds., Basic Books, New York.

Kaissidis, A., & Anshel, M.H. (1993). Sources and intensity of acute stress in adolescent and

adult australian basketball referees: a preliminary study. Australian Journal of Science

and Medicine in Sport, 25(3) 97–103

Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York, NY: Basic.

Kidd, B. (2013). Where are the female coaches? Canadian Journal for Women in Coaching.

Kidd, B. (1996). The struggle for Canadian sport. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Knoppers, A. (1987). Gender and the coaching profession. Quest, 39(1), 9–22.

Krane, V., Choi, P.Y.L., Baird, S.M., Aimar, C.M., & Kaurer, K.J. (2004). Living the

Paradox: Female Athletes Negotiate Femininity and Muscularity. Sex Roles 50: 315.

https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SERS.0000018888.48437.4f

Lapchick, R., Davison, E., Grant, C., & Quirarte, R. (2016). Gender report card: 2016

international sports report card on women in leadership roles. The Institute of Diversity and

Ethics in Sport.

Lapchick, R., Estrella, B., Stewart, C., & Gerhart, Z. (2018). The 2018 racial and gender report

card: The National Basketball Association. The Institute of Diversity and Ethics in Sport.

Lapchick, R., & Marfatia, S. (2017). The 2017 racial and gender report card: National football

league. The Institute of Diversity and Ethics in Sport.

145 Lapchick, R., Neelands, B., Estrella, B., Rainey, P., & Gerhart, Z. (2018). The 2018 racial and

gender report card: Major league baseball. The Institute of Diversity and Ethics in Sport.

Laskowski, C. (February 7 2019). All-female referee team at Sask AAA hockey game 4 years in

the making. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/all-female-referee-team-at-sask-aaa-

hockey-game-4-years-in-the-making-1.5008390

Lemm, K. M., Dabady, M., & Banaji, R. (2005). Gender picture priming: It works with

denotative and connotative primes. Social Cognition, 23, 218-241.

Levy, J., Rosenberg, D., & Hyman, A. (1999). Fanny "Bobbie" Rosenfeld: Canada's woman

athlete of the half century. Journal of Sport History, 26(2), 392-396.

Livingston, L. A., & Forbes, S. L. (2007). Factors Contributing to the Attrition of Canadian

Amateur Ice Hockey Officials: Survey Results from an Ontario-Based District Hockey

Association. AVANTE-ONTARIO, 11(3), 1.

Livingston, L. A., & Forbes, S. L. (2016). Factors contributing to the retention of Canadian

amateur sport officials: Motivations, perceived organizational support, and resilience.

International Journal of Sport Science and Coaching. Vol. 11(3) 342-355.

Laub, T.B. (2011). The public has a right to ask questions about sports corruption: Complete

autonomy is no longer an option for sports organizations...

Play the Game Magazine, pp.14-15. www.playthegame.org/2011

Manley, A., Greenlees, I., Thelwell, R., & Smith, M. (2010). Athletes' use of reputation and

gender information when forming initial expectancies of coaches. International Journal of

Sports Science & Coaching, 5(4), 517-532.

Martin, J. (2019, May 10). NBA Commissioner Adam Silver wants more female refs, coaches.

146 Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/10/sport/adam-silver-wants-more-women-

as-referees-and-coaches-in-nba-trnd/index.html

McCalmont, Lucy. (2015). NFL's Sarah Thomas Didn't Set Out to Be A Trailblazer

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/sarah-thomas-nfl_n_7027600

McDonagh, E., & Pappano, L. (2008). Playing with the boys. (1 ed., Vol. 1, pp. 1-349). Oxford

University Press. US.

Moyser, M. & Burlock, A. (2018). Time use: Total work burden, unpaid work, and leisure.

Ottawa: Statistics Canada. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-503-

x/2015001/article/54931-eng.htm

Myers, J., & Doherty, A.J. (2007). A multidimensional critique of the Sport Canada Policy on

Women in Sport and its implementation in one national sport organization. International

Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 2(4), 322–343.

