Pay Equity Committee on May 2nd, 2016

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Excellent. I do support promoting women in STEM especially. I'm the first female engineer in the House of Commons.

My other question goes back to this Human Rights Commission thing, because we've heard a lot of testimony that suggests that any complaints that go to the Human Rights Commission take, I think we heard, from six to 15 years, and sometimes longer, by the time people get paid. It costs millions of dollars, yet, Mr. Hynes and Ms. Mandal, both of you suggested that this is the right mechanism.

Can you comment on how you'd like to see that work, or is it exactly as we've see in the past with Air Canada and Bell? I think those are two of the examples that went there.

[Derrick Hynes]

Yes, there are examples, and there's no denying they took a long time, and that's not great. We would like to see that improve. What we do wonder about is whether there are things we could consider to speed up those processes, to accelerate them, to make them more efficient, rather than throwing it all out.

We do see—and the StatsCan data from earlier this afternoon verified this—that the gap is narrowing. Do we still have a problem? Absolutely, and it is one that we need to address. Representing our member organizations, it's certainly one that we take seriously and want to address because it's the right thing to do, but we're not sure that throwing it all out because it takes a long time or it costs a lot is the best approach. We have mechanisms in place, structures in place, infrastructure in place, processes in place that people understand.

What we think we need to do is put our heads together and make those processes better, because the evidence is not clear that going another route is necessarily going to be any better. It's definitely going to be more costly and cumbersome, and there's going to be a whole new bureaucracy that we'll all have to learn how to use.

We do think there's potential. As I said in my presentation, we'd like to be a part of that solution. We think 21st century employers get this and are already putting mechanisms in place, and Marina has referred to them. We certainly have examples from our member companies as well to address these gaps and to make this better.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Do you have anything to add to that, Ms. Mandal?

[Marina Mandal]

The only thing I'd add is that sometimes this may get a bit lost in the conversation, but employers also do not like long protracted battles at tribunals and courts, so it is definitely in the interests of all sides to have disputes resolved as quickly as possible.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Yes, I think there's something that needs to be done there.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anita Vandenbeld]

Ms. Ludgate, are you interested in answering some of these question, or shall we move on?

[Catherine Ludgate]

No, I don't have information to offer on the gender breakdown of the credit union employees across the country. If it's of interest to the committee, I can ask colleagues to send that in for the end of the week, but I can't specifically comment on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anita Vandenbeld]

If you do want to ask a question, please raise your hand, because there's a bit of a time lag and I may miss you.

I'm sorry; go ahead, and I'll add extra time.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you.

My other question is about the different sizes of businesses and not making a big bureaucracy when you implement the pay equity thing. Large businesses and small businesses are different.

I noticed that Ms. Mandal talked about having a pay equity committee and audits and spot checks. Can you give me some guidance as to how you see this happening in a smaller organization as opposed to a larger organization?

[Marina Mandal]

I will try.

I think some of those elements that the banks have identified for me as things that they do should be relatively easily achievable for a small organization. Whether it's at an internal review or a periodic review, I think what becomes more challenging for smaller organizations or small companies, simply because of resourcing issues, is building out a whole audit system, a whole reporting system that's heavily prescribed by law, which is why we keep going back to flexibility for organizations and building on existing systems.

Smaller banks also have pay equity plans in place. Therefore, the answer is that if you're looking at proposing a model, I think flexibility is really what helps some of the smaller companies that might struggle a bit. It gets to outcomes as well, rather than employers sort of moving hard and not being able to keep up with the legislation.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anita Vandenbeld]

The next question goes to Ms. Benson. You have seven minutes.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Thank you.

Thank you very much. It's nice to see you again, Mr. Hynes. I'm following you around here.

I'll go first to the Canadian Bankers Association. I want to clarify a couple of things in your report. The percentages are a representation when you're talking about the middle and lower levels; it's not about pay equity.

[Marina Mandal]

No.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

That's fair enough. I just wanted to make that note.

The other clarification that's important for me with the Canadian Bankers Association, and perhaps with some comments Mr. Hynes made, is that in the 2004 pay equity task force report there is a whole piece that talks about being flexible with smaller and larger employers. Some of that is addressed, but I wonder if both of you can let us know how you are doing, as industries, on pay equity.

I'm not talking about wage discrimination, because that's illegal. If Derrick and Elizabeth are doing the same thing, and I'm paying Elizabeth $5 and Derrick's getting $10, that's illegal. We all understand that.

The next thing is the fact that when women are in a workforce or in a particular area, then that brings the wage down, and then you find equal work of equal value is not happening. Bankers have been committed to the principles of pay equity for 35 years. I'm wondering how you know how well you're doing.

I would ask the same of FETCO. Where are you at? What are your own statistics?

[Marina Mandal]

On pay equity, equal pay for equal value of work, and separating that out from the wage gap, as you alluded to, it's the law, so since—

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

No, sorry. I have to clarify.

Wage discrimination is illegal. That's the description I gave with Elizabeth and Derrick, but we're talking about equal pay for work of equal value, which adds to the wage gap. I wondered how the Canadian Bankers Association knows how well it is doing on that front.

[Marina Mandal]

The way the banks have approached it is at the origin point of compensation. I mentioned a few of these.

At the starting point it's gender-neutral job evaluation, the Hay method, which not just banks use, but also a lot of corporations globally.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Do you know how well you're doing, though? Is there no issue within banks? How close are you?

