Human Resources Committee on March 7th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Thank you for that, Mr. Lepofsky, and also your comments about not spending money to make matters worse, which is obviously a good point.

We're going to move to Lisa Tara Hooper. We'll hear from you before we start our rounds of questioning. Go ahead.

[Lisa Tara Hooper, President, L. Tara Hooper and Associates Inc.]

I would like to thank the standing committee for allowing me the opportunity to share my thoughts, experiences, and viewpoints.

I've been working with people with disabilities for the past 15 years in my own business. Our goal is to assist our clients with finding employment or exploring self-employment opportunities. We work with individuals who have any type of disability.

I would like to acknowledge that there are some positive steps taken in the area of employment of people with disabilities. The opportunities fund has been a huge asset in providing funding for programs such as ours and funding to individuals with disabilities, assisting them to reach their goals. It is important to build on what's already there. Let's also look at programs around the country. There are a lot of creative ideas out there. Maybe one community is achieving great success with an idea that could be passed on to another community to benefit from.

There are essentially two sides to this issue: the person with a disability who is looking for work, and the employer. I'm going to come up with some suggestions or concerns.

The first is eligibility for programs.Through the opportunities fund, we offer enhanced employment services for people with disabilities. Currently, if someone is eligible for EI or is reachback, they're not eligible to participate in our program. This is a barrier for some people, as they may not have had a disability when they were working previously, but have acquired one since they were last in the workforce. They need the extra support provided in programs such as ours. On occasion, exceptions have been made and individuals have been granted permission to participate, but that's not always possible.

The suggestion would be to remove this potential barrier for anyone who has a disability, even if they have been in the workforce previously. On occasion, people with disabilities have been discouraged from looking for work if there isn’t support available. Not all services are geared to address the issues specifically related to disabilities.

Persons with disabilities have limited or no work experience. We've worked with many individuals who have the education they require to get the job but do not have the required work experience. For any number of reasons, they have not had the opportunity to work and, in many cases, will not even be considered for a particular position because they have limited or no work experience. In some cases, a wage subsidy for a short work placement can be beneficial. For example, an employer may create a position for a specified period of time to give the individual work experience. This can also increase the person’s self-esteem and confidence, and they're able to get a work-related reference from the employer. The question that appears to have no answer is, how can they get experience if no employer is willing to give them the opportunity?

We should raise the profile of persons with disabilities in the workforce. One of the biggest barriers to employment is the attitude people have toward those of us with disabilities. From personal experience, I know that people fear what they don’t understand and many do not understand disability if they have not known anyone with a disability. Often, people have preconceived ideas of the abilities of people with disabilities based on the disability alone. One way to start to change this is to profile people with disabilities who are in the workforce. Perhaps it could be a weekly or monthly article in a newspaper that also includes a profile of the employer, a booklet or newsletters profiling success stories. It could be through local television, or national television for that matter, through news stories and commercials. There is also the idea of developing role models. Profile some role models with disabilities. This can go a long way to someone believing in themselves if they read about someone with a disability who has achieved a level of success.

Included under the broader heading of attitudinal barriers are bullying and harassment. These are alive and well in workplaces and educational institutions. This is a huge barrier faced by people with disabilities. I've heard many horror stories of harassment and bullying to such a degree that the person with a disability was unable to complete school and was afraid to go into the workforce for fear the experience in the workplace would be similar to the school environment. Personally, I have experienced both harassment and bullying in the workplace due to my disability. I recall I was told to seek counselling for my problem in the workplace. Never underestimate the power and negative impact bullying can have on the individual with a disability. The scars left by bullying remain with you forever. Anyone who has lived with bullying knows exactly what I mean.

More attention needs to be given to our youth with disabilities. The issues with bullying, as an example, are prevalent among youth. It impacts their esteem, confidence, and worth as human beings. All of these factors have an impact on how an individual decides to move forward with their life following high school.

One way of engaging private sector employers regarding hiring people with disabilities is to create an award that is given to employers who currently hire from this labour pool. This creates a win-win situation for everyone. The employer who already hires people with disabilities is acknowledged, and other employers who may not, hear about their colleagues’ experiences and consider the possibilities of expanding their own labour force to include people with disabilities. A ripple effect is created.

The business case for hiring people with disabilities can happen in any number of ways, including the award mentioned above. It is about employers talking to employers about their experience, business to business. This can be accomplished by developing employer panels in local communities. Workshops could be designed where champion employers would talk about their experience and then be available to answer questions to talk about next steps, etc.

There could be incentives to hire people with disabilities through wage subsidies to employers. We have found it to be a useful tool, especially with employers who are skeptical about hiring. In many cases, once the individual is in the workplace and given the opportunity to prove they can do the job, the employer realizes the ability and potential they now have access to.

