Human Resources Committee on April 23rd, 2013

[Marilyn Gunn]

We speak to them and tell them this is part of the contract, that they get the first three months paid and then after that it is regular wages. We do not believe they should be on a lower wage level because they have had issues with their past.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Ms. Quillin, do you have anything to add?

[Judy Quillin]

Yes, certainly.

We certainly advocate the clients coming through the program. We are looking for legitimate jobs in a competitive job market, so any client who comes through a March of Dimes program will be matched with a job that is open to all at a competitive wage. What we may do, perhaps, through HRSDC's opportunities fund, is provide a wage subsidy for the employer for a period of time, while our client is learning the skills of the job, to support the employer perhaps through a longer training period for that job, but at the end of that time, we expect the employer to hire at a competitive wage.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

A number of witnesses have told us that, when the government subsidy ends, so does the job.

Has that often happened in your experience?

[Judy Quillin]

I think with any program of this nature there can be abuse of the situation. I think that's where our approach and that of many of our colleagues is really approaching the employer on a needs basis. We're not looking at creating a job for someone with a disability; we're looking for a legitimate job that is open because someone has quit, or there's an expansion in the company, so it's a vacancy that needs to be filled anyway. This is something that when we put our client in there, the wage subsidy occurs, and if our client can't continue, perhaps because they haven't met the skill requirement, they simply have to hire someone else.

We are looking for legitimate work, and when the wage subsidy ends, that client has learned the skills of the job and will continue on. It doesn't happen in all cases, because the skills have not been learned. Then we look at other options for the client and for the employer.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

What do you think about the idea...

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Thank you. Time is up on that.

Does anyone else wish to comment?

[Marilyn Gunn]

Yes, I'd like to speak to that.

With us, they have had 160 hours of hands-on training in warehousing, so when our clients go into these positions, they're already trained. It hasn't been book learning; it's been actual hands-on training. Therefore the three months' subsidy from the opportunities fund.... After that, I would say about 72% of our clients have remained in the position. I think the key is the hands-on experience.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Thank you for that.

We'll now move to Mr. McColeman.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

Thank you as well for being here today for this very important discussion while we, as legislators, find out what's really happening on the ground.

Ms. Gunn, I think it's appropriate that I clarify with the opposition exactly what the funds are for, because I believe there was a political motive in trying to somehow paint a picture that there's no money for housing. Let me be very clear that the opportunities fund, as I understand it, is for skills training, and it's for persons who are on the margins, as you've discussed, and who you so wonderfully help. It's unfortunate that you were put in the position you were. There's also the homelessness partnering strategy, which put $1.9 billion in our budget over five years for housing and preventing homelessness. There are two distinct funds, and they're for two distinct separate purposes. There's no motive in saying something like this, other than making a political point that there's not enough money for housing, when we're funding two separate pools of money.

I'd like to talk to Ms. Quillin and Mr. Lucas. I think the thread that's run through your comments today—and I believe you're actively involved in this—is as an employment agent, if you want to call it that, for persons with disabilities, and how important that is in terms of the ability to properly match. Also, we had some witnesses here, particularly from the private sector, who said that one of the most important things, after someone was matched with a company, was the support and coaching that is required for persons with disabilities. Do you see that in your roles in terms of the people you help? If there are other supports that you think are necessary, please advise the committee of those things.

[Judy Quillin]

We see it as absolutely critical. When we work with individuals to determine their suitable occupation or job goal, if they're suitably motivated, I firmly believe we can pretty much find anybody a job. We have to work with employers to encourage them to hire, and then once that job match is made, on-the-job support is critical for success. That can come in many forms, as I noted in my submission. It can come in terms of a job coach, who can be there to help them learn the skills of the job. It can be there in terms of accommodation supports, doing the same job in perhaps a different way, a different process. That can be very intense at the beginning of the job match, and then weaned off during time until the person is completely independent. That often happens in conjunction with the wage subsidy, so that's a weaning-off process until the individuals have learned the skills and they can do the job individually. I think it's critically important.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

I appreciate that.