National Post. (2015). Norway, France and Finland tried to help women by using quotas on

corporate boards: it hasn't worked. National Post, Retrieved from

https://nationalpost.com/news/norway-france-and-finland-tried-to-help-women-by-using-

quotas-on-corporate-boards-it-hasnt-worked

NHOA, 2019. https://www.nhlofficials.com/

Norman, L. (2010). Bearing the burden of doubt: Female coaches' experiences of gender

relations. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 81(4), 506-517.

Norman, L. (2011). Gendered homophobia in sport and coaching: Understanding the everyday

experience of lesbian coaches. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 47(8),

705-723

Norman, M., Donnelly, P., & Kidd, B. (2019). Gender equity in Canadian interuniversity sport:

147 A biennial report. Toronto: Centre for Sport Policy Studies (Faculty of Kinesiology and

Physical Education, University of Toronto)

Ochoa, M. (2019). The question you should never ask women – Period. The Conversation.

https://theconversation.com/the-question-you-should-never-ask-women-period-

116712?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation

%20for%20May%2031%202019%20-

%201324312382&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20M

ay%2031%202019%20-

%201324312382+CID_f9c1c079803e160d0a99bcfcee5f987b&utm_source=campaign_m

onitor_us&utm_term=The%20question%20you%20should%20never%20ask%20women

%20%20period

O’Reilly, K. (2012). Ethnographic methods (2nd edition). London: Routledge

OUA Women’s Annual Hockey Update, 2017.

OUA Men’s Annual Hockey Update, 2017.

Peterson, V. S., & Runyan, A. S., (2010). Global gender issues in the new millennium, third

edition. Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429493782

Phillippi, J., & Lauderdale, J. (2018). A Guide to Field Notes for Qualitative Research: Context

and Conversation. Qualitative Health Research, 28(3), 381

388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732317697102

Prus, R., & Sharper, C. R. D. (1977). Road Hustler: The Career Contingencies of Professional

Card and Dice Hustlers. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books (D.C. Heath).

Prus, R. (1984). Career contingencies: Examining patterns of involvement. In N. Theberge & P.

Donnelly (Eds.), Sport and the sociological imagination (pp. 297-3 18). Fort Worth:

148 Texas Christian University Press.

Rainey, D. W., & Duggan, P. (1998). Assaults on basketball referees: A statewide

survey. Journal of Sport Behavior, 21(1), 113. Retrieved from

http://myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docvie

w/1311952544?accountid=14771

Rainey, D. W. (1995). Stress, burnout, and intention to terminate among umpires. Journal

of Sport Behavior, 18, 312-323.

Rubens, A., & Halperin, R. (1996). Mentoring in health organizations. Hospital topics Research

Strategies. Sage Publications, 4(4), 23-28.

Safai, P. (2013). Women in Sport Policy. In L. Thibault & J. Harvey Sport Policy in Canada (pp.

317-349). University of Ottawa Press.

Sagas, M., & Cunningham, G. B. (2004). Does having the right stuff matter? Gender differences

in the determinants of career success among intercollegiate athletic administrators. Sex

Roles, 50(5), 411–421.

Schein, E. H. (1996). Culture: The missing concept in organization studies. Administrative

Science Quarterly, 41, 229-240.

Shaw, S., & Frisby, W. (2006). Can gender equity be more equitable? Promoting an alternative

frame for sport management research, education, and practice. Journal of Sport

Management, 20, 483–509.

Smith, B. & Caddick, N. (2012) Qualitative methods in sport: a concise overview for guiding

social scientific sport research, Asia Pacific Journal of Sport and Social Science, 1(1):

60-73, 12(1)

Solnit, R. (2008). Men Explain Things to Me: And Other Essays. London: Granta.

149 Sparkes, A. C., & Smith, B. (2014). Qualitative research methods in sport, exercise and health:

from process to product. London: Routledge.

Sport Canada. (2002). The Canadian sport policy. Ottawa, ON: Department of Canadian

Heritage. Retrieved from http://www.pch.gc.ca/pgm/sc/ pol/pcs-csp/2003/polsport-eng.pdf

Sport Canada. (1986). Sport Canada Policy on Women in Sport. Ottawa: Fitness and Amateur

Sport.

