Human Resources Committee on April 22nd, 2021

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

Yes, and I think too in this pandemic, when I look at some of the small businesses.... I'm from Saskatchewan, so it's interesting to see the differences in restrictions and the lack of consistency, which I understand, but the unpredictability as well on some of these small businesses makes it very difficult for them to adapt, even though a lot of our small businesses have been so creative in how they can get their products out in a safe and effective manner.

We know that creating opportunity and growth are foundational to securing a strong future for all Canadians. To succeed in that goal of a stronger, more prosperous future for all Canadians, fostering a competitive and fair environment for our job creators must be a priority.

With that in mind, are there areas of the current EI program, whether it's administrative or structural, that should be reformed?

[Leah Nord]

Yes, I've spoken to a number of principles in EI reform. I think another one for everyone involved would be simplification. I know that's easier said then done, from both an employer and arguably an employee point of view.

Sean had spoken to this idea of navigators and navigation, and increasingly this is.... Even in the appeals process, this is important. Even more important than navigators is probably removing the need for navigation.

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

Yes, and I think that too. Simplicity is so important, and so is plain language. We have heard over and over again in this committee how important it is for plain language so that people can understand. When you have all this jargon that people don't necessarily understand, it just deters them from accessing or attempting to access something that might be available to them.

Ms. Nord, quickly before my time ends, are there any program reforms that you would caution against, given the possibility of their potential impact on business competitiveness?

[Leah Nord]

Again, it's a great question, but it's really hard to say that individually without looking at the totality.

We haven't even talked about part II of the EI program and the LMDAs and all the programs that are funded there. You can't say one thing without understanding the ramifications off the board. That's why we argue that it needs to be comprehensive.

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

Wonderful. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Nord and Ms. Falk.

Next, we have Ms. Young, please, for five minutes.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'm going to be sharing my time with my colleague, MP Morrissey.

I'd like to start with Sean Strickland because I wanted to take this opportunity to thank your members for the hard and often dangerous work you do. You talked about an accident, I think in Toronto. A couple of months ago, there was a terrible construction accident in my riding of London West. Two workers were killed when the wall of an apartment building under construction collapsed. There also were others injured. It really underscored how important our workers are and how we often take them for granted.

Earlier, you mentioned apprenticeship training, and I wondered, in the discussion that we're having today, how the safety issue is impacted by EI benefits.

[Sean Strickland]

Thank you very much for the question.

I do remember the accident that you're referring too. Unfortunately, I'm sure that each member would be able to point to an example of a similar accident in their own riding.

I think it's important to recognize that generally construction is a lot safer now than it was a long time ago. Construction continues to put in place best practices, and there's COR certification. Health and safety is a core value of the unionized construction industry in Canada. Recently, there was a report, again from the Ontario Construction Secretariat, indicating how safe unionized construction is. This is a core deliverable of all of our training. All of our training is built around safety and safe practices.

On EI, when you talk about training in general, MP Young, you know that there are some questions here about recommendations to simplify the process going forward. I think one would be about how the EI today isn't the EI that it was 25 years ago. I remember that a long time ago I had to submit my cards and send them in through the mail. I really think that this training aspect, particularly given the post-pandemic recovery, needs to be, to whatever extent, hived out of the employment insurance system. Employment insurance and income support programs need to be sustainable. I agree with the Chamber of Commerce on that.

Hive that training out. We'll get that training out and get more Canadians to have access to it. Also, include safety as a component of it and you're going to see improvements to safety in co-operation with labour unions and businesses right across the country, in all sectors.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

You're at the halfway point there, Ms. Young.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you very much.

I'll pass it over to MP Morrissey.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Morrissey, welcome.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Thank you, Chair.

It's good to have a chance to be back in this committee. It has been a number of years.

I have a question for you, Ms. Nord. How would you respond to the comment that the EI system is an integral and very important part of seasonal small business vis-à-vis how the seasonal small business depends on an adequate EI system to keep their trained workers available for the next period of work? Would you agree with that statement?

[Leah Nord]

Yes, we do realize that, and I made reference to that.

