Human Resources Committee on March 9th, 2021

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

I would be interested in knowing, too, if there's a difference among your membership between women and men opting in, with women being child-bearers, having children, and that type of thing.

I know we're into this stage. I'm an example of it. My husband has actually taken parental leave a couple of times, so he's kind of the odd guy out, but it's starting to change. A lot more men are accessing that.

I'd be interested in knowing whether you notice a difference between men and women paying into that, or is it just, again, the risks they take of—

[Kenneth MacKenzie]

I don't actually have those numbers. I could get those numbers, but I can tell you anecdotally that I do notice the same shift that you're talking about. There are more fathers who are engaging in child care than there used to be.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Since you're in the community, would you say that people would want to be involved in the EI program if there were a type of guarantee or something that they would have?

[Kenneth MacKenzie]

Yes, and I think it would also be contingent. There is a lot of hesitancy around the idea. People are afraid, and it would be the same thing with the CPP, that they would be required to make both the employer and the employee contributions. For a lot of my colleagues, that would be a deal breaker in supporting it, because that would just be too much of a toll.

If it were just the employee contributions, I think there would be support.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

I have time for one quick question here.

From your perspective, has the COVID pandemic changed the level of interest in the EI program for self-employed members going forward? Have their senses been heightened to say, “Oh, I should be putting money into this,” or they want to put money into this?

[Kenneth MacKenzie]

I definitely think there's been a huge amount of recognition of the support they've received from the government over the past year. I would say, within the first two weeks to a month after the pandemic began, most of our membership was in an emergency situation. They recognize that actually this conversation moving forward really does involve them and that, in spite of the fact that they haven't been engaged with it, they should really start to prick up their ears.

We've certainly been pushing the idea that this is something we should look to reform and try to gain greater access to. I know for sure that people are paying more attention. Whether or not their interest is maintained will depend on whether or not they feel that those changes are moving in a direction that is welcoming to them.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Wonderful. Thank you, Mr. MacKenzie.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Falk.

Next we're going to Ms. Young, please, for five minutes.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you to both of our witnesses today.

Mr. MacKenzie, I wanted to give you an opportunity to comment on something that my colleague, Mr. Long, brought up with Mr. Yussuff earlier on about Bill C-24, realizing that EI doesn't cover all of your workers. It is a very important discussion that we're having today.

Back on February 25, the government tabled Bill C-24, which would extend EI benefits for Canadians who are unable to work due to the pandemic. Yesterday, the bill was read a second time, and the Conservatives refused to allow this bill to be sent to the committee, even though my colleague on the opposite side of the House said that it was a straightforward bill, and she felt that she would recommend it to her party. However, for some reason, they've decided to draw this out, and now tens of thousands of Canadians are at risk of losing income support in the middle of a pandemic.

Mr. MacKenzie, what does this delay in the extension of the benefits mean for your members?

[Kenneth MacKenzie]

I know that our members are not able to go back to work. There is no live performance happening right now. It's all shut down, so a lot of them are eager to get back to work but just can't. It's not a possibility for them to go back to work in the fields they've trained in. That certainly would raise their anxiety a great deal. The idea that their benefits might end is something that would cause them a great deal of concern.

I also think they recognize how quickly this government has been able to act over the past year, and how quickly they've been able to come together to provide the kinds of supports that have sustained our members. I think any kind of delay would cause our members to hold out hope that everybody would work together to make sure that it wasn't putting Canadians in a really dire and unfortunate position.

Like Mr. Yussuff, I believe there is time to pass that bill, but I'm certainly not in a position to tell you guys how you should best do your job.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

I think you might have a comment on what message you would have for Conservative members on this committee to pass on to their leader about making sure that this bill does get to committee stage so that we can continue to discuss this and move it forward, so that the tens of thousands of Canadians will be able to continue to be paid.

[Kenneth MacKenzie]

I would certainly urge all parties to take that message to their leaders. This is something that is important to a lot of our membership, to a lot of arts workers across Canada. They are really dependent on the actions that are taken over the next couple of weeks by the Canadian government. That would be the message.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. MacKenzie.

What we have noticed in the last year as far as live performances are concerned is that a lot of this is going online, virtual. How will this change live performance designers' job stability in the long term, now that we have a lot of virtual events?