Stevenson, C. (2001). The Third team: An inside look at officiating in ice hockey.

http://canoe.ca/hockeyrefereeing/home.html

Stogdill, R. M. (1950). Leadership, membership, and organization. Psychological Bulletin,

47(1), 1-14.

Sundin, D., & Fahy, K. (2008). Critical, post-structural, interpretive interactionism: an update on

Denzin's methodology. Nurse researcher, 16. 7-23. 10.7748/nr2008.10.16.1.7.c6750.

Taylor, L. (1968). Occupational Sociology. Oxford University Press.

Theberge, N. (1997). “IT'S PART OF THE GAME”. Gender & Society, 11(1), 69-87.

doi:10.1177/089124397011001005

Thompson, S. (1999). Mother’s taxi: Sport and women’s labor. Albany, N.Y.: State University

of New York Press.

Tingle, J. K., Warner, S., & Sartore-Baldwin, M. L. (2014). The Experience of Former

Women Officials and the Impact on the Sporting Community. Sex Roles, 71(1-2), 7-20.

doi:10.1007/s11199-014-0366-8

Titlebaum, P.J., Haberlin, N., & Titlebaum, G. (2009). Recruitment and retention of sports

officials. Recreational Sports Journal, 33 102–108

150 Todey, A. (2011). Experiences of stereotype threat of female sports officials. Poster

presented at Division 17 of the American Psychological Association Convention,

Washington, D.C.

U SPORT Playing Regulations—Men’s Hockey, 2019.

https://usports.ca/uploads/hq/Playing_Regs/201920/190813_PlayingRegs_Hockey_%28

M%29_FINAL.pdf

U SPORT Playing Regulations—Women’s Hockey, 2019.

https://usports.ca/uploads/hq/Playing_Regs/201920/190624_PlayingRegs_Women_s_Ho

ckey.pdf

Verbridge, S. (2014). Equity in the Impact of Title IX on Officiating in the United States.

Kinesiology, Sport Studies, and Physical Education Synthesis Projects.

http://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/pes_synthesis/13

Walker, N. A., & Bopp, T. (2010). The underrepresentation of women in the male-dominated

sport workplace: Perspectives of female coaches. Journal of Workplace Rights, 15(1),

47–64.

Walker, N., & Sartore-Baldwin, M. (2013). Hegemonic masculinity and the institutionalized bias

toward women in men’s collegiate basketball: What do men think? Journal of Sport

Management, 27, 303–315.

Whisenant, W., Miller, J., & Pedersen, P. M. (2005). Systemic barriers in athletic administration:

An analysis of job descriptions for interscholastic athletic directors. Sex Roles, 53(11/12),

911-918.

Whisenant, W. A. (2008). Sustaining male dominance in interscholastic athletics: A case of

humongous reproduction…or not? Sex Roles, 58(11-12), 768-775.

151 Walshe, C., Ewing, G., & Griffiths, J. (2012). Using observation as a data collection method to

help understand patient and professional roles and actions in palliative care

settings. Palliative Medicine, 26(8), 1048–

1054. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269216311432897

152 Appendices

Appendix A: Research Ethics Approval

153

Appendix B: Email Recruitment

Hello ______,

My name is Madison Danford and I am a Master of Exercise Science student at the University of Toronto. For my Master’s thesis I am studying the experiences of women officials in ice hockey. I am writing to ask if you would be interested in speaking with me about your experience as an official. As far as I am aware, there are no previous research studies where women officials in ice hockey have been asked to talk about their experiences.

Our talk will take the form of a casual conversation about your experiences as a woman official in ice hockey. In the final research report, I will not be using your name or any other information you do not wish to be used.

You may contact me at this email address if you have any questions about the project. And if you would like to participate, we can talk by telephone or Skype/FaceTime, or we could meet at your convenience.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Madison Danford

MSc Candidate, Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education University of Toronto 613-920-4662 [email protected]

154 Appendix C: Social Media Recruitment

Research Participants Sought: Women Ice Hockey Officials and Gender Relations in Officiating. Open call to all women ice hockey officials who would be interested in speaking with me regarding their experience as an official. The aim of this project is to create a conversation regarding the experiences of women officials in hockey, as this is an area that is lacking research.

