Human Resources Committee on Nov. 10th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), our study on employability in Canada will commence.

We'd just like to thank the witnesses for taking time out of their busy schedules to be here today.

On a couple of housekeeping matters, you'll have seven minutes each with your opening statements. I'll give you a one-minute sign just to help you wrap up. We'll then start with the first round of questions for seven minutes and move to a second round of five minutes.

Once again, we want to thank you for being here.

If we could just start with our opening statements, we're going to start with Ms. Gunia for seven minutes.

[Trudi Gunia, As an Individual]

I guess you all have my paper before you. Do I go through the whole paper or just summarize?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

You have seven minutes, so you summarize in whatever way you'd like.

Go ahead.

[Trudi Gunia]

My concern is as a senior who's approaching a pensionable age next year. I've been seeing a lot of articles about seniors being kept in the workforce. My concern isn't with seniors 55 plus, but with 65 plus. The stats seem to be going up, with people 65 and over working. That is not a future I look forward to.

There are also a lot of articles and studies. I have one by the C.D. Howe Institute. The title of the paper from the institute is “Boomers carry a time bomb”. They're calculating how much it's going to cost to take care of seniors, health care, and otherwise. I find that is a little scary too, when we start talking about seniors costing too much, so perhaps it would be a good idea to keep them working until 70 or 75. I think that's pretty scary.

First, I have stats on the U.S. workforce, and all of the stats show a gradual increase in seniors, women more so than men, who are staying in the workforce. I think that is due in great part to not having enough money to survive on the pensions we're given, especially if you're in the lower-income bracket.

In the one sense, there are still employers.... I haven't anything against people wanting to stay in the workforce, if they really want to do it. And there are going to be seniors who have to because of their financial situation. But I think the government has to look at addressing that by raising the pensions for those who really need to have an increase.

In Europe, these countries are finding ways to.... They're also challenged with an aging workforce. I've given specific industries here. This is on the second page. They find they must invest in training to increase their productivity. In a study from 2002 of more than 500 German companies, 22% stated aging of their workforce represented a problem for their organizations; 39% indicated they were facing challenges associated with shortages of labour.

The government says that, on the one hand, we don't have the young population, so we're going to save on education and taking care of the young in the workforce. But I think it's incumbent to really find a way to train our young people, mentor them, perhaps through the older workers too. That is what I've suggested here.

There is a program by IBM Global Services that recommends consideration and preservation of critical knowledge. One approach elicits employees' experiential or tacit knowledge through detailed interviewing or documentation explicitly capturing and storing these insights. Mentoring arrangements and communities of practice can also encourage mature workers to pass knowledge down to the next generation.

I think that's one way employers could benefit, not by keeping workers on until they're 70 or 75, but by garnering the knowledge they've gained over the years.

On page 3 I talk about how our lives have changed over the years, why women entered the workforce, what sorts of roles or careers they took, and how that changed in wartime, and then after the war women went back into the home. Then in the sixties and seventies many were forced, economically, to take jobs outside, whether they wanted to or not. Many did want to as well. But it was an economic necessity, because the cost of living had increased and because of raising children, and so on.

I go over how I feel that in this day and age women are not the ones who are so much wanting to stay in the workforce as are men, because I think that men haven't had the full duties of the household, along with raising the children.

When women reach age 65 they are perhaps looking forward to a little leisure in their lives, or maybe they're at a loss over what to do because they're used to working for much longer--that being their only job in many cases, but maybe not so much now.

I talk about the working poor. Perhaps some solutions are a guaranteed annual income, or raising the minimum wage. There are some examples here of collective bargaining and EI reform.

I talk about health. I don't buy it that we're healthier people. I think we're supplemented and sustained through medications. We have more of them now. That doesn't necessarily mean we're healthy people.

As we age everything changes--our ability to grasp new technologies, our reflexes, our mobility, our mode of life, and our outlook on life. I'm working part-time, and every time new developments come along with the computer--and they change every year--I have a problem. I have to admit it.

I've summarized my paper pretty much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much, Ms. Gunia.

Ms. Cousyn, I understand you have to leave by 9:30, so you may make your presentation now.

[Janis Cousyn, Proprietor, Calories Restaurants]

I apologize for that misunderstanding, but I've never been to one of these forums. I also have to apologize for my husband, Rémi. He intended to be here, but we are talking about a labour shortage today, and since this is a statutory holiday week, unfortunately he's doing bread this morning.

