Evidence of meeting #10 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was fishing.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Is it because there's a difficulty getting to the tribunal? Could that be the case, or is it simply that you're not certain about that and you think it's timely to have a review?
5:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
I'm not certain of that, so I wouldn't want to have that as a position.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Ms. Andrew, would you comment on that briefly?
5:05 p.m.
Commissioner for Employers, Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Yes, thank you.
There was no backlog when the board of referees and umpires.... There were a few cases the umpires were deliberating on to finish, and the board of referees' cases that were passed over were essentially those that were awaiting a ruling by CRA. All the work had been done up to date in order to pass it over to the SST, so backlogs that have come up have ensued since the SST started.
I had a very important role, along with my counterpart, Commissioner Donnelly, in helping to run the former system. It was actually functioning very well. It had been doing so since about 1940 and had been fine-tuned over the years. The rationale for putting it together with the other appeal systems was, I think, to save money and have it be more effective.
The board of referees was very effective. They heard appeals within a very limited number of days. They rendered decisions that day, and appellants got their answers very quickly. That hasn't been the case with the SST, although some of that has been explained to me as being growing pains, start-up challenges and so forth.
My recommendation is that since it's difficult to unscramble an egg, what we need to do is push for the improvements that the change was supposed to drive toward.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
To be clear and to make my comments clear, it was in 2013 that this started, so there were growing pains. We're now in 2016, and it seems that it's time to get over growing pains. However, when I'm referring to the backlog, I'm referring to a backlog that was created when the system was implemented. Confirming what you're saying, the 1,700 cases came as a result of the system; the new system was implemented, and then the backlog came about.
Ms. Arruda, going back to you, I have two questions. The first is with respect to the SST decisions and whether they should be made public. Under the previous system, my understanding was that decisions were made public. I saw an article in the Montreal Gazette in 2015 that said that there were 10,000 decisions, and 148 of those were made public. What is the the rationale behind that?
Second, if you were to make specific recommendations to improve the SST, what would those recommendations be? I think you felt rushed when you were giving your testimony on that, so I will give you the remainder of my time to address those two things.
How much time is that, Mr. Chair?
5:10 p.m.
Coordinator, Mouvement autonome et solidaire des sans-emploi (réseau québécois)
Thank you.
As far as the publication of the decisions is concerned, it's important to know that all board of referees and umpire decisions were made public at the time. You'd like to know why that's no longer the case.
The previous government was trying to achieve efficiency. The idea was to cut costs, and obviously, having to translate all the decisions in order to publish them was at the root of the problem. Hence, the previous government decided to stop publishing all decisions. We take issue with that because it creates an uneven playing field between the commission, which has access to all the decisions since it is always involved, and claimants, who have access to only those decisions selected by the tribunal.
As for measures that should be implemented, I would say it's crucial to examine certain miscarriages of justice. I think that summary dismissals should be eliminated and that every case should be heard. The requirement to obtain leave to appeal to the Appeal Division is another issue. The right to appeal used to be a full-fledged right. Those are a few things that need to be addressed.
In addition—
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
I have questions for you, but you can go ahead and finish what you were saying.
5:10 p.m.
Coordinator, Mouvement autonome et solidaire des sans-emploi (réseau québécois)
Thank you very much.
In-person hearings are something claimants really appreciate having access to. When a claimant's case is being considered, their credibility plays a huge role. But telephone and video conference hearings make it difficult to establish a claimant's credibility.
What's more, the wait times are simply inhumane. Some people have to wait up to an entire year; meanwhile, they have no access to benefits. So what do they do? They take the first job that comes along or they turn to social assistance. And once the decision is finally made, it's too late.
Wait times are a huge problem. The tribunal has a duty to provide timely decisions. We would like the government to reinstate the previous mechanism, which was extremely efficient. Inordinate delays of this nature are unacceptable. That said, the problem was foreseeable given that the number of decision-makers was reduced to 39 for the entire country, with the creation of the tribunal. That clearly isn't enough.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Very good. Thank you.
Thank you to all of the witnesses who are joining us here today.
I want to begin again with a question to Madame Arruda.
During your opening remarks, you mentioned additional measures for regions where the unemployment rate was already high. But, as we all know, a number of regions were excluded, including in Atlantic Canada and eastern Quebec.
Could you describe for us, briefly, the impact that being excluded from those measures has had on those regions?
5:15 p.m.
Coordinator, Mouvement autonome et solidaire des sans-emploi (réseau québécois)
As I said, the complete lack of income, known as the black hole, is a huge problem. In numerous regions in eastern Quebec, including Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, and in Atlantic Canada, people have absolutely no income once their EI benefits have run out until they return to seasonal employment.
Those five weeks were practically vital to these regions. Those impacted have experienced significant hardship. The economic survival of these people and these regions are at stake. We are talking about a large segment of the population that no longer has any source of income and is not necessarily eligible to receive social assistance from the province. Those five weeks often filled the void when they had absolutely no income.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
The program needs to be changed to include those regions.
5:15 p.m.
Coordinator, Mouvement autonome et solidaire des sans-emploi (réseau québécois)
That's what we are recommending.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Okay. Thank you.
I have a question for all three witnesses.