Please let me know if you interested in speaking with me at your convenience or if you would like to receive more information regarding the study.

Madison Danford MSc Candidate, Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto 613-920-4662 [email protected]

155 Appendix D: Consent Form

[Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education letterhead]

Exploring the Experiences of Women Officials in Ice Hockey

You are invited to take part in a study as part of Madison Danford’s Master’s thesis research at the University of Toronto. The following information is intended to provide you with an overview of the study so that you can make an informed decision about whether you would like to participate in the research.

The research study you are participating in may be reviewed for quality assurance to make sure that the required laws and guidelines are followed. If chosen, (a) representative(s) of the Human Research Ethics Program (HREP) at the University of Toronto may access study-related data and/or consent materials as part of the review. All information accessed by HREP will be upheld to the same level of confidentiality that has been stated by the research team.

What is the purpose of the study?

There has been very little research to investigate the experiences women officials in sport. Since women are in a significant minority in hockey officiating, this is an important area of research. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms assures gender equity, and it is important to determine whether any inequities based on gender exist in the male dominated work of hockey officiating. Given the crucial role that officials play, it is important to determine if women officials enjoy equitable experiences and opportunities. This exploratory study is the first to explore women’s experiences as ice hockey officials in Canada.

Who is conducting the research?

This research is being conducted by Madison Danford, a Master of Exercise Science (MSc) Candidate in the Department of Exercise Sciences, Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education at the University of Toronto. She is supervised by Professor Peter Donnelly, who is also the Director of the Centre for Sport Policy Studies at the University of Toronto.

Can I participate? If you are over 18 years of age and have, or have previously held a level II or higher certification in hockey, and have experience officiating in hockey in some capacity, you are eligible to participate.

Will I be compensated for my time? TTC tokens and/or gas compensation is currently provided during interviews taking place within the GTA if travel is required for interviews.

156 How much time will this require? If you decide that you would like participate in an interview, this will be held at a time and location convenient to you. The interview may last anywhere between 30-90 minutes.

What personal information will need to be collected? Some background information will be collected from you and this will include information such as the number of years you have been officiating, your level of certification, and the location and level of officiating. This personal information is useful to the study in exploring how experiences may vary.

Will my identity remain confidential? To ensure your confidentiality, you will be asked to select a pseudonym of your choice, and this will be used when analyzing data. Only Madison Danford and her supervisor, Professor Donnelly, will have access to the master spreadsheet with this information and this will be stored on a secure server on a password protected computer in Madison’s office at the University. In order to protect your identity, your pseudonym may be used in my Master’s thesis and any reports/presentations of the research. Pseudonyms will also be used in the thesis and reports/presentations when referring to specific hockey organizations and the names of programs if there is any chance that using the real names would help to identify you. In addition, all interview recordings and transcripts will be stored on a password protected external hard drive. Only Madison Danford will have access to this material. Professor Donnelly may also help to analyze the data but will not be provided any of your identifying information.

What if I no longer want to participate in the project? That is not a problem at all. Please let Madison know and all personal information that has been collected about you will be not be used in my thesis or any other publications or presentations; you will also be able to inform me about what you would like me to do with the information. Further steps will also be taken to ensure that this information is not used within data collection or analysis. You will be able to withdraw from participation in the study at any time until Madison submits her thesis to her advisory committee (approximately July, 2019).

What will I be asked to do? You will be asked questions about your hockey/officiating background, your experiences as an official, and about any relevant events you have witnessed or heard about from other officials. It is your right to refuse to answer any questions that you prefer not to answer, or to decline to discuss any topics that you would prefer not to discuss. You may also stop the interview at any time.

What will happen with the results of the study? The data collected will initially be analyzed to identify any key themes. Data may then be included in Madison Danford’s Master’s thesis and used in subsequent academic publications and presentations.

