Human Resources Committee on Nov. 18th, 2014

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Not to the witnesses, but to you, though.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Save that for me for later. We're on time constraints and we'll deal with that later.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Mr. Mayes, you have five minutes.

[Colin Mayes, Conservative, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for being here today. I have a couple of questions for Mr. Conrad.

The first one is about employers who have been found to be non-compliant with the temporary foreign worker program conditions and may not hire temporary foreign workers for two years. Bill C-43 would expand the scope of this list by including violations of any other federal or provincial law relating to employment or the recruiting of employees. What type of added protection does this provide for foreign workers hired today under the temporary foreign worker program?

The other question I have is about what I found out in my last trip to my riding. For the old applications for the temporary foreign worker program—now we have new applications and new forms, correct?—has the department worked to make sure those old applications are off-line? I have two constituents who applied with the old form and put up their $1,000. They were told that it was the wrong form, but the $1,000 has been taken. Now they have to get a new form and put in another $1,000. I wondered about that. Is the work complete to make sure the old forms are not still available online?

[Alexis Conrad]

To your second question, briefly, we have taken down all of the application forms. We do know that there are some cases where the third-party representatives or others actually had the old applications on file, so in some cases they probably used an old application form long after the change. I can't speak to the specifics of the case, but we've made every effort we can to make sure employers are using the right form, because it makes the processing of the applications much simpler.

On the former question on the issue over provincial-territorial employment standards legislation and regulations and other federal statutes, when employers who are using the temporary foreign worker program are found guilty under our provincial or federal statutes, I think it's important for us to look at that as a factor in whether or not that employer should be using the program. Clearly, the objective of these amendments is to make sure that if employers cheat employment legislation, whether it's federal or provincial, they shouldn't be hiring temporary foreign workers.

In my mind, these legislative amendments and the regulations that follow will take a great step forward in terms of making sure that foreign workers are only in workplaces where they should be. Also, we'll provide information to foreign workers in terms of whether or not they would ever want to work for an employer. To my mind, it's very significant step forward in terms of protecting foreign workers.

[Colin Mayes, Conservative, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

To follow up on what Mr. Cuzner said about the youth unemployment, one thing I find in my constituency is that a lot of the problem is due to youth sometimes not being willing to be a little more mobile and go where the work is. For the temporary foreign workers, do you find that the employers using the program are more inclined to be in remote areas where they are having a hard time recruiting because of the remoteness of the location of the job site?

Do you have you any data to show that? We're talking about the northern part of B.C. and Alberta, where it's not so much fun working when it's the middle of winter. It's likely that a lot of people would prefer not to look for a job there, so there's a lack of applicants and therefore the employer has to look at temporary foreign workers. Would that be a fair analysis?

[Alexis Conrad]

I don't have in my mind that kind of map of where they are, but we do know that when you plot out where foreign workers are in the country, they tend to be disproportionately represented in the tightest labour markets, as one would expect. That's where employers have the hardest time finding Canadians.

In some rural communities, there certainly are foreign workers where the employer has tried and there is no local labour force. It's a natural kind of tendency. That's not to say that there aren't employers in urban communities or more densely populated areas who use the program, but as a general point, you will find that in the tightest labour markets, which oftentimes are in western Canada, you do see a disproportionate number of foreign workers, which I think one would expect.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Very quickly, Mr. Mayes, you have 20 seconds. No? Okay. Thank you so much.

We'll move back to Mr. Cuzner.

How lengthy is your request, sir?

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

I'd say it's under 15 seconds.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Please present it.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Could Mr. Judge provide us with, first, when countries' quotas are increased, what the rationale is that is used to increase the quota. I cited the example of Ireland. Second, could he also provide the types of businesses that are using the international program and employing foreign youth, and finally, copies of any internal reviews of the program? If you could provide that to the committee, I think that would be of great help.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Mr. Judge, is it within your purview to provide such information to us?

[Robert Judge]

We can certainly look into what we can provide the committee, in that respect.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Thank you. Perhaps you could do that through the clerk, please.

We will get you that information, Mr. Cuzner, as much as we can.

I want to thank the departmental officials for being here. Thanks for taking the time. I'm sorry that this was an abbreviated session, but that's the way things are around here.

We will take a short break while we get the next witnesses put in place.

Welcome back, everyone, for the second panel of witnesses.

Joining us here is Ms. Murielle Brazeau, chairperson of the Social Security Tribunal of Canada.

By way of video conference we have, from Toronto, Ms. Amy Casipullai, senior coordinator, policy and communications, at the Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants; and from Vancouver, Mr. Gary Birch, executive director of the Neil Squire Society.

Witnesses, if you could keep your comments to five minutes maximum because of the time constraints we're under today, I'd really appreciate it.

Let's move now to Madam Brazeau.

[Murielle Brazeau, Chairperson, Social Security Tribunal of Canada]

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and esteemed members of the committee.

Thank you for inviting me here today to address the committee on Bill C-43, and more specifically on clause 252 regarding the appointment of members to the Social Security Tribunal of Canada.

