The CLC made that proposal at least five years go.
Ultimately, we observed that workers wanted to have access to training, but that it wasn't easy. Why would they agree to devote three months, six months or a year to development training, when they had to feed their families and there weren't necessarily any job opportunities? There's always uncertainty.
Consequently, in our view, employment insurance becomes a natural mechanism for motivating people. And leave is already offered for various reasons. So why not consider introducing training leave within the employment insurance system, to which workers would be entitled after contributing for a minimum number of years? In any case, we could find an arrangement that corresponds to that. We've calculated that every worker could accumulate a training leave bank that could be used for personal development.
In addition, employers could use that bank by offering training opportunities to workers who, at the same time, would receive an income paid by the employment insurance system. In such cases, an employer could perhaps add to that by granting a supplementary benefit, as is done in the case of health insurance and maternity leave.
So the benefit of that arrangement would be that it would offer flexibility. In addition, we would be able to provide tools for workers who, in some instances, don't necessarily have the flexibility to take charge of their own occupational training.
I believe the previous government was beginning to show that it understood this issue, but it didn't go very far. We hope to get more interest out of the new government, in view of the needs that are now so obvious. That's definitely a good way to use an existing tool, that we can equip with new accessories.