Evidence of meeting #26 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was consultations.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Acting Director General, Employment Insurance, Skills and Employment Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
For that question, I will turn to my colleague who leads on EI part II to respond.
Director General, Employment Program Policy and Design, Skills and Employment Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
On the changes to EI part II, we are reducing the amount of time you would have had to pay premiums in the past, as I mentioned earlier. Currently in the EI act, you can be eligible for extensive training if you are in receipt of EI benefits at that point in time, if you've claimed EI in the last five years and if you've contributed to premiums in five of the last 10 years. By reducing the bar for premiums paid, we will be reaching more individuals. The goal, as I said, is to reach those who have a weaker labour force attachment.
Liberal
Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
With respect to division 27, I'm wondering what “monies on separation” means. What was the monies on separation temporary measure announced in budget 2021? Why is a transitional amendment needed for monies on separation as a temporary measure?
Acting Director General, Employment Insurance, Skills and Employment Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
In terms of what monies on separation is, it's the money that is paid to an employee following separation from their employment. It can include things such as severance pay and accumulated vacation pay, and is paid out to the employee upon their job separation.
Under prepandemic EI rules, those monies paid to a claimant following their job separation were allocated as earnings. That led to payments of EI benefits to a claimant not starting until after their separation monies were exhausted. What that means in the prepandemic context is that in cases in which a claimant began to receive EI benefits before they received a separation payment and the employer did not indicate that on the initial record of employment, an overpayment of EI benefits could result and the claimant would need to return the amount of overpayment. That's what monies on separation is.
To continue with the second question—on what temporary measure on monies on separation was announced in the budget—that measure was a one-year temporary measure implemented as of September 26, 2021. It was to enable workers to receive their monies on separation sooner. Again, it's vacation and separation pay. They could get their EI regular or special benefits as soon as possible and at the same time as having monies on separation. This temporary measure also applied to self-employed workers who had entered into an agreement with the commission to receive special benefits coverage.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Thank you, Mr. Van Bynen.
Madame Chabot, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.
Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We have heard your responses regarding division 32 of part 5. According to you, these measures meet the expressed needs. However, this does not reflect the state of play. Many groups, both from the trade unions and from the unemployed and employers, have intervened. Indeed, everyone was surprised to see this section appear in Bill C‑19. Everyone would like to see some consultation to be able to discuss this, so that it actually reflects the government's announced intention in 2019.
Two years and nine months after the government's commitment, what motivated the addition of this very important section in Bill C‑19? What would prevent us from removing it and studying it separately?
As you so aptly put it, employment insurance reform is announced and expected. Why not look at reform in a comprehensive way and include the important issue of the appeal board? With all due respect, contrary to what you are telling us, what is proposed here does not at all respond to the very spirit of what constituted arbitration boards at the time.
Is the government open to the idea that this important issue should be the subject of full, proper consultation?
Director General, Benefits and Integrated Services Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
I'm going to answer the question in English.
During the 2017 third party review of the Social Security Tribunal and subsequent consultations with stakeholders, worker groups especially expressed a strong desire to return to regionally based tripartite decision-making panels for the first-level appeals. That is similar to the previous pre-SST board of referees.
Through the consultations and the analysis it was argued that this system would help improve the accountability of decision-makers to workers and employers, while making the recourse process more compassionate and informal for appellants.
The board of appeal is intending—
Bloc
Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
My dear lady, why then are there worried and disappointed people intervening?
Bloc
Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
These people are saying the opposite of what you just said. How do you reconcile that? If you want a happy and fruitful dialogue, you have to allow the parties to be truly consulted on the new version.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Thank you, Ms. Chabot.
Mr. Boulerice, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.
Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I would like to use my time to say that I am pleased to see that in Bill C‑19 the federal government is providing paid medical leave. We worked hard and for a long time to make that happen, so I'm pretty happy with that.
I'll come back to the appeal board. I would like to better understand why a deputy minister, who is in a political position, is given the management of the appeal board.
What is the process for appointing candidates to the appeal board? What control does the deputy minister have over the list of candidates? Are there not concerns about the independence of the appeal board, which would really be in the hands of the deputy minister?
Director General, Benefits and Integrated Services Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
The decision on reporting was based on a need for accountability. It was recognized that under the former board of referees model the accountability was dispersed and vague and was to be strengthened moving forward.
The direct reporting relationship of this position to the chair of the CEIC, of the commission, who is also the accounting officer for the commission, would ensure that one individual is ultimately responsible and accountable for both the funding and the day-to-day administration of the board of appeal. This ensures accountability to Parliament for the effective functioning of the new board of appeal. The accountability is clearly defined and rests with one person.
However, the commission, as most of you are aware, is made up of the chair of the commission as well as the two commissioners, so there would be natural consultation and engagement for all the members of the commission.
Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP
All right. I understand the logic to an extent. However, some people are concerned that there is political interference or a lack of independence.
I have a more concrete question in relation to the website of the future appeal board.
The Social Security Tribunal website works quite well and people are quite happy with it. As far as Service Canada is concerned, it's a different kettle of fish. They say it's hard to find the right button or page to apply for employment insurance on the website and you can't find your way around.
Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP
Are we going to take into consideration people's digital literacy and create a website that is easy to use?
Director General, Benefits and Integrated Services Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
The aim is indeed to simplify the language and access to information on the website.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Thank you, Mr. Boulerice.
Now we'll conclude this group with a five-minute round for the official opposition and five minutes for the government.
I don't have the questioner. Is it Madam Gladu?
Marilyn Gladu Sarnia—Lambton, CPC
It is. Thank you so much, Chair, and thank you to the witnesses.
I'm going to start with a question similar to Mr. Boulerice's. In my riding we are seeing a lot of people without cheques for many months because of the backlogs in EI, even a single mum on maternity leave who didn't have any money for five months and lost her house.
What is the government doing, specifically, to take action to make sure it has the capacity to implement the changes that are proposed here? The question is for Ms. Deen.
Director General, Employment Program Policy and Design, Skills and Employment Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
That is not my area of responsibility; mine is training and EIA part II. I'll turn the floor over to one of my colleagues, who will be better placed to answer that.
Director General, Employment Insurance Benefits Processing, Benefits and Integrated Services Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
At EI benefits processing, we work very closely with our policy colleagues to make sure we have the resources, based on the resource determination model, to be able to both forecast and ensure that we have the capacity in our networks to be able to deal with the proposed changes here. Our area would be the seasonal workers. That has been built into the processes and the proposals that are being brought forward today.
Sarnia—Lambton, CPC
Very good.
I'm going to continue the line of questioning by my colleague Mr. Ruff, who wanted to know what the biggest risk is. We got the answer for division 26, but for divisions 27, 29 and 32, for the people responsible, what is the biggest risk you see in implementing this legislation?
Acting Director General, Employment Insurance, Skills and Employment Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
I can answer for division 27. I would say that the risk is minimal. We are proposing a temporary further one-year extension of the seasonal measure that was part of the budget 2021 temporary measures—it will extend it to October 2023—and a transitional measure for monies on separation. Given that all of EIA part I is being reviewed as part of the comprehensive consultations on EI, the risk to the program is minimal.