The tribunal began its operations on April 1, 2013, and is mandated to provide a fair and impartial quasi-judicial process for appeals under the Employment Insurance Act, the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act.

It was created to simplify and streamline the appeal processes by providing a single point of contact for all those appeals. All decisions are made by one decision-maker called a “tribunal member”, who is appointed by the governor in council after a rigorous competency-based selection process.

At the outset on April 1, 2013, the tribunal had 28 full-time members, including me. The three vice-chairpersons were appointed in May and June 2013, and to this date, the tribunal has grown to 73 full-time members. The government recently announced the appointment of 21 part-time members, who will help the tribunal process its large volume of appeals.

Bill C-43 would allow the appointment of an unlimited number of full-time and part-time members and would remove the time limits that are in effect in the current legislation for part-time members. These new provisions will enable the government to appoint additional members as needed in either of the tribunal's divisions, depending on the fluctuation in the caseload over time.

I will now give you an overview of the tribunal's structure and where things stand with our caseload. The tribunal has two levels: the general division and the appeal division.

The general division has two separate sections: the income security section and the employment insurance section. The second level, the appeal division, hears cases from both sections of the general division, employment insurance cases and income security cases. It is therefore important to recognize that the tribunal deals with four very different caseloads.

I would like to start with the general division's income security section. When we began operations on April 1, 2013, more than 7,200 appeals were transferred to us from the Office of the Commissioner of Review Tribunals. Roughly 24% of these appeals have now been concluded. Approximately 5,500 new appeals have been received since April 1, 2013. Overall about 2,000 cases have been concluded to date.

We are currently developing assumptions and performance expectations for members to estimate when the backlog will be completed with the number of members we have and the remaining caseload. The magnitude of these income security cases represents the greatest challenge to the tribunal.

Second is the general division employment insurance section. The board of referees continued to issue decisions until October 31, 2013, at which time about 320 appeals were transferred to us. The majority of these cases are now awaiting a ruling from the Canada Revenue Agency or a decision from the Tax Court before the tribunal can deal with them. As of September 30, 2014, close to 5,000 new EI appeals have been received, and nearly 3,000 have been concluded to date. Almost half of the remaining cases are part of group appeals and are being dealt with separately. The other half are assigned to members and are at various stages of their progress.

At the appeal division we have two different caseloads: income security and employment insurance. Let's start with the appeal division's income security caseload. On April 1, 2013, more than 460 appeals were transferred to us from the Pension Appeals Board. By the end of September 2014, around 95% of these appeals had been concluded. For the majority of the remaining appeals, a hearing date has already been set or the appeal has been postponed at the appellant's request. As of September 30, the appeal division had received 258 new income security appeals of which 163 have now been completed.

Now that the majority of cases transferred from the Pension Appeals Board are concluded, we are focusing our efforts on these new cases, which we expect to address within a reasonable period of time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

I'm sorry, Madam Brazeau, but I'm going to have to ask you to wrap it up fairly quickly if you could. We have your notes, which is a good thing, but if you could wrap your comments, I'd appreciate that.

[Murielle Brazeau]

Okay.

I want to assure the members of the committee and all Canadians that every tribunal member and all of our staff are fully aware of the difficulties that appellants may face while waiting for a decision. This situation makes each and every one of us at the tribunal want to do our utmost to process these appeals fairly and as quickly and efficiently as possible.

Thank you for your attention.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Thank you very much.

Now we move on to Ms. Casipullai—I apologize if I'm not pronouncing that correctly—in Toronto to present for five minutes.

Thank you.

[Amy Casipullai, Senior Coordinator, Policy and Communications, Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants (OCASI)]

Thank you, Chair.

OCASI is concerned with the human rights of migrant workers in Canada. These workers are an important part of our communities and our economy and deserve to be treated in a fair and equitable manner while having their rights recognized and respected. While we are encouraged by government efforts to increase accountability in the program and particularly to impose consequences for non-compliance by employers, there is a potential that some of these amendments may have unintended negative consequences for migrant workers and may increase their vulnerability to further abuse and exploitation

Regarding clause 308 on the publication of employer names and addresses, in 2009, the government promised to publish the list of bad employers on the department website. Despite the number of instances in which employers were found to be in violation of the program, the list was not posted online until 2011, and, once created, published no names for another three years. Today, the list contains just five employers. Without sufficient resources for enforcement, employer violations can go unchecked and the names and addresses will never be published on the list. The government must give the same priority to investigation by ESDC and enforcement as it does to the processing of labour market assessments and employer permits.

Regarding clause 311 on employer fees, regardless of what the government has intended, we have heard that in many cases the increased LMIA fees are being downloaded directly to the worker. Raising fees to $1,000 in June 2014 increased the financial burden for a significant number of workers rather than acting as a deterrent to the employer or recruiter. This situation can be dealt with by developing a comprehensive recruiter licensing system where one is not already provided in provincial legislation and by holding employers and recruiters jointly liable for downloading fees and penalties to the worker.