We've also had witnesses who run specialized employment agencies for persons with disabilities. They're assisted through, again, many government-funded programs. They make applications to put specific programs together for individuals who have specific needs and are awarded, I would call it, on a contractual basis to produce certain numbers of training results and job-matching results. From your perspective, how important is that?

[Judy Quillin]

We are recipients of opportunities fund dollars, and we at March of Dimes serve all persons with all disabilities, regardless of type or severity, so we're a generalist provider. I do know agencies out there that are disability specific and I think, especially when it comes to accommodations in the workplace and/or job carving, which is looking at a job and perhaps taking a piece of it that the person's abilities are suited to, that could be very helpful. I think there's a place for both.

I think the most important thing is the generic piece where we look at the abilities, regardless of their disabilities, and move from there, but there is a role for specialty agencies.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

Is there one key thing we could do to overcome the myths employers have? I'm talking about private businesses, entrepreneurs, and small, medium, and large businesses. Is there any one thing you can think of that we could do to break those barriers, open those doors, and have those employers consider persons with disabilities on a larger scale than they do today?

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

We'll conclude with responses to that.

Go ahead, Ms. Quillin.

[Judy Quillin]

Yes, and I think it was noted in the report which the panel created just a few months ago. It is a mechanism to support peer-to-peer discussion, business-to-business discussion about the successes that have occurred when an employer—not just the large corporate employers; I'm talking about SMEs here—has hired an individual and it has been successful and, in fact, created a more nimble company, created a more open environment within the company. That's the type of discussion the federal government has to facilitate. I think it has made a wonderful step starting that through the panel, and it should continue in that vein.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Does anyone else wish to make a comment?

[Jerry Lucas]

I just want to say that we were recently approved for a grant from the federal government that we will be, hopefully, starting in the next couple of months. It's a partnership with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. We think that kind of a partnership is really important, because partnering with the businesses and being able to provide the wage subsidy hopefully will allow some businesses that might be a little cautious in trying to work with disabled employees to take that step and to gain a better understanding of what the capabilities are.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Go ahead, Madame St-Denis.

[Lise St-Denis, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for your comments, Mrs. Gunn.

I was not familiar with the Moving Forward program, but I know that similar organizations are out there. In Montreal, Quebec, the work done by father “Pops” is akin to what you described.

Are any links established between similar organizations in different provinces? My question is specifically about funding. Would it be beneficial for all similar organizations across provinces to come together in order to submit a joint request to the federal government?

[Marilyn Gunn]

Ms. St-Denis, thank you so much for your comment. To me it is vital that we have open communication with different organizations that are doing the same. As I said before, you cannot be an island; you have to be a group and work together to address the issues. I would very much be open to that. I did some research from Calgary, but I have not found agencies that do exactly as we do. I would welcome the opportunity if I could have that information.

Thank you.

[Lise St-Denis, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Regarding funding, you talked about some programs—either for persons with disabilities or individuals with mental health issues. Are the people who work for your organization volunteers, or are they paid by, for instance, the health care system?

[Marilyn Gunn]

Most of our people are paid employees. It takes pretty specific people to work with people with mental health issues and people coming out of homelessness. A lot of people are afraid to work in that area, but we do have some very qualified volunteers. We have 18 in our current cohort. We have, I think, eight volunteers who work alongside them. It is very important. We cannot operate without volunteers. Our whole organization has 1,800 volunteer hours every year, but most of our people are employees.

[Lise St-Denis, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Okay.

Do the employees depend on annual funding? In other words, do you have to wait to see whether you will receive funding every year, or is that not a problem for you?

[Marilyn Gunn]

No, we have to wait until we know that the funding is through. That's a huge barrier for us. If there was something like three-year or five-year funding in succession it would really work well. We have to wait, so then they're on contract. All our employees are registered social workers, and have been trained to train people on equipment.