Natural Resources Committee on March 9th, 2020

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Has there been any discussion about that as a problem? As the baby boomers fully retire, is there a threat there that we simply aren't going to have the bodies to manage the industry?

[Elisha Ram]

That's certainly something we monitor, not just with respect to this particular sector. This is an issue that affects the economy as a whole.

I think the typical profile of a worker in the natural resource sector, excluding perhaps oil and gas, does tend to be somewhat older and mostly male dominated. Some of the measures around training and support that were introduced were specifically with that in mind. We recognize that some of this population that's being impacted does not necessarily have a lot of formal skills, but probably does have other skills they've acquired through their lives that could be very useful in other sectors where there are greater opportunities.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Okay. You mentioned the issue of its being predominantly a male-focused industry. Are there any measures in place right now to effect that in any way?

[Elisha Ram]

We do not have any programs specifically targeting this sector that have a gender component to them. However, nothing prevents the sector or any company in the sector that is looking to change the profile of its workers from coming to see us. We would be happy to discuss their needs and consider how we might be able to help.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Okay.

I only have about a minute and a half, and I do have a question about training. When training is funded through either federal or provincial sources, what training is being taken up by the most employees at this point?

[Alan Bulley]

The way that the provinces and territories report on the training they do, especially under the labour market development agreements, is broken down under a number of broad categories that were put in place when the federal government initially delivered skills training.

The largest component is simply listed as “skills development”, so it could be a very broad range of industry- specific training. It could also reach into something like literacy and essential skills over a very broad range of skills development. Breaking that down individually is not something I could do for you right at the moment, but it is generally quite broad in the way the provinces and territories report that back to us.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Very quickly, we've talked a lot about innovation in the sector today. Is there anything that's coming that isn't there right now and is going to be needed in terms of skill sets for this industry?

[Alan Bulley]

I don't have anything specifically on that. The largest share of what happens in terms of skills development takes place at the provincial and territorial levels. We provide the funding and they make the determination themselves about what's best required for their own jurisdiction and their own specific labour markets.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Thank you, Mr. May.

Mr. Simard.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you.

I listened carefully to your presentation. However, if I speak specifically about my region, I can say that the serious crises in the softwood lumber sector have led to an abnormally high rate of people losing their jobs. As you pointed out earlier, this is a difficult situation. In fact, these people have spent their lives in the forest, are of a certain age, are on the verge of retirement, are used to a certain lifestyle and, from one day to the next, have to find a new job. These transitional measures must be implemented. In this regard, I agree with what you said. Unlike my Conservative friends, I have no objection to this being applied to sectors other than wood. I will tell you why.

I have difficulty seeing how this program—which we were talking about earlier and whose acronym in French is PABO, a joke that works in French, but perhaps not in English—offers essential support to people who lose their jobs. In concrete terms, how can it support the forestry industry?

I may have missed something. Can you enlighten me on that?

[Elisha Ram]

The intent of the softwood lumber action plan on the labour market side was to ensure that workers had access to skills training, totally recognizing the challenges experienced by an older worker used to working in a particular sector, but wanting to make sure that those who wanted to transition and acquire new skills have the opportunity to do so.

As my colleague mentioned, the funding was offered to the provinces and territories. Those that wanted to take advantage of it could do so. Some chose to do it, and others felt they had the resources they needed and did not need any additional support.

The other component, which was the special work-sharing agreement, was intended to ensure that employers and employees had the flexibility they needed to make arrangements such that they did not necessarily have to lay off the workers but could keep them on part time and be supported by employment insurance for the day they were not working.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I understand a little more about the second part and a little less about the first. In my opinion, it's a social program like any other, which is designed to support people going through a transition into the labour market. In my opinion, it should be given a broad interpretation rather than a narrow one.

At the end of your presentation, you said that the program was also intended to make forecasts about what could happen in the forestry sector. Since you are aware of the trends in the forestry sector today, especially in terms of automation in the workplace, I would like to know if you have any figures on job losses due to automation in the forestry sector and on the people who will have to make a transition. Indeed, there are certainly some trades that are going to disappear.

[Elisha Ram]

We do not have any specific forecasts on the effect of automation on the forestry sector. We do have a variety of expert opinions and a study that has been done on the effect of automation broadly speaking on the economy. What it does underline, first of all, is that there is a wide range of potential outcomes. In many cases we see automation leading to more jobs rather than fewer because of the types of new opportunities that automation might create. In other cases, particularly for lower-skilled work, there is a concern that automation might replace that employment.

