Evidence of meeting #52 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 pregnancy.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Melodie Ballard  As an Individual
Anna Nienhuis  As an Individual
Liette Vasseur  President and Professor at Brock University, Canadian Coalition of Women in Engineering, Science, Trades and Technology
Karen Dempsey  President, National Council of Women of Canada
JudyLynn Archer  Former Chief Executive Officer and Director, Women Building Futures

11:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bryan May

Thank you.

We'll now move over to MP Long, please.

April 6th, 2017 / 11:45 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB

Thank you, Chair. Good morning to our witnesses.

Anna and Melodie, thank you for your very compelling stories. They're unbelievable.

I want to start by telling you that I have a good friend—my riding is Saint John—Rothesay in southern New Brunswick—a female friend who's a welder. We often talked and she lamented the fact she had been the only female in her class or course. I've talked to welding associations and have had lots of meetings with Matt Wayland too, who is with IBEW, the electrical workers. It's quite clear that basically 5% of their workforce are women. Obviously, that's not acceptable and we need to increase that.

I'll start with Ms. Vasseur, Ms. Dempsey, and Ms. Archer, just to get your comments on this. What can we do to make sure we increase the number of women in the trades? Do you think there's enough alignment between schools, industries, and trades to encourage more women to enter the workplace?

I'll start with you, Ms. Vasseur.

11:50 a.m.

President and Professor at Brock University, Canadian Coalition of Women in Engineering, Science, Trades and Technology

Liette Vasseur

Thank you for the question.

There is definitely a big challenge among the three components, as you know. First, in school, we don't encourage women and girls to go into trades, technology, science, engineering—trades being the thing that has been mentioned the most—especially in the non-traditional system. The big concern in many cases is the question of the conditions that women will have to deal with. Discrimination is still rampant today. People think that it's disappearing. It's not. In fact, I was talking yesterday to someone who was telling me that especially in small and medium-sized enterprises, which we have in most of the country, if a woman even goes for an interview she will often be discriminated against, because they know that if she's young, that means she will probably get pregnant and that will cause issues. One thing we have to realize is that the workplace culture from the start is very obviously difficult for women. So when a the potential employer fears that a woman will get pregnant, they always kind of discriminate against that. So that is something from which there is a really important need to protect the woman.

11:50 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB

I want to get Ms. Dempsey and Ms. Archer in on this, also. Obviously there is a major shortage of workers coming up in the trades. I want to get your input as to what we can do and as to whether you feel there is proper alignment, again, among schools, industry and labour to make this actually happen.

Ms. Dempsey.

11:50 a.m.

President, National Council of Women of Canada

Karen Dempsey

I'm certainly not an expert the way a couple of these women are in the sciences, but we do have affiliate members who are in the sciences, for instance, the Society of Canadian Women in Science and Technology.

I believe it is really important to make sure that young women in school, from junior high on, really understand the opportunities that are available to them, and that they are not steered particularly along one path or another but are shown there are many career paths available to them, and that they are encouraged to explore the so-called non-traditional paths such as the trades, engineering, etc. I know there are a lot more women engineers and a lot more women in science and so on these days. However, something that really needs to be ramped up is exposing young women to other women who are currently working in these areas. They should come to schools, speak to students, and have programs like that where students can interact with them on career days, and all of those sorts of things, because at this point in time, I am not sure that young women are really made aware of the opportunities available to them.

11:50 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB

I'm going to jump in there. Thank you for that. I would agree. I read an article last night in the Windsor Starcalled "Build-a-Dream Camp...”, which was basically teaching young women that the sky's the limit for trades.

Ms. Archer, could you just give me your two cents' worth as to what we can do? I've talked about the alignment among schools, industry, and labour to encourage more women to join a workforce that needs help.

11:55 a.m.

Former Chief Executive Officer and Director, Women Building Futures

JudyLynn Archer

My number one suggestion would be to invest. Invest in Canada's most significant workforce. They're already there. They've already proven they have the work ethic we need. Make sure we are meeting the needs of women and the employers. In the scenario that I mentioned to you of the refinery and all those women, that employer paid the whole shot—the housing, the training costs, and all of that. That investment is coming back to that employer big time and we continue to recruit them. I think any time you want to invest, you want to take your best bet and put money behind it. We do need increase awareness across Canada to help women understand that these opportunities are there. The time to do it is now.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB

Thank you very much.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley—Aldergrove, BC

I have a point of order.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bryan May

Sure.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley—Aldergrove, BC

Mr. Chair, I didn't want to interrupt the testimony or the questions, but the focus of Bill C-243 is on how we can help women who are already in the workforce. I think the questions just asked would be really appropriate for a future study of this committee, but in the limited time that we have to discuss this, we need to stay focused on Bill C-243 and how we can help women who are already in the workforce and are now pregnant. Therefore, I encourage us to stay focused on Bill C-243.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB

I don't agree with that, Chair.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bryan May

That's duly noted.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB

I think they're both very closely related.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bryan May

We have the ability, as committee members, to ask whatever questions we want. However, I agree with Mark that we need to be focused on this. This is a very limited study—so duly noted.

Thank you.

We'll move over to MP Sansoucy, please.

11:55 a.m.

NDP

Brigitte Sansoucy NDP Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My thanks to all the witnesses.

Ms. Ballard, allow me to thank you especially. Your story inspired this bill and your testimony has particular significance for me, and for my colleagues, I am sure.

My first question goes to Ms. Dempsey.

In a letter to the previous minister, the National Council of Women of Canada indicated that it would prefer maternity benefits to be provided through a more flexible employment insurance system. In your testimony, however, you clearly said that, throughout an entire pregnancy, it is more about employment conditions. You told us about the relationship to the employer and the need to find a position that poses fewer risks.