Who do I contact if I have further questions? If any have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us, at any time. You can contact Madison Danford at 613-920-4662 or email at [email protected] You can also

157 contact Madison’s supervisor, Professor Peter Donnelly on 416-946-5071 or email [email protected] Who do I contact if I have concerns about how the research was conducted? You can contact the University of Toronto’s Office of Research Ethics if you have any comments or concerns regarding how the research was conducted, including questions about your rights as a participant. You can email [email protected] or phone +1 416-946- 3273

Exploring the experiences of women officials in ice hockey

By signing this form, I acknowledge that:

I. The researcher has given me the opportunity to ask questions about the study and its procedures and that these questions have been answered to my satisfaction. II. At any time during the study, I may request further clarification from the researcher. I can do this by contacting the researcher by phone or email. My participation in the research is voluntary and I am under no obligation to participate in the study. In addition, I acknowledge that I am free to withdraw from the study at any time, without explanation. III. I have been told that my personal information will be kept confidential as desired, except where release of information is required by law. The only exception to this is the supervisor of the thesis with whom data might need to be discussed during the data analysis process. Where sharing data with the supervisor (Professor Peter Donnelly) is necessary, for example to gain his assistance with analysis, the interviewer (Madison Danford) will ensure that he will not have access to personal identifying information. IV. No information that would identify me will be released or printed if I do not wish it. V. The possible risks and benefits (if any) of this study have been explained to me and in no way

does signing this consent form waive my legal rights nor does it relieve the researchers or

involved institutions from their legal and professional responsibilities.

VI. I may obtain a copy of this consent form (and the appended letter) for my records

I, ______(print name) consent to participate in the study, Women Ice Hockey Officials and Gender Relations in Officiating being carried out at the University of Toronto.

Participant’s signature:______Date:______Telephone: ______E-mail: ______I, the undersigned, have, to the best of my ability, fully explained the nature of this study to the participant. I believe that the person whose signature appears above understands the implications and voluntary nature of his/her involvement in the research procedures. Researcher’s signature:______Date:______Telephone: ______E-mail: ______

Sincerely,

158 Madison Danford MSc Candidate, Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education University of Toronto, 613-920-4662 [email protected]

159 Appendix E: Interview Guide

This project is exploratory in nature and aims to investigate gender relations and the experiences of women ice hockey officials at various levels of hockey across Canada, and especially in the Greater Toronto Area. In particular, the key research questions are: What are the experiences of women officials in ice hockey, especially in terms of their relations with men as players, spectators, coaches and other officials?

What are the process(es) or framework(s) (if any) that best describe and characterise the development and experiences of women officials in ice hockey? What are the implications of this exploratory project and how might they be used the generate change?

Sporting and Officiating Background • Tell me about your sport background? • Did you play ice hockey? If so, for how long and at what levels? • Your current officiating certification level? • How long have you been officiating? • How did you become a hockey official? • How far would you like to advance in officiating? Are there opportunities to advance? • What are the best things about being a hockey official?

Experiences of Women Ice Hockey Officials • General experiences of being a woman official? • Any difficulties that result from being a woman official in male-dominated spaces (mixed officiating squad, certification courses, interacting with men coaches, officiating men’s/boy’s games, etc.) • Differences between officiating men’s and women’s games? • Examples of being taken seriously and not being taken seriously as a woman official? • Tell me about the power structure when a man is the referee and the lines people are women? • What are the differences between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ men referees? • Are there any ways that funding plays a role in the structure of women’s hockey (compared to men’s)? • Are you given as many opportunities as men officials with similar qualifications? Why?/Why not? • Are there any ways that you think you might be treated differently from men officials because you are a woman official? (By other referees (men/women)?, by men players/women players?, by men/women coaches?, by men/women spectators?) How do you know this? • It has been reported that women referees have not always been paid for the mileage involved in travel to officiate games. Has that occurred to you? If so, what was your reaction? • What are the best and worst things about being a woman official?

160 • Any specific examples of sexist behaviour that really stand out for you? What about racism, ableism, elitism, homophobia, etc. • Anything I have missed, or that you would like to talk about?

Would I be able to follow up by email or phone if I have any further questions or need clarification on anything?

