Evidence of meeting #47 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was case.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:40 p.m.
Spokesperson, Conseil national des chômeurs et chômeuses
It would definitely be good to have access to the statistics. They would supplement our own statistics that we keep locally. We nevertheless have good local statistical tables concerning situations in our area.
As regards the assessors, if there are only two, generally we'll automatically recommend that people wait and file a postponement request, particularly if the assessor representing the worker is absent. In our view, it's to no one's benefit to appear before only two assessors.
12:40 p.m.
Spokesperson, Conseil national des chômeurs et chômeuses
As for the umpires, it's very long. Even if the claimant has found work, the period they want to recover is a period when he was in any case unemployed. There is a benefit period to be recovered, even if it's been 14 months.
12:40 p.m.
Bloc
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
You can't go 14 months without a job. If the person has found a job during that period, the Employment Insurance Commission will say that the individual was employed during that period and that he has to repay it.
12:40 p.m.
Spokesperson, Conseil national des chômeurs et chômeuses
If the individual goes back to work and is no longer eligible for benefits, it is possible to recover the hours accumulated. Some people have banked hours. If the person's claim is denied because of misconduct or that person loses the 2,000 hours accumulated, that's quite significant.
12:40 p.m.
Bloc
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
I'll close by thanking you for the good work you're doing for unemployed workers. Your role is essential. You are often the first people these individuals consult when they have a problem. You submit contentious cases to MPs' offices, but I want to tip my hat to you, especially since you receive no assistance from the federal government to support your organizations. Moreover, there might be a recommendation that the federal government provide financial encouragement for your organizations.
Thank you very much.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
Thank you very much.
Madam Charlton, you have seven minutes, please.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Chris Charlton NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON
Thank you for being here with us today.
I want to pick up where Mr. Savage left off and perhaps take it in a slightly different way, and that is to address the relative formality or informality of the hearings process. You commented on some people having representation and others not having it and said that some rely on legal aid to get that representation.
I always appreciated the fact that you could in fact make representations without any representation and I felt that this made the process incredibly accessible. To me, that's a really important part of the process. I understand, of course, that there are times when representation is hugely beneficial to the process.
Could you comment on how, if you were to rewrite the system, you would maintain accessibility and still make sure that people are represented in such a way that they receive a fair outcome?
12:40 p.m.
Coordinator, Mouvement autonome et solidaire des sans-emploi (réseau québécois)
There is a problem with the way the appeal docket is established. The commission prepares the docket and uses the case law that is more consistent with its point of view. The claimant reads that, sees that the case law is against him and against his right to benefits. If he isn't represented, that is to say if he represents himself, he becomes discouraged and abandons the appeal.
Perhaps it could be a role of the commission or Service Canada to provide people with better information. An assistance service might perhaps be appropriate. At least they should show more neutrality and permit appeals. With regard to the appeal docket, we sense that a single point of view is defended, and it's that of the commission. The claimant finds himself isolated. Whatever the case may be, I believe your groups are doing good work with representation.
12:45 p.m.
Spokesperson, Conseil national des chômeurs et chômeuses
Of course, it would be preferable for a body independent of the board of referees and the commission to prepare the appeal docket. For the moment, it's the commission people who do it. The claimants or individuals appealing a decision thus automatically have some doubt.
Furthermore, the hearing is normally held in the commission's offices, which casts even more doubt on the board of referees' impartiality. People have to be reassured every time, even when we meet them. We tell them that this is the board of referees and that they are people from the general public. We explain the entire situation to them, but even when they trust us, they nevertheless have to go to the commission's offices and the docket is prepared by it. It's difficult. There's still a little doubt in people's minds.
I'd also like to talk about the decisions made by the board of referees, particularly in overpayment cases. In those circumstances, if the appeal is denied, the commission automatically proceeds with recovery. It receives the information and the recovery is set in motion internally within a period of two or three days. We've seen some cases of this kind in our area. However, the person doesn't receive the decision from the board of referees for five to seven days. When they're informed of the decision, they have 60 days to appeal it, but the fact remains that the recovery process has already been triggered by the commission. People don't have the time to think or to go and meet with people to determine whether it's worth the trouble to appeal the decision to the umpire. The commission has already started the repayment process. When the person goes to appeal, 15 days or three weeks later, that person will already have received notices of debt that in any case will be payable. At that stage, those people have already been dealing with financial problems for some time. They have lost their jobs. They have had to take time to appeal the decision and appear before the board of referees. All that adds to their problems and can have a snowball effect at some point. These people may be suffering from anxiety, may become sick and, in many cases, ultimately claim EI sickness benefits.
Within the 60-day period during which appeals are possible, the commission may first take 21 days to issue its notice. Claimants should at least be informed of the decision at the same time as the commission, that is within the seven- to 10-day period during which the commission must render its decision. Like the commission, they should have time to analyze the situation before deciding whether to appeal the decision. Then, if it is determined that there is a 21-day period, as for the commission, and if the commission wants to proceed with recovery, it could implement the process. That would at least enable people to check with an accountant, a lawyer, an advisor or someone else to see whether it's worthwhile to keep going, potentially as far as the umpire and, if so, how to go about that.
12:45 p.m.
Coordinator, LASTUSE du Saguenay
I have a few comments to make. Ultimately, they have to comply with the board of referees' training document, which is entitled Tribunal Proceedings in Employment Insurance, which is supported by judgments of the Supreme Court of Canada.
The government isn't doing what it should be doing. It should tell commission people that they have to stop putting pressure on the board. As for the dockets, I repeat what I said earlier, that the appeal is filed by the claimant, but that the commission prepares the appeal docket in accordance with its own viewpoint. In my brief, you'll see that, in some cases, it even changes the grounds of appeal.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Chris Charlton NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON
I rather wanted to go to a place that Mr. Komarnicki didn't want us to go, and now that he has left, I want to take advantage.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Chris Charlton NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON
It's with respect to the appointment process. I think it is tied into practice and procedure, because it is about fairness, and for the process to be perceived to be fair is really important. That is part of practice and procedure, and I hope we get a chance to explore that a little more later.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
Thank you very much.
Before I go to Mr. Vellacott, let me tell committee members that the analyst was able to clarify something for us with regard to Mr. Simms' question.
The commission, the employer, and the worker all can appeal the decision of the board of referees. Each one of the parties can make an appeal, not just one or the other. I just wanted to clarify that. Thank you very much.
Mr. Vellacott, you have seven minutes.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
My quick question may be a little bit for the committee members around here as well. The first panel seemed to imply that it was maybe too formal a process. I'm hearing from the group now presenting that it's about right, that they don't figure that it's overly formal, for the most part.
The other thing we heard from the first panel in the earlier hour was that a number of them said the process was too slow. I think you're saying, if we are hearing you correctly, that it's too fast, and that sometimes you'd like to slow it down. Am I understanding correctly or not? You don't have enough time to prepare...?
12:50 p.m.
Coordinator, LASTUSE du Saguenay
That's too fast. There are seven days between the moment I receive the appeal docket and the appearance. Before the appeal is filed, that can drag on because the board has 30 days to set the case down for hearing and it has to do so within 30 days of receipt of the docket by the clerk. If the commission keeps the docket at its office for 15 days, that's 45 days. If it keeps it for 30 days, that's 60 days. That's part of the procedure. I can't speak for all the regions, but this is systematic in our area.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
Okay. Let me understand this. So you are saying as well that it is too slow, then, is that correct? The process is often too slow, even though sometimes you want to slow it down a bit because you need a little more time at some phase of it. Would that be correct to say?
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
Sometimes you want to slow it down a bit because you need a little more time...?