Human Resources Committee on Dec. 6th, 2018

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

It could be self-esteem support.

[Adele Furrie]

Yes, it could be self-esteem. I mean all of those softer supports that are needed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Madam Sansoucy is next, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Tompa, I would like you to clarify something. You talked about four pillars of a pan-Canadian strategy, and I remember the words “confidence” and “support”. Did I forget two of them or did you rather break down support into three different pillars?

You can answer me in English if you like.

[Dr. Emile Tompa]

Of the four pillars, the first is disability confidence, the second is comprehensive supports, the third is effective partnerships and the fourth is measurement and accountability.

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

Thank you very much.

Given the employment rate among adults with disabilities, it is clear there are barriers to getting and retaining a job.

I would like to know what you think would be the best way to proceed to enable the federal government to become a model employer in the integration and retention of people with episodic disabilities. I think that is the foundation of everything.

In addition, how could the federal government educate other employers on the importance of lowering barriers to integration and retention? Please take turns answering.

You can start, Ms. Haan.

[Maureen Haan]

I'll start. Thank you.

I think that the accessible Canada act calling for the Government of Canada to hire 5,000 people with disabilities within the federal government is an excellent opportunity. However, I think that the stereotypical definition of disability....

Really this is the crux of what we're talking about today: to make sure that invisible disabilities are also included in that number. I think ensuring this right across the country is going to be a challenge, although I think you've got the right assistant deputy, Madame Laroche, to be able to set that up. I think it's just to make sure that the 5,000 hires include an equal percentage or a proper demographic of episodic disability.

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

Thank you.

Ms. Furrie, what do you think?

[Adele Furrie]

I think it's the federal government not only doing that with the 5,000 but also recognizing the support programs that are in place, and—again I keep going back to it—focusing on the definition that currently exists in the income support programs and ensuring that it does embrace the concept of invisible and episodic disabilities.

[Dr. Monique Gignac]

From what we hear, the most stressful thing for workers is around communicating—what do I say, when do I say it, who do I talk to?—within this privacy legislation. Recognizing that and working on tools to help people know how to talk about this will help workplaces.

Often they notice a problem, but the worker hasn't said something. People with mental health conditions may not be aware that they're actually moving into an episode. Communication, I think, is a priority.

Another priority is to do accommodation planning better and do it as positive problem-solving, as opposed to discipline, which might say, “If you don't show up next time, you're out.”

Building awareness within the federal government in its workplace about episodic disabilities is important. Co-worker and manager training will also help people to work through these issues better and to know that they're coming back. It's something that does happen. These are good workers. They're often good workers for years, and then there will be an episode.

[Dr. Emile Tompa]

I agree with what all these folks are saying.

I would add that it would be really important that you adopt the new Canadian standard that Maureen and I and others are involved in for work disability management systems. These are voluntary standards. The CSA Group is working on developing this with us, and it's built on continuous improvement. There's always room for improving each year. It's a cyclical process whereby you monitor and evaluate progress in disability confidence and you continuously look for new ways to improve and raise the standard of your disability confidence across the entire workforce.

[Tammy Yates]

Thank you.

The Office for Disability Issues within the federal government has actually been aware of episodic disabilities for a very long time. However, at the federal government level, I think the siloed approach from ministry to ministry to ministry in terms of training and awareness-raising—which many of my colleagues have shared—has to be addressed.

For example, in training public servants on disability, how is that training done? How is the awareness-raising done? We provide inputs and online training. Has even the Office for Disability Issues taken that training? There are opportunities in terms of building capacity, raising awareness and breaking the silos even within the federal public service.

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

Ms. Yates, I will follow up with a question for you.

In one of your recommendations, you talk about targeting programs for women, young people and aboriginals.

Why are you targeting aboriginals specifically? The federal government has a role to play and that could be part of our recommendations.

[Tammy Yates]

I'm understanding everything you're saying in French, and because I am so anxious to respond quickly, I am going to respond in English.

When we look at the indicators of the social determinants of health for indigenous communities in Canada, on every single indicator, whether it be HIV or diabetes and so on, we see they are probably on the lowest rung of the ladder, unfortunately. Needless to say, any approach in looking at episodic disabilities has to be prioritized for indigenous communities, and it has to be a wraparound approach.

It's not a conditions approach, because what I also spoke about is the individualized funding model. When you look at the person, don't just look at the episodic condition; look at the life of that person. Also, for indigenous communities in Canada, when we look at the life—unfortunately—of the average indigenous person, we see it is not what we would want to see mirrored.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you so much.

Mr. Ruimy is next, please.

[Dan Ruimy, Liberal, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you, everybody, for being here today.

When I first looked at the motion, the first thing that popped into my head was, wow, we have a lot of work to do ahead of us, and trying to understand that three sessions—which is all this is—are not enough to change the world.

However, hearing the work that you folks are doing gives me great relief, knowing we're not starting from scratch. The conversations and dialogues have been happening. The awareness has been created. What we can expect from a three-session study is perhaps where we can focus more of our energies.

Tammy, you mentioned Bill C-81. We did a lot of work with that. I think that's a great starting point. Episodic disabilities are mentioned in there.

There are some questions that come up, though. We kept hearing earlier about the disability tax credit and that 90% of disabled people don't get it. It's one thing to say that we don't need to change our EI rates, but looking at the 90%, if you were to actually understand why, how and where, and that number were to change, you can see the magnitude of the impact that could have.

I'm curious to know your thoughts on that 90%. Where did that come from? Why is it 90% and not 85%? What are your thoughts on that?

[Tammy Yates]

I actually think it again goes back to the definitions and to misunderstanding. The two things that come to my mind automatically are not understanding episodic disabilities and the lack of a consistent definition.

[Dan Ruimy, Liberal, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Ms. Haan, would you comment?

[Maureen Haan]

Thank you.

Just to expand on what Tammy is saying, again it's because a lot of people just don't identify as a person with a disability. If I have a chronic health issue, if I have MS, I have a disease; I don't have a disability.

I think that we've run into similar things with CPPD. It's “Oh, I have a disability. I'd better prove that I have a disability. I have to make myself completely disabled in order to get on this program, and then you want me to go back to work?” I think that it's the label of disability, and it's understanding that while you may have an impairment, the disability is really the environment around you.

[Dan Ruimy, Liberal, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

You just said “I have to prove that I have a disability.” Do you think that at some point you have to prove that you have a disability?

[Maureen Haan]

For...?

[Dan Ruimy, Liberal, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

That's the question I'm asking, because you said that: “I have to prove—

[Maureen Haan]

Yes.

[Dan Ruimy, Liberal, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

—that I have a disability in order to qualify for a tax credit.” The question is, do you believe that you have to prove that you have to have a disability?

[Adele Furrie]

That's exactly the way the program is structured. You believe you have a disability. You believe that you qualify, and then you're given this form to complete that has been developed to operationalize the definition of disability. You don't know the right words to use—and truly it is about not knowing the right words to use in your description—to complete the form, and then you have to have either a doctor or a psychologist or somebody associated with the medical profession sign off on it. Then it gets reviewed by someone who isn't a medical professional to decide.