I think it's likely we will see some of these effects playing out, but it's difficult to say with a lot of precision how fast and how deep those will be.

Our programming is intended to ensure that Canadians in all sectors in all parts of the country have access to the ability to obtain the skill that would make them more resilient to the coming of greater introduction of automation—so digital skills, better essential skills and skills that are much more difficult to replace with automation, such as creativity and judgment. I think by ensuring that these are available to Canadians we can help them be ready so that if and when automation does become a broader part of their life and is more integrated into business processes, they will have the skills for that.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I understand the direction of the program very well, but what worries me a little bit is that the people who are going to learn new skills are going to apply them in another sector, but not necessarily in the forestry sector. That is where this program seems to me to be a social program like any other. It is essential and I do not question its relevance, but I get the impression that it is being used to try to erase a much larger structural crisis with regard to softwood lumber. There is a lack of support for research and development and international trade in this area.

It is, after all, a social measure that allows people to re-enter the labour market. It was just a little comment.

In closing, do you have any data on the people who will use the type of program you were talking about earlier and who will find employment in the forestry sector later on?

[Elisha Ram]

No, we do not have any hard data on participation rates. As my colleague mentioned, many of these programs are delivered by the provinces. We do have access to the reporting they provide us, and we can work with them to get better information in the future, but we don't necessarily have that information today.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Cannings, you are last up.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you for being here.

I just want to start by saying that the forest sector has changed a lot, especially the labour relations within the sector, within the last 20 or 30 years or more. It used to be that most of the workers were employees of companies, and now if Weyerhaeuser wants to harvest a cut block, they contract out to someone to build a road into that cut block. That person contracts out to someone else to actually put the tape out on the road. They contract someone else to go and cut the trees on the road. They contract someone else to actually build the road, and that's even before they get down to harvesting the timber.

It would seem to me that the bulk of the workers in the forest, the people out on the land, who, I think, are probably a quarter to a third of the people working in the forest sector in B.C., are self-employed basically. They're contractors. I just wonder how much of these funds are available to people like that, you know, guys who just go out and do things as sub-subcontractors to somebody else. Do they have the same access to those funds as someone who works in a mill does? How much uptake are you getting from that kind of worker?

[Elisha Ram]

Eligibility will vary depending on the program. Employment insurance regular benefits are not available to the self-employed, so anyone who is self-employed would not have access to the income support. However—and my colleague can add more detail on this—the workforce development agreements in fact are intended for people who are not eligible for employment insurance. Those agreements provide the provinces and territories with vast flexibility in terms of who they can serve. We know that many of them are serving people who are contractors or self-employed.

Do you have anything to add?

[Alan Bulley]

Yes, thank you.

Under both of the large agreements that we spoke about, individuals can present themselves to the provinces or territories and will have access to whatever programs the different jurisdictions make available.

Out of the measures we've spoken about here, I think the only one that would not be applicable to the self-employed would be work-sharing, because there wouldn't necessarily be an employer-employee relationship. However, everything else that we've spoken about would be accessible to the self-employed, whether or not they were eligible for employment insurance.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Would that include funding to feed their families and that type of thing, or is it more for the retraining and things like that?

[Alan Bulley]

Depending on the nature of the program set up by the jurisdiction, it could include income support while the individual was on training so they could continue to do the types of things that you're talking about, like paying their bills, while they were receiving skills training.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

If they were just interested in staying alive while this crisis unfolded, they may not be eligible for any extra supports?

[Elisha Ram]

As I said, someone who is in a self-employed work arrangement is not eligible for the income support side of employment insurance. However, as my colleague mentioned, there are opportunities for Parliament to design interventions that provide people in those situations with income support while they're doing something else to make themselves more employable. That can include training, upskilling, or job replacement partnerships, where the province, for example, might pay a portion of the person's salary while that person is learning a new job working for an employer. There is no passive income support, but there are definitely opportunities for active income support.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

You mentioned there wasn't much uptake in the initial year or two of this program, because lumber was over $600 and everybody was surviving quite well. In the last year things have changed dramatically. As many people have mentioned, a lot of mills have closed, particularly in British Columbia.

Do you have any statistics or figures on what the uptake from British Columbia has been in the last year? When I talk to British Columbia government people, the sense I get is that they feel the federal government isn't helping as much as they'd want to see it help. They have their own fund that they have reluctantly put up. They took it from another rural fund, which was a very unpopular. I don't know, but I get the feeling they would like to see much more support from the federal government for workers and communities. Maybe the community's part is beyond your domain, but do you have a sense of what the federal government has provided in extra funds to British Columbia in the last year?