I'm not here on behalf of the Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association. I am on the board of directors of that association, and I know you have received their submission. It has some strong recommendations that I wholeheartedly endorse. However, I am here on behalf of myself and my husband as small independent operators and owners of Calories Bakery & Restaurant on Broadway Avenue here in Saskatoon. It is a 20-year established restaurant and we have 35-plus employees, at least 20 of whom are full-time.

I don't believe that my fellow small local operators in the industry have any idea of the size of the crisis that's looming ahead. I perceive that many are still in growth mode. I was at a local business forum just recently with lots of restauranteurs from our street, and they're starting to feel it, but they aren't in tune with the statistics. I've seen the statistics, so I'm acutely aware of what we're facing and what's ahead. As such, our company has chosen to delay an expansion that we had intended to pursue. We want to wait to see if we can stabilize our problem at our existing location.

When I first heard about this looming labour crisis last spring, I thought, “Oh, we won't see it in Saskatchewan for a long time. We certainly won't see it in our business for a long time. Our staff is like family. Many have been with us for years and years.” But that's not the case. As of August, we've felt an incredible difference, and it's across the board. We're talking about qualified workers and entry-level workers. We're seeing it in the front of the house and the back of the house.

We're already starting to struggle, and I really fear for the future and for the future of our industry. We can't compete with wages that are being offered in Alberta. We can't compete with the oil patch. We can only work ourselves, with our managers who choose to stay on with us in Saskatchewan and Saskatoon. It's so hard. I fear for the health implications in the future as we and our managers are required to take on more and more.

We've started to spend months recruiting. We've never seen that before. We just can't replace the workers who are moving on. Last summer we lost a qualified baker to the oil patch. We can't hire dishwashers. The kids these days just aren't really interested in that kind of work. We've looked at working with disabled workers and trying to train them, but there's an incredible lack of support. There are small programs for that, but they're just not enough.

I know that CRSA is advocating an increase in immigration and temporary work visas. That has been their approach, but I don't think that's the solution for Saskatchewan. We have a huge workforce here that's not being used to its full capacity. We have an aboriginal community that needs to come into the fold. There's huge potential to train and integrate these people into our industry.

There needs to be a fundamental shift in the EI and the social assistance programs. They need to become top-up systems rather than clawback systems. Rather than penalizing workers for getting back into the workforce, or changing from a higher-paying job to a lower-paying job, if we change the system so we are topping up their wages rather than clawing them back, that would make a huge difference.

We need to adapt to the new workplace and the new workforce, have better worker mobility, and use older workers if they want to work in our industry, without having it affect their pensions if they work part-time and things like that.

The point my husband wanted to make is that we are a teaching kitchen. We train staff, but no benefits ever accrue to us. There is no room for our current apprentice at the local technical college because they haven't increased their program to offer more spots. If you can believe it, we have an industry in crisis and they're turning away people who want to enter the cooking program. She has chosen to challenge her exam, knowing that Rémi has had at least five cooks that have challenged, and one received the highest marks in the province. But absolutely nothing accrues back to us as business owners, as we take the time and effort to train these people to help our industry survive and move forward.

I would like to see programs for mentorship, better tax benefits for us as we train these workers--something that acknowledges our work and effort.

I think I have covered everything. I just wanted to state the small operator's opinion. I don't represent everyone, but these are all important issues that need to be considered, and I really do fear for where we're headed.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Ms. Cousyn. We appreciate your being here today.

Mr. Hubich.

[Larry Hubich, President, Saskatchewan Federation of Labour]

Thank you very much.

I appreciate the opportunity to be here to present before this committee.

The Federation of Labour is a very unique organization in Saskatchewan. We are the largest labour central in the province, with over 90,000 affiliated members. We are the largest industry organization in the province, and we represent more taxpayers than any other single organization in this province.

We have a long history with employability issues. We run a workplace literacy and essential skills program called worker essential skills training, which is WEST for short. It is the longest running labour-sponsored program in Canada--17 years--that deals with literacy and essential skills.

The SFL deals with issues surrounding aboriginal workers, immigrant workers, and apprenticeship. We are a founding partner, along with the Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce, of the Saskatchewan Labour Force Development Board. The SLFDB has or will be making a presentation today. I fully endorse their presentation.

