Human Resources Committee on June 20th, 2006

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

It's interesting that we're talking about literacy, which is obviously a very important issue in this country. My line of questioning concerns the language we're using in discussing this important issue.

Ms. Manson Singer, when you were talking about the 3.7 million Canadians aged 25 to 64 who do not have a high school diploma or higher credentials, you used the phrase, “condemned to lower-wage, lower-status jobs”. One question I would have is, can you define “lower-status” in this context?

[Sharon Manson Singer]

Lower-status jobs, when we're talking about this, are really jobs that fall into the area often referred to as the secondary labour market. In other words, they're jobs without well-defined benefits, without well-defined work rules, without well-defined periods of work. These are not the nine to five bankers' jobs where you have a clear expectation about what they need. Often it's shift work, without necessarily much control over the shifts as they're given, and/or it's the quality and conditions of work. That's really what I'm talking about.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

What kinds of examples are there?

[Sharon Manson Singer]

Let's take, for example, a visiting kind of health care worker, who would be there to assist in helping an older person take medication. They work for an agency in the voluntary sector; sometimes they're trained and sometimes they're not, or have very limited training. They may have one shift one week and two the next week—a very unpredictable kind of workload. Also, there is unpredictable income. That would be one example.

Cleaners would be another example. They may be rotated into different work sites and not have much control over the conditions of the work site, or may face hazardous cleaning materials without proper equipment. Those would be examples of the kinds of low-status jobs where there's not good control over the workplace.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

You're actually talking about the job conditions more than the specific employment itself.

[Sharon Manson Singer]

It's the job conditions as well as the specific employment itself, with respect to work hours and their predictability, and therefore, of course, the kind of income you can expect to receive for the job.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

But some of those jobs would be pretty necessary and important to society still.

[Sharon Manson Singer]

Absolutely. And we need to have those jobs done, and this again speaks to the need to ensure that people are literate when they are in those jobs, so that they understand how to best protect themselves and also how to really negotiate better working conditions for themselves. Because if they can't read the employment standards act, they have very little recourse to understanding how they can change their current situation.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Secondly, in referring to the nine million Canadians age 16 to 65, you say that they have literacy skills below the level considered as “necessary to live and work in today's society”. What does the phrase “necessary to live and work” mean? What do you consider that? It's pretty dramatic, that nine million people would fall into this category.

[Sharon Manson Singer]

It is very dramatic, and I think it is one we should all be concerned about, as people who are concerned about our country and the conditions and quality that we live in.

What we're talking about is the ability to participate in democratic processes, understanding how you vote and where you go to vote, understanding how to evaluate the choices that are in front of you, understanding how to navigate the health care system so that you can get the kinds of services and requirements that your physical and mental self need in order to do that. And we're also talking about basic kinds of numeracy skills, so that you can understand how to do your grocery shopping, how to plan your budget, whether or not it makes more sense for you to invest your money in an RESP or an RRSP. Those are the kinds of basic life tasks that we're talking about, and nine million Canadians do not have the required levels of literacy or numeracy to participate fully in our Canadian way of life.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

You say nine million Canadians age 16 to 65. Do you know what percentage of the population between 16 and 65 that would be?

[Sharon Manson Singer]

I'm going to turn to Ron, who may have a quick statistic on that one. No?

[Ron Saunders, Director, Work Network, Canadian Policy Research Networks]

I don't know the number offhand, but it's big.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

But it's a pretty high percentage, obviously.

[Sharon Manson Singer]

It's a very large percentage.

When we're trying to think about this, often when we're looking at problem areas in our country, we're looking at a narrow piece of the population. But this is not narrow. This is a wide-band group. It really is talking about a lot of people who are in the middle, and I think it's necessary to address it from a pan-Canadian perspective rather than a narrow targeted approach. Nine million people is almost a third of our country.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Do you see the problem, then, being that the literacy is actually falling, or is the complexity of society increasing?

[Sharon Manson Singer]

I think the answer to your question is yes on both sides. Certainly the complexity of our society is increasing and it is more difficult to navigate the kind of life choices that are put in front of Canadians at every step of their lives, but at the same time we have wide bands of our population who are not completing their basic education. Even though we've seen some increase, the divide between the urban and rural is very high, the divide between the dominant culture and aboriginal is extremely high, and these are areas where we think we really need to make a difference.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Thanks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

Monsieur D'Amours, five minutes.

[Jean-Claude D'Amours, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Murphy, I understood that you are of the opinion that the premiums paid by employers should be reduced. Do you assert that employers should stop contributing altogether?

[Michael Murphy]

I'll comment very briefly there, Mr. Chairman.

The issue is that today employers pay a premium of 40%, essentially 1.4 times what employees pay, and that's been going on for over 30 years. The rationale for that, as I mentioned earlier, in my view is no longer there. We would suggest that the appropriate level of payment is one where you drive that 1.4 number down over a series of years so that it becomes equal to what employees pay.

[Jean-Claude D'Amours, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

I would like to know your position and that of your organization regarding employment insurance and the whole range of pilot projects introduced by the government in the past. I would also like to know the Canadian Chamber of Commerce's position.

[Michael Murphy]

Thank you for the opportunity.

One issue I was concerned with is in terms of this particular pilot program. I'm using it as the latest example of a difficulty with the EI program as a whole. That's one. I think Mr. Lessard's comment earlier about the reference to a 98% success rate in terms of achieving the target is right, in terms of asking who the target audiences were.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

I don't want to filibuster, Mr. Chairman, but this is a matter of principle: Mr. Murphy obviously wants to deliver a message, but it seems to me that his statements have nothing to do with the debate on labour force mobility, which is on the agenda today. If the issue is putting into question the premiums paid by employers and employees, I am of the view that we should put aside another day for holding such a debate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

It's a question Mr. D'Amours has. I think it relates just about as much as the environmental question related. Let him continue, though. He has five minutes.