Ms. Andrew, you referred in your presentation to the importance of protecting the EI fund. We have heard from employers and employer representatives that this is critical going forward. Perhaps you could share what you hear from employers on this front.
5:15 p.m.
Commissioner for Employers, Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Employers do support EI being there to cover at least part of the income loss for employees who lose their jobs through no fault of their own. I think they are concerned about the way that finances have been handled in the past. They don't want to see a repeat of the monies being taken when they are needed for the rainy day of a recession and not being returned, because those monies are intermingled with general government revenues, and it's quite tempting.
Employers are also concerned about the level of the premiums they have to pay. It seems to be disproportionate to the other parts of the tripartite arrangement. It is counterproductive in some cases, because if smaller employers are paying payroll taxes, CPP, workers' compensation, and all those, it adds up to quite a tab on creating a job. It can work against job creation, which is what we're trying to promote in this system.
In terms of it protecting the fund in other ways, I think it's important to set the criteria and the parameters at a fair and reasonable level. Employers don't want to see the number of hours reduced to 360 or to 420. They think employees need to have a strong attachment to the work. I would argue it's probably immoral for governments to create a generous program that has easy access and long periods of benefits, because so many of us define ourselves by the work we do. You're creating a very difficult decision for people in deciding whether to go on EI and stay on it versus being a productive part of the workforce.
I think the design can help sideline people, and employers worry about that. They have a shortage of qualified labour now in many areas, and the demographics mean they are going to need more people in the future—
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Sorry. I did want to ask Mr. MacPherson about the same point. Thank you for your feedback.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Briefly, how do you and the Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association feel on the importance of protecting the EI fund?
5:15 p.m.
Executive Director, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
I want to go back to the importance of seasonal economies to Canada.
One of the things I think a lot of Canadians don't realize is that, for example, on Prince Edward Island, in the summer months, we have one of the highest employment rates in the country. There are a lot of significant, viable jobs and businesses there. Unfortunately, winter rolls around, or the season that they're not producing rolls around. We see this as a bridge that is a safety net for the fishing community. A lot of that gets clawed back when the economy is good. That's exactly what the program is for. It extends to a lot of other industries too. It's important to the health of Atlantic Canada.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, everybody, for your presentations today.
I think I'll start with Mr. MacPherson and Mr. Jenkins.
I am from Atlantic Canada too. My riding is Saint John—Rothesay. I spent 12 years of my career in the aquaculture industry, so I have a bit of knowledge of the fisheries.
I want to focus on an article by John Williamson that I read not too long ago. I think we all know who John Williamson is. He is a former member of Parliament from New Brunswick Southwest. He is currently the VP of research at the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies.
I think it is safe to say that at times Mr. Williamson develops a reputation for speaking before he thinks. The article that I read was “Atlantic Canada hurt by Liberal reversal of their own EI policies”. I think the policies and programs we came out with were very progressive: an additional five weeks of eligibility, the two-week waiting period reduced to one week, the hours for new claims or re-entrants going from 420 to 665 in Atlantic Canada, working while on claim, and work-sharing. I think they are progressive policies.
In the article he wrote, Mr. Williamson accused the government's EI policies of hurting employment in Atlantic Canada. He argued that making it easier for unemployed workers to get EI will cause them to become “stuck in the EI trap”. He argues that lower eligibility, which was presented in the 2016 budget, will “entice” workers away from the workforce and from education.
Do you guys feel that is justified? Can you give me some comments on that?
5:20 p.m.
Executive Director, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
Well, I think there are some old paradigms out there, and I don't think they exist in a lot of cases anymore.
Some of those old paradigms are that people enjoy EI and that it is a ticket to go and do exactly what you want and live a grand lifestyle. Certainly anyone I come in contact with in our fishing community would love to be fishing most of the year. Their crew would love to be working most of the year, if not year-round. People in the plants feel the same way.
Let's not forget that most of these people live in rural coastal communities, and they spend a huge percentage of any money they get in those local communities. When the boats are making money, the car dealerships...everyone benefits.
Unfortunately, we can't get away from the seasonality of our profession. We have ice here on P.E.I. when parts of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia can fish. That is just the nature of it. It is incredibly important to....
Captain Jenkins would like to comment, too.
5:20 p.m.
Vice-President, Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association
I would like to comment on it. It is a great question.
When I started in the 1970s, I could fish six months of the year. I put my boat in the water around April 15 and I could fish scallops for two weeks before I started lobster-fishing. Right after lobster-fishing, I was at the groundfish, then back to the scallops, and then at the tuna. It was six months of non-stop fishing.
We don't have that anymore. Our bread and butter industry on P.E.I. is lobster. If we are lucky enough to get a bit of halibut, we fish a bit of halibut, or a few tuna, or some mackerel, and things like that. Fishing, as we now know it, is totally different from when I started in the 1970s. If we had more fish to catch, I don't think fishers would be on EI as much as they are, but unfortunately we don't have the resource anymore to go out and target.
Regarding his comments, I think he should go to some of the fishing villages in April and see the guys lining up for jobs and trying to get on boats, and stuff like that. As I said when Minister Finley was on P.E.I., I don't know any lazy fishermen. I know a lot of fishermen who don't have anything to fish, but I don't know any lazy fishermen.
Thank you.