With regard to financial assistance with job accommodations, although we know that most job accommodations cost less than $500, many employers think it's going to cost a lot more. All they see are dollar signs, and they don’t see anything beyond that. Greater education on the truth about job accommodation is critical. It's necessary to dispel the myths and misconceptions surrounding this issue.

On financial assistance with physical accessibility, we suggest offering some tax incentives or other financial incentives that would encourage employers to make their workplaces more accessible. Many times we speak with employers about accessibility and they'll say, “Oh, there are a few steps to get into the building, but once you're inside we're completely accessible.” There needs to be a greater awareness of what accessibility is. It doesn’t mean that it has to cost a lot of money. It's about perception, and we need to work at changing the perceptions that employers have.

Many times we hear from employers that they don't know where to start or what to do if they want to hire someone with a disability. Employers are appreciative of the pre-screening that we do, the support we provide in an interview, or the job coaching services for our clients. Employers have found this to be extremely helpful with the training and extra support that the individual with a disability may require. Employers need to know how to access government services or funding to assist with job accommodations, etc. An insert in a mail-out could include information about hiring people with disabilities or information related to accessibility or accommodations.

Many of the suggestions I've provided today can be easily accomplished without a huge price tag. I'm realistic, and I do know that if we're truly committed to increasing the profile of people with disabilities in the labour force, money will need to be committed and action taken.

The task you've undertaken in the development of this report is an important one. The information contained in the final report and the action taken as a result of this report will impact the lives of all Canadians with disabilities, especially the ones who dream of inclusion in our workforce. Hopefully their dream will become their reality.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Thank you, Ms. Hooper.

We certainly appreciate your presentation. You gave insightful, thoughtful remarks and suggestions and we'll certainly take them into account.

We will start a round of questioning with Mr. Julian, and we'll conclude with Mr. McColeman.

Mr. Julian, go ahead for five minutes.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to all the witnesses. You are giving us a lot of insight today; it's very important.

James, you seem to be a very intelligent and bright guy, so I'm sure you'll be an asset to whoever hires you once you finish your school. Good luck with that.

I think we all know how dire the situation is. About 50% of the nation's homeless are people with disabilities and about half of those who have to line up in the food lines and bread lines of this country are people with disabilities. So the situation for people with disabilities is very dire in this country, there is no doubt, in part, because of neglect. The solution, of course, as you have all pointed out, is putting into place the support networks that allow Canadians with disabilities to get the kind of gainful employment they need. That certainly would help them fully contribute to this country.

The problem seems to be the lack of supports in the workplace. I was part of a consortium that founded the Disability Employment Network in British Columbia. What we found is that people with disabilities would get to the job site, and as you mentioned, Ms. Hooper, it was supposedly an accessible building, but they couldn't get past the stairs; or there would be accessible washrooms in a non-accessible building; or an accessible building on the first floor, but no accessible washrooms. For deaf Canadians, there would be a lack of interpretation that would allow them to go through the job interview. So we put in place a variety of supports and were very successful.

This was a decade ago. A lot of those support programs have been eroded. The funding is simply not there.

I guess my question for all three of you, starting with you, Ms. Hooper, is this. How important is it to have in place those disability supports, those job accommodation supports that come from federal government funding so that we can provide that opportunity for employers really to see how interesting and exciting it is to hire a Canadian with disabilities? We know the loyalty is much higher and the turnover is much lower for Canadians with disabilities once they get the job. How important is it to have those supports in place that the federal government has neglected, to make sure they do get the job?

[Lisa Tara Hooper]

It's critical to have the supports in place. That's very important. Tied to that is also education about what accommodations are, because we find that employers don't really understand what they are, so they come up with their own ideas of what they perceive to be accommodation. Education needs to take place with employers as well, but definitely there need to be dollars available, absolutely, if we're going to change this at all.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Have you seen an erosion over the past decade, as well, in those types of programs and those types of supports? We've certainly seen that in British Columbia.

[Lisa Tara Hooper]

To some degree....

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Thank you.

Mr. Lepofsky.

[David Lepofsky]

[Inaudible—Editor] alike rose to applaud in May 2005 as they voted in unison for a law that made accessible workplaces legally mandatory. Supports are important. Education is important. Encouragement is important. You need detailed, enforceable, strong, and effective accessibility standards and a deadline—we have 2025—or all of those other tools will not live up to it.

There was a debate for a while whether you could achieve this through voluntary measures. Through the unanimous vote of our legislature in 2005 it was made clear that debate was over. It's got to be strong and effective mandatory accessibility legislation. If you want to learn more about this, I'd be happy to give you more at another time, but if you go to our website, aodaalliance.org, you'll see that we put forward proposals for how to implement the law and put in those supports that are entirely sensitive to difficult budget and deficit times.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

You have about 35 seconds. You might want to move to hear from the third group, Debbie Hagel.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Absolutely, Mr. Chair, that's exactly what I was going to do.