It may seem odd to some outsiders, but literacy training, workplace training, essential skills, and other employability issues are natural meeting points for business and labour. There are some rogues out there who will never agree to work with labour, or even other business organizations, but by and large, while we may disagree on tactics surrounding employability issues, we often agree on strategies.

On training, workplace literacy, and essential skills, there isn't enough time in the seven minutes for me to go over the whole range of employability issues. In the few minutes we have, I'd like to talk about workplace literacy and essential skills.

I'm sure I don't have to go over the results of the 2003 adult literacy and life skills survey. I'm also sure I don't have to read to you from the recommendations listed in the report, “Towards a Fully Literate Canada”. This report came out last November from the advisory committee on literacy and essential skills to the Minister of Human Resources. Both documents are easily accessible, well researched, and well respected.

Another document you may wish to look at is called “Literacy in Saskatchewan -- Implications of Findings from IALSS 2003”. This is a PowerPoint presentation that was prepared earlier this year under the auspices of HRSDC.

I have identified about thirteen points, particularly around literacy, that we think are essential in the labour movement. Obviously we reinforce some of the documentation you've received from other organizations, such as our federal counterpart, the Canadian Labour Congress. We support the presentation they made to this committee in October. I've included it in the kit, and I'm sure you have a copy of it.

We need core funding for the Canadian Labour and Business Centre. This centre for research and dialogue on training and other industry issues was the only organization of its kind. It worked well for business and labour, and we would like it back.

The labour market partnership agreement, such as the one Saskatchewan had with the federal government before the current government cancelled it, was a $109 million agreement. It would have been used to address those issues that this committee is dealing with.

On core funding for the delivery of workplace literacy and essential skills programs, according to Satya Brink, the director of the learning policy directorate at HRSDC, Saskatchewan needs to concentrate on citizens who are at IALS level 2 and bring them up to IALS level 3. The majority of those people are in the workplace. The workplace is the easiest venue for providing literacy and essential skills training. They need to become more productive. As we know, literacy is a transferable skill, so upgrading in the workplace also helps the worker at home and in the community.

I sympathize with the recommendations coming from the previous speaker. Believe me, we're on the same wavelength when it comes to identification and realization of the worker shortage. What we need to do is capture cooperation in a proactive way between business, labour, and government around strategies to stem the tide of people who are attracted to the oil patch. There are some vehicles we need to have in place to ensure that happens.

There is the issue of core funding for provincial, regional, and national literacy networks. These networks were wiped out as of September 25 by the cuts from the federal government, yet they are organizations closest to those who need to access community and family literacy programs.

We think there needs to be core funding for literacy that is focused on apprenticeships and journeypersons. According to the Canadian Apprenticeship Forum, literacy is one of the key barriers to successfully completing apprenticeship. We need industry-run learning centres and programs that address these needs. We need a pan-Canadian literacy strategy.

We need strong support for our public colleges and technical institutes. These institutions have proven to be the best vehicles for delivery of apprenticeship and other training programs, yet their waiting lists are years long. Again, you referred to that. We need the federal and provincial governments to make a qualitative increase in funding, so these institutions can meet the expanding needs of society and industry alike. We need strong support for union training centres. Many apprentices receive their technical training in union training centres. We think there's room for a 1% training tax fund based on the Quebec model. We need the return of the National Literacy Secretariat. Sectoral employment planning--sector councils are valuable organizations.

On the whole issue of employment and training initiatives for aboriginal people, we're constantly told that aboriginal people are our hidden assets in dealing with the shortage of skilled workers. This can be true, but first we have to give real meaning to those statements and not just turn them into platitudes. As an example, there's little doubt that over the next five to seven years, Saskatchewan's tar sands will start to be developed just like Alberta's. The demand for skilled labour in this and other skill-starved sectors as well as other occupations could be filled by aboriginal people, but only if we start working on this now. We need a massive increase in financially supported academic and apprenticeship training opportunities for aboriginal people, and we need to start that now.

We call on the government to rescind the cuts to the Status of Women budget.

Finally, in closing, I'd like to say we support the written submission of the Canadian Labour Congress. We support the submission I hope you're going to be seeing from the Saskatchewan Labour Force Development Board, which talks about the need to have industry, business, labour, and government participating together in a cooperative effort to deal with a number of these very pressing issues.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you for your presentation.