[Kenneth MacKenzie]

It's certainly changing the language of how we create the work that we create. In fact, over the past year, our organization became a local of IATSE in no small part because a lot of the work that we do is actually moving closer to film. All of this work that's happening now online brings us a little bit closer to what film looks like.

I think that this is a part of the resiliency of our community, in finding new ways and forging forward in spite of the obstacles and limitations. I'm really proud of my colleagues for finding new ways to do the job that they love and are so passionate about. I don't see this going away. I hope that this provides more stability. I hope it provides another form of entertainment for everybody to take in.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. MacKenzie.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you very much, Ms. Young.

Ms. Chabot, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I truly regret that we are debating Bill C-24. The bill needs to pass. It's going to come back to the committee, and witnesses are going to appear before us. The sooner that happens, the better it will be for workers.

I will now return to the focus of our study, which is EI reform, and ask a question of Mr. Yussuff, president of the Canadian Labour Congress.

When our EI system was set up, the government was contributing to it. You said the system had regressed rather than progressed financially.

In terms of funding the program, do you believe that the government should restore some funding as part of reforms?

[Hassan Yussuff]

I think it was initially seen as a tripartite system, where we as workers weren't the only ones paying. Government was also contributing. I think that's part of the discussion we should have about whether the government should be playing a role, because EI is not just about getting benefits to the unemployed. It's about training. It's about other programs that are tied to the EI program, which is exclusively now financed by workers' and employers' contributions. That's a necessary discussion we should have if we're going to use this program as the social safety net to look after workers in this country because of a variety of issues—not just unemployment—when they need support in this country.

You just heard from my colleague, Mr. MacKenzie, regarding workers in the film industry who were classified as self-employed. How do we best ensure that these workers can access the system but also reform it in a way to bring them into the system so that they are truly legitimately self-employed, versus those who are misclassified, who are not self-employed?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Chabot.

Next is Ms. Gazan for two and a half minutes.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much, Chair.

My question is for Mr. Yussuff.

One of the recommendations is to raise the benefit level to a minimum of 60% and set a floor of $500 a week.

I've often argued that EI benefits are no longer livable. Why do you think this is necessary? I know you said 60%. In fact, Carl Pursey, who is the P.E.I. Federation of Labour president, even argued for 70%. Why is it critical that we raise these EI rates?

[Hassan Yussuff]

I think it's been far too low. I think this pandemic has revealed the inadequacy of the benefit level. We've been paying people the minimum. Far too many people have been struggling just to maintain any sense of ability to pay their bills and meet their obligations.

I think that earlier, the government set the benefit level at $500 per week for the CERB, recognizing that if you want workers not to fall further behind, you have to pay them a decent benefit.

I think we have to start from someplace. We believe that the maximum has to increase and the minimum has to increase because this has been frozen for far too long. There's a real need to examine what the levels should be. Equally, I think it has to go up.

It also disadvantaged women equally, who are highly dependent on their benefit. The last thing we want to do is to pay them such a low benefit that people don't think it's worth collecting it at the end of the day. It's critical that we recognize in this reform that the benefit level needs to go up, and we need to make sure we set it at the appropriate level to ensure that people in this country can meet their basic needs.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I know you mentioned women, but what other groups are more likely to be excluded from claiming EI benefits and what kinds of barriers do they face? Are there any other specific groups that are falling through the cracks?

[Hassan Yussuff]

Well, workers of colour and young people are the two other groups we should be very concerned about.

Prior to the pandemic, we finally got youth unemployment into the single digits. Now it's back up in the double digits, and we don't want this to be another lost generation that doesn't come back. Equally, I think in many urban centres, workers of colour who have been on the front line providing services to Canadians during this pandemic—and I think we have seen this in the statistics that StatsCan has been providing every month—are not doing so well in the recovery and are not doing so well in the unemployment levels of this country. We're going to have to take that into consideration if we want to lift those communities out of poverty and equally ensure that people aren't falling further behind because they end up being on employment insurance because they've lost their job.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Gazan and Mr. Yussuff.

We're going back to the Conservatives now for five minutes. Do we have a volunteer for the Conservatives?