Ms. Hagel and Ms. Zeleny.

[Debbie Hagel]

One of the things we advocate, and I think it might have come across, is we really are about empowering individuals to speak for themselves and their own accommodations that they need. I think James can attest to that.

Sometimes my going in and talking to an employer is way more intimidating, perhaps, or it's the employer's thinking. Just through the natural progression of a job interview, if employers are prodded to ask the question, “What accommodation might you need?”, certainly empower and educate the individual to speak for themselves and do that. It is sometimes far less intimidating to the employer. That's just been our experience.

James, would you like to speak to that?

[James Noble]

Yes. I think if you change the employer's perception, there will be less of a problem for a potential employee to perceive. They won't perceive it as much of a problem; they won't have the same problem going forward. Allow each individual to reach their fullest potential because when that happens, society reaches its fullest potential.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

We'll move to Mr. McColeman, and we'll conclude with your questioning.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here today. Special thanks to Lisa and James, who are actually living it and showing through their lives the example to others that many things are possible that people thought not possible in the past.

As you know, the government received a report called “Rethinking Disability in the Private Sector”. That report focused around need. One of the points brought out today was the need for employers to fully recognize the abilities that are out there. This morning we heard from Joseph Dale and a program he started called Rotary at Work. It talked about exactly what you said, Lisa, which was that the peer-to-peer model is the best in his estimation from his experience; in other words, a place like Brantford Volkswagen telling someone else in our community. It also talks about the need for employers to make investments based on this being a business case that makes sense for them to be a better company, more profitable, etc. There's lots of incentive if we can get the awareness to the employer level.

I've known you personally, Lisa, for quite some time and the work of your agency in connecting persons with disabilities to employers. Can you describe what you've seen as some of the best situations that have worked for you practically in connecting people and how the employers have reacted once that has happened?

[Lisa Tara Hooper]

Usually we found that some employers have been very receptive to hiring someone with a disability and open to what could transpire. Once the individual has been in the workplace, the employee with a disability has just blossomed in terms of their abilities and their self-confidence. Their whole life takes a turn upward because their confidence is increased and their self-esteem is increased. Brantford Volkswagen that you mentioned is an ideal example of that. They saw the benefits in hiring someone who was committed to having a job and determined and loyal, and all of those things. They saw that when they hired Norman. That just shows there's a real positive impact on the whole organization.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

Right. I spoke with the owners of Brantford Volkswagen last Friday. They say that it's actually such an enhancement, such a business case for them to tell their story to other employers, small, medium-size, and large employers. We heard this morning that in the U.S., 47% of Walgreens' workforce are persons with disabilities.

Mr. Julian brought up the case of declining funding. The provinces across this country carry the ball in large part for assisting people with disabilities. Am I correct in saying that?

[Lisa Tara Hooper]

That's my understanding.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

The provinces do support persons with disabilities. I live it too. My 26-year-old son is intellectually disabled, and I know from being a parent that the provinces have a deep responsibility when it comes to making sure of many of those supports. The federal government has responsibilities too, but to characterize it that the federal government has let the disabled community down I think is an absolute falsehood. I think the provincial governments have restructured things in ways and means, and perhaps in some provinces—I'm aware of Ontario—it's more severe than other cases, but to characterize it as a national situation is, as I said, a falsehood.

You're an exceptional entrepreneur. By the way, Lisa was awarded the first ever Woman of the Year award in our community two years ago for her outstanding accomplishments. Lisa, you're an entrepreneur who runs a company that connects people as more or less an employment agency. It ties in exactly with Mr. Dale's comments this morning, that these agencies such as yours are critical to the people who have disabilities to be able to connect and to employers who need a simplified process.

[Lisa Tara Hooper]

Absolutely.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

We'll conclude with your response to that if we could.

Go ahead, Ms. Hooper.

[Lisa Tara Hooper]

Yes, employers need help making that connection. Services such as ours are critical in making the connection between the employer and someone with a disability. There aren't a lot of services available that offer that specifically for people with disabilities. That has declined.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Thank you for that. I apologize for having to abridge the time we have for questions and answers. I might say that if any of the members of the committee wish to pose specific questions to any of these or the previous witnesses, you may wish to do that through the clerk. The clerk will then forward them on to the specific person, but you have to indicate the question and to whom it's directed.

It's interesting, by video conferencing we were able to have people testifying from Brandon, St. John's, Toronto, and Regina. Unfortunately, we didn't have all the time that we would have liked to have.

With that I'm just going to suspend ever so briefly so we can deal with some committee business. Thank you very much for presenting and joining us today.

All right, there's a motion made to deal with committee business, which relates to the two motions, in camera. We'll have a vote on that motion.

[An hon. member]

A recorded vote, please.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

We'll have a recorded vote on that motion.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

Okay, we'll go in camera to deal with committee business.

[Proceedings continue in camera]