We will now move through with seven minutes. I'll just remind you that as we go through our first round, Ms. Cousyn has to leave within the half hour. You'll be able to get one round of questioning anyway, so that will be great.

Mr. Regan, seven minutes.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank each of you witnesses for coming in and taking your time to think about these difficult issues. I'm sure you're thinking about them all the time, especially Ms. Cousyn, as you explained, but for all of you, these issues are top of mind, and your knowledge is appreciated.

Let me ask Ms. Gunia a question. What we've been hearing across the country, and you understand this, is the idea of removing the requirement for mandatory retirement. The second suggestion has been that we provide systems whereby seniors can keep some portion of their pension. For instance, if they have old age security or what have you, they'd be able to keep either part or all of that and still work, so there's an incentive and they'll do a little better. You're saying we need to provide seniors with a good enough income to start with, so they don't need to work.

Are you concerned that if we lift or remove the age of mandatory retirement, it gradually creates the expectation that you ought to be working if you're able-bodied and over 65?

[Trudi Gunia]

Yes, that's what I feel. Sweden has an age of 67. I don't want to see that happen here.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

You feel it would add pressure--

[Trudi Gunia]

If you start depending on an aging workforce, you're going to run into health problems, and then you're no further ahead. It's got to be the younger workforce, but the training isn't there, and it should be, because that's who you're going to look to for employment.

I've been working since I was 16, and it will be 50 years or more that I've worked. I worked hard as a child and I don't want to work beyond 65. At the same time, I live far below the poverty level, so the necessity is there for me. I have a myriad of health problems, so I just don't see how I could do it or want to do it.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

By the way, I want to thank you because you've done a lot of research for us, and that's very useful. Thank you.

Let me ask Ms. Cousyn a question. You talked about the difficulty you've had when you tried to get people with disabilities to work, but you find they don't have enough support. Could you talk about the kinds of supports you feel are needed?

[Janis Cousyn]

They offer to send in a job coach and things like that, but a restaurant is a very particular place. Unless you've spent time in a restaurant.... You can't easily bring in a job coach, and there's often not room for it.

In certain roles in restaurants there is a real place for people with disabilities. For example, when you discuss things such as increasing immigration, you're thinking that these people are going to come in and fill these lower-level entry-level positions that the young people in Canada don't want to do, such as washing dishes.

Nobody can run a restaurant without a dishwasher; that's the reality of it. Our young Canadians don't really want to do this job, so we begin thinking we should fill it with immigrants. But with the right training and the right program, people with some disabilities would be relatively capable of doing this job. We've had some success with that. Our kitchen is particular, because it's small, and dishwashers do a lot of other things, but in certain restaurants I can see that as being highly successful.

You really have to work hard to find a disabled worker. It shouldn't be that hard. The organizations who are trying to integrate these people into the workforce should be knocking on your door saying, I have somebody I think would fit your organization. It shouldn't be the other way around.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Can you describe for us what you have seen in terms of the EI program not working, using the experiences you've had with employees, and give us a little more of an idea of what you have in mind?

[Janis Cousyn]

I find in general there's a lack of incentive for people to change jobs and change roles. We've seen success stories. For example, my key dishwasher was on social assistance for nine years. She had two foster children, and she has a third she's raising on her own who has a myriad of disabilities, in terms of social issues at school and what not. She's incredible, but nine years not in the workforce.... It took a sensitive employer like us to say, let's work with this.

You have to support their situation. It shouldn't be to her detriment to re-enter the workforce. It frustrates me to no end. She's still in subsidized housing, when she has a good job. There is a need for programs that can move her forward and get her out of there, but at the same time we as a small business can only pay what the job is worth. No matter how much we care for her and support her in other ways, a dishwasher's wage is a dishwasher's wage.

If there were a top-up system, rather than saying that as soon as you get into the workforce we're clawing back, and you don't get this and you don't get that, if we were saying, enter the workforce and we'll still give you your subsidy.... Every single time she looks at getting out on her own, she says, well, they're going to take away my this and my that.

I just think we have it wrong. This is somebody who is a dedicated worker. She shows up every single day, five days a week, and she shouldn't be in that situation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Regan, for that round.

We're going to move next to Mr. Lessard. Anybody who needs translation can put on a headset.

