Human Resources Committee on March 27th, 2007

[Corinne Pohlmann]

One of the problems we had with the Quebec 1% training tax is that it didn't necessarily recognize very easily all the informal training that happens at a smaller firm. That is why I showed one of the charts that indicated that what we call “informal” training, on-the-job training, mentoring, that type of thing, is much more prevalent in a smaller firm and can be just as effective and as important to the experience and the skill base of an employee. Too often, with some of these programs, it's difficult for them to recognize that type of training, and that's why it can be difficult for small businesses to really benefit from these types of—

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

I don't want to offend you, but it is recognized. For employers who would go to the trouble of identifying all of the training, coaching and mentoring that is available, it is also recognized. It is measured, it is included. I wouldn't want this program to be discredited based on erroneous information. It delivers results. It is not perfect, I'll acknowledge that. Small businesses with less than 50 staff members are not subject to this rule. They should be.

Could something be done based on this principle?

[Corinne Pohlmann]

We also believe that training is already happening at a much more advanced degree at many businesses already across Canada. I'll give you another suggestion, another way we believe we can help small businesses train even more, and that's actually using the employment insurance system.

One idea we've been trying to push a little bit is the fact that right now the EI surplus is very large, and 56% of all the revenues that come in go toward benefits, as they should, but 44% goes toward programs. We'd like to suggest that one program that could be used is the idea that new employers that are small businesses get a holiday—

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

I just want to hear your opinion on this. Employment insurance is an inappropriate reference because only 40% of the people that should be entitled to employment insurance receive it. In my opinion, that is not the solution either. I just want to see what you can do from your perspective, because it would seem to me that you count on others at every turn. You are probably one of the most active organizations in terms of raising your members' awareness and listening to their opinions. I see the work you do and I myself have had small businesses. I see what you are capable of doing. You are probably the most active on that front, but whenever you get the opportunity, you turn to others. That is exactly what you are doing right now.

What can you do yourself? In my opinion, employment insurance is not the solution. We know the program very well and it doesn't seem to me that that is the solution.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I'm sorry, we're way over time. I've been looking for a chance to jump in here and didn't have one.

We're going to move to Madame Savoie for five minutes.

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be helpful to Mr. Lessard and I'll continue in the same vein.

You expressed frustration about employees being poached by other companies. For example, I'm from Victoria, and I recently spoke to a small business person who had just lost an apprentice that he had trained, or helped to train, to National Defence, so to the government. It strikes me that there is a role that everybody has to play in training. I would suggest that recognition of all forms of training by employers might be a good way to go, with that being a basic requirement, and to avoid that kind of poaching, because if you're training and she's training and you poach from each other, well, then it comes out even, more or less.

I'm wondering also why the idea of employers' involvement or contribution to training is not something that you would advocate more enthusiastically.

[Corinne Pohlmann]

Absolutely. We encourage our members constantly to be training. In fact, I would suggest to you that the last research we did on training in small businesses was in 2003, and I think there's even more today. They had already been investing more in training in the three previous years and were planning to invest even more into training in the coming years. So they are already doing that because they have to.

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

So you wouldn't have any problem if that were a requirement, for example, across Canada?

[Corinne Pohlmann]

Well, I don't think it needs to be a requirement. I think it's already happening. Training is occurring.

As you have pointed out yourself, there's lots of frustration among smaller firms, especially in very tight labour markets, because they don't necessarily have the ability to pay the higher salaries and have the great benefits, because they can't access them. So they invest in somebody and say, “Look, I'll train you. I'll pay for your training. I'll bring you into this company.” And then a larger firm or the government will come in and say, “Oh, we can pay more. We'll take you, now that you're trained”, and that is a frustration for small businesses.

We're trying to come up with ways that we can help them train, because it takes a lot of money for a small business to do that. That's a costly process for them to go through.

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

The 1% idea that Quebec has adopted, recognizing formal and informal training, would seem to address some of those issues. That's why I mention that, because it seems to be working to some--

[Corinne Pohlmann]

We don't necessarily agree--and I'd have to go back and check. I know we've done a little bit of research on the issue in Quebec, and I'd have to look at some of our results from that.

One of the problems with the Quebec system is that it's also very onerous in terms of paperwork. A lot of businesses are not even necessarily applying for it, because it takes too much time and effort for them to go through the process of trying to fill out the forms and get the money back. So while they still might be training, they might not necessarily go through the process of trying to get the 1%.

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

So that's a question more of process than of principles.

[Corinne Pohlmann]

It's a process question, yes.

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Okay, I'll leave it at that. I have one other question for you.

Another representative of your association in another province talked about the skills shortages. She raised the issue of skills shortages in Alberta and the skills shortages in Quebec and suggested that there were more women working in Quebec per capita than in Alberta because there is a strong, quality child care program operating in Quebec.

Do you think that might be an issue that would keep women from reintegrating into the workforce--the lack of good child care across Canada, Quebec excepted?

[Corinne Pohlmann]

I really don't have any data to back that. I'm not really sure I could even answer that question with any authority. I'm sorry.

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you.

I'll go to Mr. McKeown and Ms. Moore.

I have a sister who went blind at 20 and received an enormous amount of support from CNIB. She continued her teacher's training, but with the blind, and became a teacher.

I'm wondering what kinds of supports you think used to be there that are no longer there, that the federal government has a role to help support at this point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I'll just let you know you've got about 15 to 20 seconds left, if you could just finish off with that question.

[Cathy Moore]

I'll say very quickly that in the federal government, one of the things that would really assist departments in the hiring of people with disabilities, which they've been required to do under the Employment Equity Act, would be a central area in which they could draw on accommodation expertise and also accommodation equipment. That no longer exists. Each department is responsible individually. As Madame Pohlmann stated earlier, many times they just don't bother, because they don't know what to do.

A central area, at both the provincial and federal levels, would be a huge help.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much.

We're now going to move to the last questioner. Mr. Lake, you have five minutes.

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

Thanks again.

Since I have two kids, I have to pander equally to both of them.

I mention oftentimes in this committee that I have a son with autism. We've had lots of different groups dealing with disabilities come through here. One thing I find is that there are specific skill sets and challenges that are different with each group of people and that are unique to their circumstances.

I'm wondering, for the CNIB folks, if you could please speak to the specific types of professions and employers that could benefit from hiring the people you represent, and tell us the kinds of jobs we might be talking about.

[Bill McKeown]

There's a complete range of jobs, depending on the person and the skills they've acquired. There are lawyers out there who are blind or who have vision loss. We have people working on assembly lines. So there is a total range. There are people in retail. The jobs are as varied, almost, as they are within the normal population.

[Cathy Moore]

I would echo that there is no cluster--and I know you don't mean this--there are no blind jobs any more than there are jobs for people with disabilities. The VP of Disneyland in France is visually impaired.

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

Okay, maybe speak a little bit to the accommodations that might be required. If I'm an employer and I want to take advantage of the benefits and strengths of someone with a visual disability, what accommodations might I have to make?

[Bill McKeown]

One of the things you might want to start with is working with the other employees so that they understand what they can do to help, the kinds of things they should be comfortable with, and how they can get to be comfortable working with the person. It could be simple things like adapting equipment for a computer that enables them to use screen-reading material or Braille output. It could be something as simple as a hand-held magnifier, which some people need. When I first lost my sight, it gradually diminished, and I was able to get by using a hand-held magnifier for several years.

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

Okay, and you say a lot of it is just communication at the front end too, for the other people who are working there now.