At our most recent committee meeting, we had with us an official from the Union des travailleuses et travailleurs accidentés ou malades. He told us about a program that has existed in Quebec since 1981, a program called For a safe maternity experience. The program provides preventive withdrawal leave to pregnant workers whose position poses a danger to them. The official told us that the employment insurance scheme is not the right vehicle to handle a preventive withdrawal program. Actually, that opinion is quite widely shared in Quebec.

Then, in her testimony, Ms. Ballard told us that Service Canada had no idea how to deal with her situation because pregnancy is not an illness. That is why, in Quebec, the program is funded exclusively by employers. Quebec considers that preventive withdrawal is more about working conditions. It's the working conditions that represent the dangers for a pregnancy or for an unborn child, not the pregnancy itself.

As a committee, we have to hold consultations and make recommendations with a view to establishing a national maternity assistance program. Should we establish from the outset whether this is about working conditions or maternity leave? Actually, the Supreme Court has already pointed the way in that regard. According to the court, given that preventive withdrawals are more closely linked to working conditions, they fall under provincial jurisdiction.

In our consultations, should we from the outset be seeing how the federal level can provide the leadership in establishing a program in each province such as there is in Quebec, not forgetting that the federal role in this area is limited to workers who are subject to the Canada Labour Code?

In your view, does preventive withdrawal have to be considered an extension of maternity leave or should it rather be a matter of workplace health and safety?

Noon

President, National Council of Women of Canada

Karen Dempsey

I'm not all that familiar with the situation in Quebec. However, I think anything that would help the situation would certainly be a great boon to working women.

In my speaking notes I mentioned the hazardous conditions. Those were originally addressed in Bill C-243, and were the reason that Melodie, for example, needed time off or to exit the workforce. In the bill it did mention that if the employer could find other duties for the employee that were less hazardous, that would be preferable because then she could still remain in the workforce. However, if you're a skilled tradesperson, that's probably going to be very difficult for the employer to do. You can't just go from being a welder to being a receptionist or a secretary, or an HR person—whatever. You're a skilled person and you can't transition into something else that easily.

Maybe if EI could be combined with the provincial programs, as you were saying, that would certainly be a good solution. I think you're asking for some onus to be put on the employer. The employer has a stake in this. If the employer were to step up to the plate, as it were, and contribute so there is a preventive withdrawal system, that might be a very good solution.

I don't know. Does that answer your question?

Noon

NDP

Brigitte Sansoucy NDP Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Yes, thank you.

My next question goes to Ms. Vasseur. It is along similar lines to my last question.

Ms. Vasseur, in the second point in your remarks, you mentioned the stress caused by the work environment. So let me ask you the question as well. In your view, when we discuss preventive withdrawal for pregnant workers, are we talking about working conditions or is it more about the pregnancy itself? For pregnant women who cannot remain in their positions because of dangerous working conditions, do you think that Quebec's For a safe maternity experience program is an example we can use? Should we allow or encourage that model in other provinces rather than working with the employment insurance program?

Noon

President and Professor at Brock University, Canadian Coalition of Women in Engineering, Science, Trades and Technology

Liette Vasseur

Thank you for the question.

As I see it, employment insurance is one stage. However, if we are talking about a national strategy, it is going to be very important to think about better integration with matters like working conditions.

If we consider the International Labour Organization, especially convention no. 183 and recommendation no. 190, there is clearly a need. There really is a problem, a gap, in linking employment insurance with working conditions, especially for women. Some countries, like Denmark and Finland, are a long way ahead in this area. They have been able to link the two situations and to make sure that a woman who becomes pregnant can take advantage of preventive withdrawal and not lose her job.

The problem at the moment, especially with small and medium businesses, is that employers do not necessarily have the means to cover all the costs. That is something that needs attention.

Noon

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bryan May

Thank you very much.

Now we'll go over to MP Dhillon, please.

Noon

Liberal

Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC

Hi. Thank you to all for being here today.

Mrs. Dempsey, you talked about the employer's giving less hazardous duties to a pregnant woman, especially when it comes to dangerous jobs, but you also spoke about human rights at the same time. You said it would be a downgrade to give the woman less dangerous work, maybe by bringing her down to receptionist work. How do you reconcile the two, since there would obviously be a pay cut as well?

12:05 p.m.

President, National Council of Women of Canada

Karen Dempsey

I wouldn't use the word “downgrade”. That's certainly not what I meant.

As I said, it was part of Bill C-243 that if a woman in a hazardous position could be kept in her job or be given another job with her company but in a less hazardous position, then it would be a good solution if she could remain working and stay in the workforce for as long as possible. That said, I referred to the fact it might not be that easy for someone who is skilled in a particular job to switch to another job, which is not to say that a secretary, receptionist, or whoever is not skilled. It's just a totally different skill set. I have worked as a secretary, as a receptionist, and as a teacher, so I'm certainly not downgrading those positions. I just meant that it's a totally different skill set, so it may not be possible. Even if an employer wants to be as accommodating as possible, it just may not be possible to accommodate an employee and to put them in a different position that is less hazardous. In that case, she would have no other choice but to go on maternity leave, which is what Melodie did.

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC

For small business enterprises, it would be very burdensome as well. Let's say there are four or five employees and it's a trades job. It would be harder for the small enterprise to support that change. Is that so?

12:05 p.m.

President, National Council of Women of Canada

Karen Dempsey

Yes, I think that's the case, whether it's a small or large enterprise, but especially for small businesses with a very small workforce. You may only have one person doing a particular job, so yes, I think it would be very difficult.

This is why we need to be able to give women the opportunity to access maternity leave earlier when necessary.

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC

The way you were talking about it, it seemed like you wished that employers also have a private insurance regime. Am I correct?