Monsieur Lessard, vous avez sept minutes, s'il vous plaît.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Firstly, I would like to thank you for being here this morning and for providing us with your testimony. What is good this morning, is that we have both a micro and macro perspective: an individual focusing on personal experience, a business perspective and, of course, the federation of labour. In fact, you've all really complemented each other. The work you've done within your small business, Ms. Gunia, is admirable and I appreciate your contribution.

My question is initially directed to you, Ms. Gunia. Your analysis this morning has provided us with a fairly new and fresh perspective and that is that over reliance on an aging labour force is not a good investment for the future. I understand that it may be a short-term investment in the sense that we would be calling on people who need some additional source of income because their pension is not enough.

In fact, you referred to older workers, especially in the area of manual labour, who are often afflicted with all sorts of health issues.

Have you looked at the whole issue of work adjustment for the 60 to 75-year-old workers? That's the age bracket you referred to. When you get older, of course you don't have the same physical strength and yet, the job remains physically demanding. In a business, for example, even if it's only a matter of moving a door, the physical effort required of an older worker is not the same. Have you thought about this issue?

[Trudi Gunia]

I haven't really, but if you adapt the work, I still have the concern that you're trying to keep that worker in the workforce. If you try to adapt that worker to the workforce in a different line of work, then the government, or whoever is studying this, may look at it and say, “Well, look, he can't do that, or she can't do that job, but we can keep that person in this job, so why do they need a pension?” If they're too disabled to work in one thing but they're doing well in another beyond the age of 65, there's still the possibility of saying, “As long as they do well in that job for the next five years, as they keep working, maybe we could raise the pensionable age or cut back on the pension.”

I think the danger is always there. Even that is still depending on the older worker. I think that's what you're saying. They were in a job that was too difficult, but perhaps they could do something in another way, another job that's lighter. That may be something that some people would want to do, but I think there are dangers in that. That's still depending on the older worker.

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

So if I am understanding you correctly, the current retirement age, which is 65 in Canada should not be increased. Should one wish to continue working after the age of 65, the individual should be able to choose whether it be for personal or financial reasons. Is that correct?

[Trudi Gunia]

Right, because a lot of workers are going to be working who can't afford to quit. They can't afford to leave the workforce. That is where I have a problem, too, because the pensions don't match the cost of living.

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

Thank you.

I would now like to ask Ms. Cousyn some questions. Your slant on employment insurance is really interesting. Clearly, employment insurance penalizes those that pay into it rather than supporting them. I think that what you have said here today only goes to confirm what we have been told in the past. What it is interesting is the fact that this remark was made by an employer to boot.

You said that we could use employment insurance as leverage to encourage people to turn up to work. So, in the case of a business that cannot pay its employees high wages, it can be added to their salary to make the package more competitive. You have some big businesses nearby.

Have you given any thought to the criteria one would need to meet in order to be eligible for this wage supplement? Would it be based on a business' revenue, on the profitability of the business? Have you thought about this?

[Janis Cousyn]

It's difficult to say, but for each business, there is a scale when it comes to qualifications and basic wage. So, when you hire a dishwasher, a head chef or a section manager, there is a sliding pay scale with a minimum and maximum range for each position. When you manage your business, you know how much to set aside for each position in order to remain profitable and keep your doors open. Because that's the bottom line: you have to stay open and remain an employer in the community. If you aren't able to cover your business costs, then you won't remain a viable business; you have a budget. A dishwasher's wage is pretty much set. If the dishwasher has been with you for five years, well then yes, you can increase his or her wage, but there has to be a maximum to this range which you cannot exceed. But when someone starts working again, has to turn up to work every day and get back into the swing of things, then he or she may wish to climb up the ladder within a business and get some vocational training which is appropriate to the business.

What I find frustrating is that there are no programs focusing on what small businesses can do for workers. We transmit our experience on a day-to-day basis, we show all our employees what we've learned throughout our career and in the courses we took at school, and this is never recognized, we never get anything back for it. We're always asked to pay more, but we can't. We do what we can and we know our limits. So, if someone wants to work, learn a new vocation, well there are opportunities for such people. Instead of having a system which penalizes people when things start going well, we should be helping these people and giving them a leg-up so they enjoy a better quality of life while getting back into the workforce.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Lessard.