161 Appendix F: Observation Guide

• What is my positionality in the space? o Where? o Why? • Who do I see? Who don’t I see? o Spectators o Teams o Employees • Who do I hear? Where are the coming from? o What are they saying? o Who might be saying it? o How is it being said? o Who is it directed towards? • Who is on the ice? o Officials o Players o Coaches • Who is in the stands? o Men o Women o Children

162 Appendix G: Hockey Canada Officiating Registration Numbers

2014-2015 Level I Level Level Level Level Level Other Total II III IV V VI British M 2205 1470 254 46 19 7 -- 4001 Columbia F 230 122 14 5 ------371 4372 Alberta M 2026 2062 357 77 23 8 25 4578 F 161 132 18 3 1 -- 1 316 4894 Saskatchewan M 1647 755 220 48 21 7 9 2707 F 157 63 9 4 ------233 2940 Manitoba M 571 356 495 31 12 5 -- 1470 F 67 32 20 6 ------125 1595 Northwestern M 64 64 89 29 12 3 -- 261 Ontario F 9 5 6 1 ------21 282 Eastern M 297 440 350 62 32 4 -- 1185 Ontario F 19 9 2 ------30 1215 Ontario M 1176 3842 2041 618 178 19 -- 7874 Hockey F 265 415 99 15 ------794 Federation 8668 Quebec M 867 2085 1438 45 11 11 -- 4457 F 40 59 49 5 1 -- -- 154 4611 New M 405 278 394 65 22 9 11 1184 Brunswick F 50 15 5 3 ------73 1257 Nova Scotia M 206 252 430 58 20 6 -- 972 F 16 19 18 3 ------56 1028 PEI M 108 98 135 11 7 4 -- 363 F 15 9 9 ------33 396 Newfoundland M 254 139 241 30 10 3 -- 677 and Labrador F 28 15 12 ------55 732 Hockey North M 51 36 11 8 ------106 F 1 5 ------6 112 Hockey M 9877 11877 6455 1128 367 86 45 29835 Canada F 1058 900 261 45 2 -- -- 2266 TOTAL 10935 12777 6716 1173 396 86 45 32101

163

2015-2016 Level I Level Level Level Level Level Other Total II III IV V VI British M 2225 1468 261 61 21 10 -- 4046 Columbia F 252 126 16 5 ------399 4,445 Alberta M 2137 2164 355 73 21 12 30 4792 F 173 143 21 3 1 -- -- 341 5133 Saskatchewan M 1648 762 248 46 20 8 15 2747 F 168 55 9 4 1 -- -- 237 2984 Manitoba M 550 362 492 25 11 3 -- 1443 F 61 36 18 4 ------119 1562 Northwestern M 70 91 89 29 12 3 -- 294 Ontario F 10 7 4 1 ------22 316 Eastern M 360 431 393 30 12 3 -- 1229 Ontario F 27 18 5 ------50 1279 Ontario M 1245 3640 2000 576 154 20 -- 7635 Hockey F 249 423 94 13 ------779 Federation 8414 Quebec M 949 2048 1442 54 7 11 -- 4411 F 32 56 50 10 3 -- -- 151 4662 New M 479 263 338 60 22 9 8 1179 Brunswick F 41 16 7 3 ------67 1246 Nova Scotia M 220 241 390 78 25 7 -- 961 F 24 17 21 7 ------69 1030 PEI M 118 78 148 10 6 5 -- 365 F 20 8 8 ------36 401 Newfoundland M 241 139 285 28 10 2 -- 705 and Labrador F 22 18 16 ------56 761 Hockey North M ------F ------Hockey M 10242 11687 6441 1070 321 93 53 29907 Canada F 1079 923 269 50 5 -- -- 2326 TOTAL 11321 12610 6710 1120 336 93 53 32233

