Human Resources Committee on Dec. 4th, 2018

[Patrycia Rzechowka]

The main thing would be to work with, in my example, the Multiple Sclerosis Society. They're the people who have the most current knowledge. There's research consistently coming out that would help people understand what people with MS are going through.

Even for my employer, I just had the conversations with people. It's been placed on me to educate people, but if we moved into a potential system where.... Instead of the government being the one that just gives money because people can't work anymore, why not work with the employer to supplement the time when people may need to take extra time off? For example, for me, if I need an extra two weeks off, some employers might look at that and say, “No, we can't handle that.” Why not work with the employer to supplement something like that, versus putting me on straight disability for the rest of my life or for however long?

You are asking what drives me, what keeps me going. I can absolutely appreciate the fact that some people are having to jump through all these hoops. They might just give up, because they don't have the support, because all the different parties don't speak, don't communicate. They don't share the proper information to best support people who truly want to work and be useful.

I know several people living with MS who are exactly like me. They work. They go through the same things. I'm not special. I'm not the only one. I just get to be the voice at the table today. There are countless people living with MS who are doing the same thing that I'm doing. If there was a way to make it easier for them right from the get-go to not have to fight to still work and do the things they want to do, and still feel like they're somewhat normal, that would make a huge difference.

[Deanna Groetzinger]

I think somebody used the word “stigma”. One of the things that compound this is the stigma of having an episodic disability, whether it's a brain condition or another condition. I would hope that, using the example that Patrycia used, there are a number of organizations that can assist employers in looking into what people need, and how they need to be gainfully engaged at work. That's something I hope this committee would draw on, the expertise of the organizations across the country.

I look forward to seeing what this new accessibility law will actually do when it's passed, because there are elements, at least in the federal jurisdiction, where perhaps there could be some modelling of good employment.

[Brigitte Sansoucy, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

I have one final clarification question for you.

Mr. Prince, you talked to us about extending the benefit period up to 26 weeks, but you also mentioned another possibility, of extending benefits for more than a year, even up to two years. Could you clarify that?

[Prof. Michael Prince]

What I was referring to is that perhaps the eligible recipient could draw down those 26 weeks over a two-year period in different blocks of hours, rather than saying, “You're eligible. You take it for 15 or you take it for 26 straight weeks.” Again, that may help some people with episodic disabilities, but it certainly won't help a lot of people with episodic disabilities, so it's about building in some flexibility.

Whether we leave it at 15 or we take it at 26, or some groups call for 35, whatever it is, can we deliver that in a more flexible, person-centred way that actually responds to the realities of people's lives?

[Brigitte Sansoucy, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you very much.

Thank you all for joining us here today and contributing to this study. I really appreciate your attendance and your testimony. I believe my colleagues do as well.

Thank you to my colleagues, and to everybody who made today possible. Enjoy the rest of your day, folks. Thank you.

The meeting is adjourned.