Finance Committee on Dec. 7th, 2021

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I thought I had two and a half minutes. It's good that I have six.

My first question is about seasonal workers. I would like to know how far the bill applies to them.

As I understand it, there are two criteria. Firstly, you have to have suffered a fall in your average earnings over a well-defined 12‑month period, from March 2020 to March 2021. The second criterion, however, is that you must have experienced a 50% decline in revenue in the current month compared to the same month in a previous year. However, for seasonal businesses that do not earn income during the off-season, how can 50% of zero be calculated? That is particularly difficult.

I would like to know what Bill C‑2 provides for seasonal workers and how they can be compensated.

[Catherine Demers]

Thank you for the question.

Let me add some clarifications.

Many of these workers have benefited from temporary measures offered by employment insurance. If they were affected by the pandemic, if they experienced job loss or reduced hours, they may have been able to access EI benefits over the past year or the Canada recovery benefit. The benefits we are talking about today would take into account the income received, including the Canada recovery benefit or the EI benefits received. These benefits would be included in the $5,000 minimum earnings requirement. In the case of seasonal workers, these sources of income would therefore qualify.

I hope this was a more complete answer to your question.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Following on from your response about eligible sources of income, I would ask: if these workers normally have no expected income during an off-season, what figures are you basing this on?

[Catherine Demers]

We are basing this on the previous 12 months or the year 2020. If they did not work, but received benefits during that period and the amounts received add up to a minimum of $5,000, they may be eligible for assistance.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

I see.

What about the second criterion, whereby a month is compared to that same month from a previous year?

[Catherine Demers]

I'm not sure if this applies to the benefit we are talking about for workers. We don't look at one month's earnings compared to another month. Perhaps that is the case for the business benefit. For workers, however, this is not the case. It's really in comparison to—

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

We are talking about the hard-hit companies, right?

[Catherine Demers]

Oh, I see; I was talking about the workers.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

How then can seasonal businesses that have no income in the low season meet the second criterion?

[Yves Poirier]

I can answer the question.

It's helpful to understand how employment support programs work. In terms of the stimulus package for the hardest hit businesses, the criterion of having suffered a drop in income in a particular month compared to another month certainly comes from the old wage and rent subsidy program. This is the measure that was established at the beginning of the pandemic. It's been in the program since the beginning and it's very well understood by employers. So that criterion is pretty clear.

In practice, this means that businesses must demonstrate a loss of income in the current month. The government chose this criterion in order to target the hardest hit businesses. In this way, there is no change in the rules compared to those previously in place. This measure would also apply under the new program.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

So in summary, we are on the same page when it comes to businesses.

With respect to seasonal workers, previously, they could collect the Canada recovery benefit, or CRB, without having to do so through their enterprise. Now, according to Ms. Demers' response, they will still be covered by Bill C‑2 if they generated more than $5,000 in earnings over the 12 months in question.

[Catherine Demers]

That's correct. Income earned in 2020 is also eligible.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Thank you, that is very clear now.

I'll ask my next question.

If someone claimed a caregiver benefit or sickness benefit this week, for example, before the bill is passed, could they claim it retroactively for the period when they were eligible?

[Catherine Demers]

Yes, that is what the bill provides. When the proposed changes come into force, they may be retroactive to November 20. Benefits had already been extended, by regulation, from October 23 to November 20. The purpose of this bill is to extend them further, from November 20 to May 7. Once these changes come into effect, workers will have 60 days to file a claim if they were affected during one of these weeks.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

You have 10 seconds.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

So I will take this opportunity to thank the officials for their answers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you.

Now we'll move to the NDP and Mr. Blaikie for six minutes.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you very much.

One of the things this legislation does is extend the leave period for workers under the Canada Labour Code so that they can be entitled to take leave consistent with the program length of the Canada recovery sickness benefit and the Canada recovery caregiving benefit, both of which are being increased by two weeks, but of course this will only be in federally regulated workplaces, or about 17% of the Canadian workforce.

What efforts have already been made to reach out to provinces? Does the government have any commitments from the provinces that they will likewise be extending leave provisions at the provincial level so that Canadians can benefit from the extension of these programs?

[Douglas Wolfe, Senior Director, Strategic Policy and Legislative Reform, Strategic Policy, Analysis and Workplace Information Directorate, Labour Program, Department of Employment and Social Development]

Thank you, Mr. Blaikie. I can respond to that question if you'd like. I'm from the labour program.

You're quite right that the provisions do only apply to federally regulated workers, so it's a small fraction of the overall labour force. Certainly, provinces and territories are aware of these provisions and are certainly aware that Bill C-2 is making its way through Parliament. We fully expect that they will make the amendments that would be required so that employees within the provincial and territorial jurisdictions could also have job-protected leave.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Is that expectation based on any communication that you've had with the provinces? Are there any provinces that have introduced legislation so that this can be done in a timely way?

[Douglas Wolfe]

To my knowledge, no province has introduced legislation yet, but certainly with a bill like this one, provinces would normally follow suit. Of course, they are fully autonomous, but normally they would follow suit on a bill such as this one.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Has anyone in the federal government surveyed the legislative calendars of provinces to get an idea of when they might be able to introduce and pass legislation?

Provided this legislation passes in time for Christmas, I'm thinking that if no other provinces have undertaken to make complementary legislative reforms, this leave wouldn't actually be available to 87% of the Canadian workforce, or thereabouts—maybe 83%—until some time in late January, February or March. Does the federal government have any expectation as to when it will be available? Respecting, of course, that provinces are independent, has there been enough communication with them to have a reasonable expectation about when provincial leave requirements might be expanded?

[Douglas Wolfe]

Yes, that's a great question, and it's certainly important. I should say that for most provinces they already do have provisions in place, due to what has come before, so for some of them, this might mean simply extending these provisions; but for the vast majority of them, they already do have provisions in place, just to be clear.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Okay. So for the vast majority of provinces, you're saying that the leave provisions required are already in place and Canadians could avail themselves of this in most provinces as soon as this legislation passes here in Ottawa.

Could you provide a list for the committee of which provinces would already be compliant in their leave provisions with this legislation and which ones aren't, and what communications have happened with the ones that aren't?