164 2016-2017 Level I Level Level Level Level Level Other Total II III IV V VI British M 2087 1416 249 73 33 10 -- 3868 Columbia F 233 128 23 4 ------388 4,256 Alberta M 2400 2361 344 68 20 12 33 5238 F 191 160 18 4 1 -- 1 381 5619 Saskatchewan M 1751 815 193 64 22 6 10 2861 F 203 44 7 3 1 -- -- 258 3119 Manitoba M 587 330 515 31 11 3 -- 1469 F 95 36 20 5 ------156 1625 Northwestern M 68 55 91 28 11 2 -- 255 Ontario F 9 6 6 1 ------22 277 Eastern M 395 427 363 28 6 6 -- 1189 Ontario F 37 20 4 1 ------62 1251 Ontario M 1252 3192 1737 502 165 17 -- 6865 Hockey F 220 387 98 19 2 -- -- 726 Federation 7591 Quebec M 860 1877 1347 68 14 7 -- 4173 F 34 53 37 10 3 -- -- 137 4310 New M 468 262 330 62 29 9 6 1166 Brunswick F 46 16 5 1 1 -- -- 69 1235 Nova Scotia M 223 276 399 57 24 7 -- 986 F 22 23 12 7 ------64 1050 PEI M 113 70 158 15 4 7 -- 367 F 17 14 10 ------42 409 Newfoundland M 208 141 215 43 10 2 -- 619 and Labrador F 24 21 11 2 ------58 58 Hockey North M ------F ------100 Hockey M 10367 11222 5941 1040 349 88 49 29056 Canada F 1137 908 251 58 8 -- -- 2362 TOTAL 11504 12130 6192 1098 357 88 31519

165 2017-2018 Level I Level Level Level Level Level Other Total II III IV V VI British M 2124 1225 401 79 29 13 -- 3871 Columbia F 268 116 37 6 ------427 4298 Alberta M 2505 2332 315 66 22 10 56 5306 F 200 157 19 4 1 -- 2 383 5689 Saskatchewan M 2032 648 208 51 19 8 4 2970 F 213 47 8 5 2 -- -- 275 3245 Manitoba M 550 301 545 34 9 3 -- 1442 F 80 36 24 3 ------143 1585 Northwestern M 65 37 87 30 12 2 -- 233 Ontario F 10 3 5 1 ------19 252 Eastern M 334 525 325 41 17 5 -- 1247 Ontario F 33 28 3 1 1 -- -- 66 1313 Ontario M 1158 2946 1550 479 149 21 -- 6303 Hockey F 101 157 26 2 1 -- -- 287 Federation 6590 Quebec M 1006 1852 1369 91 12 9 -- 4339 F 48 51 45 17 3 -- -- 164 4503 New M 471 270 301 58 33 8 9 1150 Brunswick F 36 18 6 1 1 -- -- 62 1212 Nova Scotia M 221 179 386 45 11 7 -- 849 F 35 21 24 5 1 -- -- 86 935 PEI M 106 69 167 11 5 5 -- 363 F 20 5 18 1 ------44 407 Newfoundland M 282 161 292 47 13 2 -- 797 and Labrador F 32 15 16 2 ------65 862 Hockey North M 9 36 15 6 1 -- -- 67 F -- 4 -- 1 ------5 72 Hockey M 10863 10581 5961 1038 332 93 69 28937 Canada F 1076 658 231 49 10 -- 2 2026 TOTAL 11939 11239 6192 1087 342 93 71 30963

166

Appendix H: Officiating Level System Breakdown

Level I

Purpose To prepare a young or new official to officiate Minor Hockey

Certification An individual is certified at Level I with attendance and completion of a Level I clinic. Some Branches require completion of a national examination, to be marked and returned prior to the completion of the clinic. Delivery Minimum of eight (8) hours of instruction May be presented over two evenings, or on a Saturday and/or Sunday Note Upon completion of the Level I requirements, the official should receive a certificate and card. Minimum age guidelines may be set by individual branches.

Level II

Purpose To further enhance the training and skills of Minor Hockey officials

Certification A person must be a minimum of sixteen (16) years of age to obtain Level II status. Must attend and participate in all sessions of the Level II clinic. Must obtain a minimum of 70% on a written national examination, to be marked and returned prior to the completion of the clinic. Must pass a practical, on-ice evaluation, performed by a qualified Branch Hockey Canada Officiating Program supervisor. Delivery Minimum of eight (8) hours of instruction May be presented over two evenings, or all day on a Saturday or Sunday Note A novice official, seventeen (17) years of age or older, may obtain Level I and II certification in one year based on ability. This is the only opportunity within the Hockey Canada Officiating Program to accomplish two levels in one year. This is designed to encourage persons with playing or coaching experience to consider officiating. Upon successful completion of the clinic, examination and on-ice supervision.