When we look at it going forward for our seasonal workers, I would argue that, in this day and age, a seasonal worker is not a seasonal worker across sectors or across the country or in geographical locations. I would actually say that they are important, but they're not a hybrid or an overall construct these days either.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Having an EI system is important in maintaining that seasonal workforce, especially for seasonal small business.

I have a question for you, Ms. Frache. You referenced 12 weeks as a minimum, which I would agree with, a national minimum standard. Where would you view that in the areas of importance? There has been a different discussion in this panel today, and I haven't heard the history on it. Is it more important to have a minimum EI ceiling or a maximum?

Right now, during the pandemic, we have $500, whereas in the past a lot of people could receive EI so low that they could not survive on it. I would argue as a politician that it's very important to have a minimum threshold for those people who work in low-income jobs and small weeks. Could you opine on that, Ms. Frache?

[Pam Frache]

Yes. It's absolutely very important to have a minimum floor. Imagine trying to live in a province where the minimum wage is $11.90 an hour. Living on 55% of that is just untenable even if you were lucky enough to have full-time work. I couldn't agree more that we need to have a minimum level of income supports for workers so that people can survive.

Remember, their survival is also about the survival of the local economy. When workers have money in their pockets, that's precisely why EI is an economic stabilizer. We can't be thinking about it as merely an expense. We have to think about that money going back into the economy, back into local businesses and stabilizing our economy until it is able to recover. Therefore, I agree fully with you that we need a minimum and much higher proportion of income that's insured.

That said, we also need to raise the ceiling on how much income is insured. People think they have an okay job where they might make $30,000 or $40,000 a year and they think maybe they can live on a portion of that. However, when you see what 55% of a capped income actually is at $45,000 or $50,000, it's not enough for people to live on.

I think we need both. We need the minimum weekly amounts of support, but we also need to raise the ceiling on insurable income, because that will actually put more money in people's pockets, as well as increasing EI revenues for funding.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Frache, and thank you, Mr. Morrissey.

Ms. Chabot, you have two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you.

I will try to be brief to give the witnesses time to respond.

What I'm hearing and what concerns me is that we will have to wait until all of this is stabilized before reforming employment insurance for businesses, for companies and for workers.

I want to remind you that employment insurance already had gaps and flaws before the pandemic. It is said that nearly 60% of workers are excluded. That is a huge number. The labour market certainly needs our businesses and our companies, but it also needs workers. Strengthening the employment insurance program therefore seemed to us to be a necessity, and even more so since the pandemic.

Do you think we could act quickly to close some of the gaps in eligibility and benefits? Can you start sending us messages now?

Who would be willing to answer my question?

[Pam Frache]

Thank you.

I do think we need to move quickly on this. We knew right away, as soon as COVID hit, that the old employment insurance system was not up to the task. It is important that we address the major barriers to EI.

What's exciting about this is that it's doable. If we actually do this, EI can be restored to its heyday when it protected workers and the economy at the same time: reducing hours, eliminating the quick fires and extending the duration of benefits. Another aspect of extending the duration that's good for the economy is allowing workers to find jobs that fit their skill set, instead of their having to take survival jobs as they hit the benefit cliff, having to take a survival job that doesn't make the best use of their skills.

Again, an effective EI program is good for the economy, it's good for workers and it's good for making the best use of skills. I think it's urgent, because we can't wait and COVID has shown us that.

[Leah Nord]

I would ask what “effective” looks like and what it costs. What does it cost employers and employees, and the system?

We're not able to answer that until we have concrete answers to those questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Nord.

Thank you, Ms. Chabot.

[Sean Strickland]

Mr. Chairman, may I add a final comment, absolutely quickly?

I think the time for major reforms is now, and you can do that within the window of sustainability.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Well done. Thank you.

[Pam Frache]

That is especially if the federal government steps up with its portion of the funding.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Next is Ms. Ashton, please, for two and half minutes.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

That's great. Thank you.

I want to go back to Ms. Frache from the Workers' Action Centre.

I wonder if you can touch on the urgency that's needed here. What have you been hearing from precarious workers? I know you referenced Amazon workers. During this pandemic, how critical is it for EI to be reformed, and what kind of situation are they facing more broadly?

Could you perhaps touch on what the implications on all of us are when an entire class of workers, particularly precarious workers, is falling through the cracks?