It comes to the point, in lots of cases, of how long do we have to wait—no offence—for employers to get their act together to address it. When we're just asking for more statistics and that kind of thing, it's hard for us to tell people that we have to wait and do another study. I'm wondering if either of you knows how well you're doing in this area.

[Derrick Hynes]

That's a great question.

What I will say on behalf of the member organizations within the organization that I represent is that we are 18 large employers that are federal. Most, if not all, are heavily unionized. I don't know if Statistics Canada has run data on this, but from reading some of the literature, my sense is the gaps are narrower within heavily unionized settings.

When I was talking to some of our member companies over the past couple of weeks and preparing to come to speak to you today, I got a lot of positive feedback from HR professionals who have been around for a while and have seen the world change in this area. Did they have statistics they could give me to say it was 10% better than it was when they started in their jobs in HR? No, but certainly there was a positive vibe around the way pay equity is a part of the conversation and the way HR systems are organized around joint job evaluations and these sorts of things.

There is a sophistication to it now that might not have existed 25 or 30 years ago, and I believe that is revealing itself in the data. The gap is narrowing. Are we there? Absolutely not. I read some of the transcripts from the previous committee meetings you've held, and I know that some of the union leaders have said “Get off your wallets, companies, and fix this.” We believe the issue is more complex than one simple fix, which was the tone of our presentation, but overall, the feedback I received from the member companies was that it is a lot better and things are improving.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

I guess the other piece is that it is important that there be a responsibility on employers. If in fact you're saying it's a priority, then they should to be able to demonstrate that, because what we've heard from the complaints-based system, even from the Human Rights Commission, is that they don't have the expertise, and it's long and drawn out. You know, some of those people died before they got their thing, and that's not okay, so it's not a whole new system.

It's a system that would be more efficient and effective with the expertise you need to do that kind of thing with the flexibility that Ms. Mandal talked about, and that is similar to occupational health and safety. There would be an ability to be within a bigger framework with more expertise focused in the area, so you'd actually move more quickly.

Obviously, you can tell what I think of 2004. There's a lot of good stuff, and we don't need to reinvent the wheel. Do you have any comment on that?

[Marina Mandal]

I guess my comment would be that I definitely don't want to give the impression that we have come into this appearance with our minds made up, at least for the banks. What we'd want to do is look at the details and look at where we can avoid duplicating or reinventing the wheel.

I totally understand the point about the requisite expertise needed, and there are maybe other ways to handle that, such as having those people at the Human Rights Commission versus a brand new commission. The devil is in the details. We as an industry, and I'm sure others around the table, would want to take a close look at what's being proposed and what the consequences, intended or otherwise, could be for employers and employees.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anita Vandenbeld]

That's time.

We will now go to Ms. Dzerowicz for seven minutes.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thank you so much.

First I'd like to say thank you to all three presenters. It was excellent.

I'm going to ask all my questions at once, and you can sort of put your thoughts together.

Ms. Mandal, you've mentioned that banks have made progress on pay equity, and Mr. Hynes, you've indicated that the gap is narrowing.

I'm following up on Ms. Benson's point. I'm a very big believer that what is not measured is not going to be worked on and that progress cannot be made, so I would highly recommend that if there are any statistics that give us any indication that banks have actually made progress on equal work of equal value, they be given to our committee. I'm a little bit worried that it wasn't presented today. That would be a very key thing to present.

There's a second thing I want to say, and I should let you know I am a former bank executive and I'm very familiar with banks. I've spent the majority of my life working in the banking industry at very senior levels, so I want to indicate that in my experience, unless there is a road map, a game plan, an executive champion, accountability, transparency, and reporting and rewards on progress, things aren't going to happen at the bank. I'd like to know whether or not that is actually happening at each of the banks, and if so, if you could relay where the progress is with all the banks. That's my first set of questions.

Second, with all due respect, Mr. Hynes, more reports and studies are not needed. The train has left the station. In 1977 pay equity was made a human right in Canada, and the reason we actually have this pay equity committee, in my personal opinion, is that we haven't made the progress we should have made on pay equity thus far. Now, even in saying all of that, I will say to you that I care a lot about costs for banks and I care a lot about costs for businesses. This means something to me; I care about our economy.

You have indicated, Mr. Hynes, that it is costly to put in a proactive model and it will be prohibitive from the administrative perspective. What data do you have or what more information can you give us on both of those fronts?

[Derrick Hynes]

To answer that question, I don't actually have concrete data to say that it's x numbers of dollars to do this or x numbers of dollars to do that.

I don't disagree with you. I believe you said that the train has left the station, and we've been researching this issue for many years. The 2004 report, which is 600 pages long and has dozens and dozens of recommendations, was clearly a substantial piece of work. At FETCO, my predecessor was quite involved in that process. We didn't necessarily agree with all the key recommendations that came out of it, but we certainly were a part of it.

In terms of measuring the overall impact for where we need to go next when we look at the proactive versus the current model, what we're saying is that we have a system right now under the Canadian Human Rights Commission. It's not perfect, but it does exist. Also, we're not just talking about the cost of business; we're talking about the cost of government. If government is going to invest in something new to try to take this further and narrow this gap even more, which we all agree is a great idea, we question whether building a whole new system under a whole new bureaucracy is necessarily the thing to do.

For us, it was just common sense to think that if we're going to build a whole new thing, that's likely going to cost us more. Also, we're all going to have to learn the new processes to make that work, and it's going to take more time to figure it all out than it would if we were to try to improve the processes currently in place to try to bridge those gaps.