Level III

Purpose To prepare officials capable of refereeing Minor Hockey Playoffs, Minor Hockey Regional Playoffs and Female National Championships, or being linesmen in Junior B, C, D, Senior and Bantam or Midget Regional Championships

167 Certification Must be fully certified at Level II and referee at least one year at that level Must attend and participate in all sessions at a Level III clinic Must obtain a minimum of 80% on a written national examination, to be marked and returned prior to the completion of the clinic Must be judged capable of refereeing in Minor Hockey Playoffs Must pass a practical, on-ice evaluation, performed by a qualified Branch Hockey Canada Officiating Program supervisor Delivery Minimum of eight (8) hours of instruction An official at Level III will have a thorough knowledge of the playing rules and the role of an official Similar delivery options as in Level II although the Level III is usually presented in one day Note Upon successful completion of Level III (clinic, examination and on-ice evaluation).

Level IV

Purpose To prepare hockey officials capable of refereeing Senior, Junior A, B, C, D, Minor Hockey Regional and National Championships, Female Hockey National Championships and designated Minor Hockey IIHF competition, or being a linesman in Major Junior, Junior A, Senior, CIS, CCAA, Inter- Branch and IIHF competition Certification Must be fully certified at Level III and referee at least one year at that level Attendance at Level IV will be by Branch invitation only Certification at Level III does not automatically make one eligible for Level IV Must attend and participate in all sessions of a Level IV clinic Must obtain a minimum of 80% on a written national examination Must pass a practical, on-ice evaluation, performed by a qualified Branch Hockey Canada Officiating Program supervisor Must be capable of officiating in any one of the categories as listed under purpose When an official fails the practical on-ice evaluation, certification will not be validated; however, the official may request a second evaluation. The second evaluation will be done at Branch convenience but at no extra cost to the Branch Delivery Minimum of fourteen (14) hours of instruction. Usually is presented over an entire weekend. The topic areas for a Level IV clinic are outlined by the Hockey Canada National Office. Branches are encouraged to contact the Hockey Canada Manager, Officiating for assistance in staging a Level IV clinic Note Upon successful completion of Level IV (clinic, examination, on-ice evaluation).

Level V

Purpose To prepare competent officials to referee Major Junior, Junior A, Senior, CIS, and related Inter-Branch Playoffs

168 Certification Must be fully certified at Level IV and referee at least one year at that level. Attendance at Level V will be by Branch invitation only Must attend and participate in all sessions of the Level V clinic Must obtain a minimum of 90% on a written national examination Must pass a practical on-ice evaluation, performed by a qualified Branch Hockey Canada Officiating Program supervisor Must undergo fitness and skating tests Must be capable of officiating in one of the categories as listed under “purpose” Delivery Minimum of fourteen (14) hours of instruction. Usually is presented over an entire weekend. The topic areas for a Level V clinic are outlined by the Hockey Canada National Office. Branches are encouraged to contact the Hockey Canada Manager, Officiating for assistance in staging a Level V clinic Note All officials reaching Level V are required to pass an annual written national examination and fitness test to qualify for Inter-Branch assignments.

Level VI

Purpose To prepare competent officials capable of refereeing at National Championship finals and designated IIHF competition (i.e. Memorial Cup, Royal Bank Cup, Allan Cup, University Cup, CCAA finals, World Championships, Olympics, FISU Games)

Certification Branch nominations are submitted to the Hockey Canada National Office and are reviewed by an established selection committee Must be fully certified at Level V (including fitness tests) and referee one year at that level Must attend and participate in all sessions of a Level VI clinic Must obtain a minimum of 90% on a written national examination Must pass a practical on-ice evaluation, performed by a national supervisor. Delivery Level VI clinics are held based on national need for Level VIs. The Hockey Canada Manager, Officiating is responsible for the organization of the site and program, establishing criteria and review of the candidates qualifications Minimum of four (4) days of instruction Attempts are made to stage the clinic in conjunction with a major training program or early in the season, requesting cooperation from local leagues so officials are able to work scrimmages or games Note All officials reaching Level VI are required to pass an annual written national examination and fitness test to qualify for Inter-Branch, National and International assignments

169