Finance Committee on April 2nd, 2014

[Sarah Anson-Cartwright]

It is, but I will answer in English, if you don't mind.

Absolutely.

This is what's so fascinating and challenging, that where we look at occupations in demand, they are, if you will, across all parts of the spectrum. It's not to say that we shouldn't be focused on creating a lot more respect and appreciation for not only the skills in the skilled trades professions, but also the fact that you can command a pretty high wage these days. That's something which I think parents need to learn.

Also, we do need the more what we call highly qualified university educated people in the areas of engineering, as I said, the health care sector—a great demand continues there as we look out to the forecast—and computer scientists. You've probably heard from the information technology sector that they have a crying need for more entrants into that field.

Absolutely, it's across the spectrum but we have to be very strategic about where those expected jobs are in the occupations in demand and how that's going to align with where, looking ahead, the opportunities will be in the country.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Thank you.

My last question goes to Mr. DiCaro.

You talked about the manufacturing sector. In this study, we have heard a lot about workforce mobility and people leaving their communities to find employment elsewhere. That must factor into this discussion somewhere. Is it a problem? It is not that we do not want people to go to other places, but is finding a balance a challenge? We do not want to start an exodus from communities and regions, but we still want young people to be able to travel to find employment.

What do you see as the challenges?

[Angelo DiCaro]

That's a very good point. The group that has been impacted the most within the decline of manufacturing is younger workers. They're the last to get in the door and they're typically the first to get laid off when things go south.

Again, anecdotally, we can look at some of the highest youth unemployment communities in Canada. A lot of them are in Ontario. In places like London and places like Windsor, there's been a mass exodus of these manufacturing jobs, as is clear. We know this. That's forcing some young people to make some important decisions on where they go and also on where they raise their families. Sometimes they have families. How do they disrupt that family life to go elsewhere?

These are problems, but at the same time, in understanding the challenges of labour market mobility in this case, it's important that we look at this really critically, knowing that there's another side to it that we can't just dismiss. I think that's critical.

I have just one more point on that. One of the things we've seen in Ontario, and it ties into one of the recommendations, is some directed investment on infrastructure projects, such as what happened when Toronto purchased new subway cars. There was a provision that said the cars had to be built in Canada.

Because of that provision, those cars were manufactured in a plant in Thunder Bay. It saved that plant. It was a Bombardier plant in Thunder Bay, a very old plant. Because of that provision, it actually brought in 500 new young workers, who now earn $30-plus an hour, a lot of them in skilled trades. It was all a product of good policy that directed public spending to save a plant and keep manufacturing jobs in a remote community.

To us, there's something in this that we should be exploring, not dismissing as protectionist and as old-school economic thinking. This could have tangible results. I think that's one answer, in some ways, to that question.

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, Dave Van Kesteren]

Thank you.

I have the last round. I want to very quickly shift directions. At the last meeting, something occurred to me that I want to share.

I think I'm going to go to you, Monique, with the Federation of Independent Business, but anybody else can jump in on this too.

I had a forum with business owners. This happened a number of years ago. During the course of the conversation, we talked about legacy, about turning it over to the kids. The overwhelming response was “there is no bleep-bleep way that my kid...”. These were professionals, the very people you're talking about now. We're talking about those parents. What was the reason for this? Because they couldn't compete with some of the public sector jobs.

I want you to comment on that and see if we're not missing a component that's very important as well, the fact that...for example, the police and the firemen.... If you want to talk about that, or if anybody else wants to talk about that, please go ahead.

[Monique Moreau]

We do have a piece of research called WageWatch that we're updating this year with the new StatsCan data, which showed that at the federal public service level, I believe.... I could be wrong and it might be the whole public service, but I think it's just the federal level. When you look at just wages, apples to apples, the same jobs, and the StatsCan codes, people employed in the public sector make 18% more than in the private sector. When you include benefits, that brings it up to 40%, so a small business owner can't compete.

Also, we do get calls from our members saying that it's not necessarily just the public sector, but It's someone across the street offering 50¢ more an hour, so the person leaves. When a bigger business comes in and hires that individual for $1 or $2 or $3 more, after the small business owner has spent a year or two or five training them, they're starting all over again.

The result of all this is it is incredibly difficult for our members, and even our own organization, to compete, especially here in Ottawa, in regard to retaining individuals because of those lucrative positions in the public sector.

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, Dave Van Kesteren]

Could we have those statistics you talked about? Could you send them to the committee?

[Monique Moreau]

I certainly can send the old report, yes.

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, Dave Van Kesteren]

Sarah, did you have something to add?

[Sarah Anson-Cartwright]

Yes, please.

I hear from members across the country. I want to give you an example.

The St. John's Board of Trade has a member there that I'm told is a small firm that does cleaning in offices and so forth. Because of what's on offer in the public sector for cleaning jobs in hospitals and so forth, they are really struggling to attract and retain workers at the wage they can offer to be competitive in their space. There they are, and yet because they're offering a wage that's considered and compared to the public sector wage, they can't even attract temporary foreign workers. They're caught on both sides of the spectrum, so to speak.