Regarding clause 307, while the intention is to enforce compliance through the threat of suspension or relocation as it applies to the employer, this clause will punish the worker at the same time by suspending or revoking his or her work permit. The worker's legal status in Canada is tied to a valid work permit, which is tied to the employer. When that permit is suspended or revoked, a worker is left without legal status in the country through no fault of his or her own and in fact is rendered more vulnerable. Workers who are dependent on the employer for housing and means of support, particularly when these are part of the terms of employment, will be left without status, income, shelter, and food. These factors will serve as a major disincentive for the worker to report abuse.

Instead a mechanism should be provided to stop the removals of migrant workers where abuse has been reported, and the affected worker should be provided with a pathway to permanent residency. At the very least, the worker should be given an open work permit to find another employer, pay any debts, support their families, and be shielded from employer reprisals. Such a provision would act as an incentive for workers to come forward to help with enforcing the compliance regime and make the employers more accountable.

Clause 313 introduces a new provision for the government to collect, retain, and use the social insurance number. It seems to be an unnecessarily intrusive way of ensuring employer compliance. One former member agency that works with migrant workers told us that CIC already asks their clients to provide their SIN. They found that the information is used to find and deport out-of-status clients. These are workers who are out of status but working and using the SIN to pay income tax and who are then punished for doing so.

There's a place for a temporary migrant worker program in Canada's mix of immigration programs, but we're troubled by the levels to which migrant workers have been recruited, particularly in Ontario where permanent residency has decreased while temporary migrant worker numbers have increased. Permanent residency leading to citizenship must always be the foundation of our immigration and protection programs. Just like reducing worker vulnerability, it should be part of any of our labour market programs

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Thank you very much.

Now we move on to Mr. Birch for five minutes.

Go ahead, sir.

[Gary Birch, Executive Director, Neil Squire Society]

Good afternoon—good morning here—and thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

My name is Gary Birch. I'm executive director of the Neil Squire Society. Our mandate is to use technology, knowledge, and passion to empower Canadians with physical disabilities.

The Neil Squire Society is a Canadian national not-for-profit organization celebrating its 30th anniversary. We are committed to providing education, technology, and career development for people with physical disabilities through complete end-to-end services. Specializing in skill enhancement, enabling technologies, and workplace empowerment, the society has served over 30,000 people since 1984. The organization serves a culturally diverse population that is not limited to any specific disability type. However, traditionally we have worked with individuals who are most marginalized in society, particularly those who have had a very long-term detachment from the labour force.

I personally have 30-plus years of experience, through the Neil Squire Society, championing opportunities for persons with disabilities. I recently also had the privilege of serving as a member of the federal panel on labour market opportunities for persons with disabilities.

Regarding division 19 of part 4, clause 252, my understanding is that there is a backlog of more than a thousand people appealing benefit rulings across Canada, including Canadian pension plan disability benefits. An aging population and increasing disability rates have contributed to the growing backlog of people trying to access federal supports. It has been stressful for people with disabilities waiting to have their files reviewed as the wait times continue to grow.

I understand that Minister Kenney has authorized the appointment of 22 additional employees to the federal Social Security Tribunal. This will help alleviate the stress on government systems and on the lives of people with disabilities across Canada.

Many people with disabilities are living below the poverty line. Many of them need to have timely access to benefits. It's critically important in their lives. The appointment of 22 additional employees to the Social Security Tribunal is a key step towards helping to address the backlog of appeals and helping to improve the lives of people with disabilities.

Regarding division 24 of part 4, my understanding is that these clauses relate to administrative matters involving the foreign workers program. Although this is beyond my area of expertise, I would like to note that the use of this program should be judicious in its application to ensure that Canadians, in particular I'm thinking of Canadians with disabilities, are being provided with proactive supports to help them fill these potential job opportunities.

The current Government of Canada has been very proactive in its support of persons with disabilities to get them back into the workforce and to improve their employability through various mechanisms, including the enhancement of the opportunities fund.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Thank you, Mr. Birch.

Now we will move to our first round of questioning.

Madame Groguhé, I believe you're going first.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for taking part in our deliberations. My first question is for Ms. Brazeau.

To our knowledge, the backlog of cases at the Social Security Tribunal keeps increasing. There are currently 14,677 pending cases.

According to you, how long will it take the tribunal to catch up with that lag and process those 14,677 cases?

[Murielle Brazeau]

First, allow me to specify that the tribunal is divided into three distinct sections and that it has four case loads. At this time, the backlog of approximately 11,000 files comes mostly from the General Division, which deals with questions regarding income security. At this time, these 11,000 files are the biggest challenge for the tribunal.

However, thanks to the 21 new part-time, recently appointed members, and to the new process in place since last April that allows us to give precedence to the oldest files, we expect to make great progress in this regard over the coming months.

At this time, we are working on developing performance standards for the members. With these standards, the number of files to be processed and the number of members available to process them, we will be able to estimate a date for the completion of the study of all of the backlogged cases. Because of the lack of sufficient experience in the processing of these files, it was until quite recently difficult to develop performance standards. Now, after a few months of experience, we can begin to develop performance standards for our members. In the near future, we should be able to determine the date on which we will have processed all of the backlogged files.