Evidence of meeting #32 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was non-market.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Okay. Shall clause 4 carry?
I'm going to ask the legislative clerk to speak again to the relevancy of clause 4.
The Clerk
Clause 4 is what's in the bill. It does not refer to any amendments that were moved or not moved. It's up to the committee, but clause 4 refers to what's in the bill.
Bloc
Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC
We vote in favour of the clause.
Let's hurry up. There are only 10 minutes left.
Liberal
Annie Koutrakis Liberal Vimy, QC
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. I need clarification, because I'm getting conflicting advice.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
We'll suspend for two moments to get clarification on the necessity of clause 4.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
The committee is back in session.
I'm going to ask the promoter to speak to clause 4.
Liberal
Terry Beech Liberal Burnaby North—Seymour, BC
Thank you for the opportunity.
I'm going to take this opportunity to speak to clauses 4 and 5. I've had conversations with all sides, and I understand the frustration experienced by all sides based on the lateness of the emergence of the amendments and the clauses thus affected. I would also defer to any of the professionals sitting next to me, who are all technical people, if they want to get into more details.
In my understanding, both clauses 4 and 5 are redundant, and an additional flag was raised that, because death of a child would be incorporated into the definition and stillbirth is not affected by what we're doing here today, by incorporating that into the specific definition, you would actually be putting those rights at risk.
Because it's unnecessary and would have an unintended consequence, I'm hoping both clause 4 and clause 5 will be removed.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Are we clear? Has everybody heard Mr. Beech's explanation? Are we good?
I'll return to clause 4.
Is it the wish of the committee to defeat clause 4 and remove it?
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Airdrie—Cochrane, AB
On division.
(Clause 4 negatived on division)
(On clause 5)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
For clause 5, the question is the same, as is the explanation the promoter has given.
Shall clause 5 be removed?
Conservative
Laila Goodridge Conservative Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB
On division.
(Clause 5 negatived on division)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Thank you, committee members.
We're now on new clause 6. Please focus on the bill we have going. We're now on new clause 6, and we have an amendment called G-9.
Do you wish to move G-9? It is in scope.
Liberal
Annie Koutrakis Liberal Vimy, QC
Yes, I would like to move G-9, which would add a new clause 6, regarding extending the length of bereavement leave.
I don't know, Chair, if I read it into the record or whether the clerk does or you do.
Liberal
Annie Koutrakis Liberal Vimy, QC
I move that Bill C-222 be amended by adding after line 31 on page 2 the following:
6 (1) Subsection 210(1.01) of the Canada Labour Code is replaced by the following:
This is regarding the death of a child.
(1.01) Subject to subsection (1.011), every employee is entitled to and shall be granted, in the event of the death of a child of the employee or the death of a child of their spouse or common-law partner, a leave of absence from employment of up to 10 weeks that may be taken during the period that begins on the day on which the death occurs and ends 12 weeks after the latest of the days on which any funeral, burial or memorial service of the child occurs.
The next proposed new subsection of the code relates to leave for the death of a child under section 206:
(1.011) Every employee is entitled to and shall be granted, in the event of the death of a child of the employee that occurs while the employee is on, or is entitled to be on, leave under section 206 in respect of that child, a leave of absence from employment of up to 10 weeks that may be taken during the period that begins on the day on which the death occurs and ends on the later of
(a) 12 weeks after the latest of the days on which any funeral, burial or memorial service of the child occurs; and
(b) 12 weeks after the end of the leave under section 206.
(2) The portion of subsection 210(1.02) of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:
(1.02) In subsections (1.01) and (1.011), “child” means
That would be followed by a definition.
The rationale for that is that clause 6 adds subclause 6(1) to Bill C-222 to amend subsection 210(1.01) of the Canada Labour Code to provide that bereavement leave for the death of a child is extended from eight to 10 weeks. This will ensure that employees in the federally regulated private sector have job-protected leave while receiving the additional eight weeks of employment insurance parental benefits following the death of a child. The additional two weeks of leave will cover employees who have not yet served the one-week waiting period, for example, if they were not already receiving maternity or parental benefits and where their benefit period is postponed by one week due to a delay in the interruption of their earnings.
Subclause 6(1) also adds a new subsection 210(1.011) to the code to provide that bereavement leave for the death of a child may be taken up to 12 weeks after the end of the employee's maternity leave, if applicable. This change ensures that an employee who loses their child during the maternity leave period can wait until that leave ends before taking the full 10 weeks of bereavement leave.
Finally, currently, bereavement leave for the death of a child may be taken during the period that begins the day on which the death occurs and ends 12 weeks after the latest of the days on which any funeral, burial or memorial service occurs. This means that an employee who loses their child at the beginning of their 17-week maternity leave may not be eligible to take bereavement leave if they wish to complete their full maternity leave entitlement.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
You all have the amendment that would add the new clause 6, which is G-9.
Is amendment G-9 carried?
Madam Larouche, go ahead.
Bloc
Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC
We set a number of weeks, but keep in mind that we'll have to think about increasing it to 50, just as we have to think about cases involving serious illness. The Bloc Québécois wishes to reiterate its desire to establish a proper number of weeks.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Thank you, Madame Larouche.
(Amendment agreed to)
We will now go to amendment G-10, which would add new clause 7. G-10 references clause 6, which was created by G-9 as G-9 was accepted.
Do you wish to move G-10?
Liberal
Annie Koutrakis Liberal Vimy, QC
Yes, we are moving G-10.
New clause 7 would add a transitional provision.
I move that Bill C-222 be amended by adding after line 31 on page 2 the following:
Transitional Provision
7 (1) Section 210 of the Canada Labour Code, as amended by section 6, applies to an employee if, on the day on which section 6 comes into force,
(a) the period during which the employee is entitled to take leave under subsection 210(1.01) of that Act, as it read immediately before section 6 comes into force, has not ended; or
(b) the employee is on, or entitled to be on, leave under section 206 of that Act.
The next subclause deals with periods of leave.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), an employee who has taken two periods of leave under subsection 210(1.2) of the Canada Labour Code before the day on which section 6 comes into force may, despite that subsection, take one additional period of leave.
The new clause 7 would add a transitional provision to Bill C-222 to ensure that any employee who is within the eligibility period for bereavement leave or for maternity leave on the day the changes to the code come into force is entitled to take the additional two weeks of bereavement leave. It would also ensure that an employee who is on maternity leave when the changes come into force may complete their maternity leave before taking the full 10 weeks of bereavement leave.
In addition, if an employee has taken a maximum number of periods of bereavement leave—that is, two—before the coming into force of these changes, they may take a third period to avail themselves of the additional weeks of leave, provided that they are still within the eligibility period.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
We now move to new clause 8, which would be added by amendment G-11, which can be moved.
Do you wish to move G-11?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Does anybody wish to have G-11 read into the record, or do you have it?
Conservative