That's just an anecdotal example.

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, Dave Van Kesteren]

Does anybody else want to throw anything into this quickly before I ask my next question?

Mr. DiCaro.

[Angelo DiCaro]

I feel obligated to say something about that. It's more the principle of this, and I appreciate that there are competitive issues to consider.

In our submission to you, you'll see some charts that I've included. In a lot of ways, with respect to public administration jobs for young people, the other higher-wage sectors that on average would pay the higher wage for young workers, these are typically all in decline. What we're watching is a sort of a reconfiguration of the jobs available to young people, and to all workers for that matter. They're sort of on this low-wage kind of model.

At some point, we're going to have to take a sober look at that and say that as much as a contract cleaning company wants to get into the hospital sector and they're paying $11 an hour, for example, just to—

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, Dave Van Kesteren]

I'm going to interrupt you for a second. I'll give you another chance, but what I do want to say is this. What we're trying to lay out here is that kids are making the wrong choices. They're getting into programs, but we're not necessarily saying that those jobs are there. The parents are saying, “Don't you dare do this; you're going to become this”.

Would you agree that this is part of the problem?

[Angelo DiCaro]

Yes, I would agree, and again back to the point I made earlier, but anyway, just to qualify....

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, Dave Van Kesteren]

Very quickly, I'm running out of time, so I want to be fair with everyone else, too.

I'm really intrigued when I hear the working relationship you have with, first of all, your workers and the union. That's fantastic. Angelo, I have to tell you something. You are a new breed of your union. I'm going to remember the old days with the CAW, for instance. We were talking about scarring, and I'll tell you, the first time I encountered the CAW in my office, I was scarred. I was emotionally bruised.

So, I'm really pleased to see that. The reason I'm saying that is I'm detecting a new way of thinking when we talk about looking at schooling and what we're looking at in Germany. Is that something that we're starting to see more and more of, where the unions...?

I remember once saying to reps who came that nothing is going to change until we all roll up our sleeves and say, “How can we make this the best company in the world again?” Is that kind of an attitude that's starting to develop in the workforce today?

[Angelo DiCaro]

I'm assuming you want me to respond to it.

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, Dave Van Kesteren]

I'll ask Mr. Reid, too, so you have a few seconds, and then Mr. Reid.

[Angelo DiCaro]

The short answer is I believe so. I think these are common problems that we're trying to find common solutions for.

One thing I'll raise that's a bit of a disappointment is that some of the forums where there is this kind of collaborative multi-stakeholder dialogue are dying off. These sector councils that existed, Germany on a different model, were built on this kind of labour-government-employer collaborative model. We're seeing funding cuts on these things, and they're just dying away. I think that's going in the wrong direction.

To your point, Chair, I think this is a good thing to do, but in practice we're seeing in some ways on a sectoral basis the opposite actually happening.

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, Dave Van Kesteren]

Thank you.

We have run out of time. I'm going to suggest, because we've rushed you through so quickly, if any of you would like to just take two minutes and wrap up what you've been saying, you have that opportunity. Is that acceptable to the rest of the committee?

[Gerald Keddy, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS]

I have to go. I apologize.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

All right.

Angelo, if you want to, you could wrap up your comments. You have two minutes.

[Angelo DiCaro]

I feel like I've taken up too much time as it is with my counterparts here.

I think I've made my point. The essence of our submission here is for the committee to look deeper in terms of the restructuring.

I do want to raise just one point, and that's my only point here, on the issue about retail jobs not being around back then as they are now. In fact, the retail jobs were still the lead employment sector for young people in 1976. There were just fewer of them. Actually, they were typically good jobs. Some of the supermarket jobs were actually very well-paid jobs that people built careers around. That is changing. Too many young people are clumped into these jobs that actually aren't delivering, and I'll emphasize the point, it needs to be considered in your deliberations on this issue. That's my point.

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, Dave Van Kesteren]

Thank you.

Sean.

[Sean Reid]

When we came away from the trip to Germany, the first thing I remarked on, both publicly and privately, was at the federal level there is far more that unites both industry and labour on the skilled trades and the labour shortage than actually divides those who are seriously engaged in the issue. It's at the provincial level where things start to fall apart, and I recognize that the federal government only has certain influence there. But the turf wars that exist at the provincial level with apprenticeship ratios, with trade certification, with new bureaucracy and red tape, is a real problem when it comes to fluid access for the young workers into this system, and the mobility of those workers. I think there definitely is a role that we would encourage the government to play in convening some harmonization at multiple layers at that level.

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, Dave Van Kesteren]

Thank you.

Peter.

[Peter Pilarski]

I'm actually going to reiterate that comment. The three of us, we often have very passionate disagreements on public policy issues, but in my experience working with Merit, when it comes to workforce development, when it comes to safety, when it comes to any of these kinds of bigger issues, we stand shoulder to shoulder; we work together. I think there's a willingness now more than ever, because everybody recognizes there are definitely big issues out there. I would agree with Sean that the federal government certainly can play a role to try to bring all the players together to have a very mature conversation about some of these issues, and maybe not get into the fray as much.