Pay Equity Committee on May 4th, 2016

[Johanne Perron]

It's less detailed and that's a problem. It should be more detailed. The issue is complex, so the more detailed the legislation is about the process the employers have to follow, the better it is. In our case, it's not that clear in some cases.

The timelines are also a bit too flexible. There's always a possibility to ask for extensions.

As well, it only applies to the public sector, whereas we would like to have public and private sectors that are federally regulated for this piece that you're working on.

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

Okay.

I heard you talk about this one example where nurses had an inequity, and they got this 41% increase. We've been hearing from witnesses that even where legislation exists and people have done what they can, the wage gap is still 9%. It's not closed and people don't understand what all the causes are for that.

Do you study the causes or do you just pay the 9% increase and address it like that? I'd be interested to hear your opinion on that.

[Johanne Perron]

It would be nice to have the 9% increase for everybody.

No, I don't think it's the way we look at it. It's really dangerous to equate the wage gap with pay inequity, because really the wage gap is influenced by so many factors. The fact that women are much more educated now influences the wage gap. However, in New Brunswick we know that women are more educated than men, and still there is a wage gap. It's much more complex than just looking at one thing.

In all honesty, you could have a situation where you have no wage gap and still have pay inequity. For instance, if you go in a school and you have the same wages for the janitor and the schoolteacher, then you don't have a gap, but you do have a really serious pay inequity problem.

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

Yes.

Those are my questions.

Dan, do you have a question?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Sure.

Actually, I was just speaking with my colleague here. I believe last night we were discussing Nova Scotia, and it seemed that Nova Scotia had a slightly better track record over the past 10 or so years, for the most improved, yet I think it has a much different legislative framework.

You mentioned that the rules you operate under in New Brunswick are less detailed than in Quebec, but how would you afford that Nova Scotia seems to have tackled the issue much differently?

[Johanne Perron]

I just want to know what you're talking about. Is it the track record on the wage gap?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

I'm sorry. We've put in a lot of hours here in the committee.

It's with regard to the most improvement since their initial implementation, as far as the gap is concerned. I'm wondering what you might owe that to. Is it demographics? Is it immigration? Is it legislation?

[Johanne Perron]

To explain their success, if you like?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Yes, their comparative success.

[Johanne Perron]

I don't have the knowledge to answer that question.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Fair enough. We talked to StatsCan, and in some cases they don't either.

I appreciate that. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anita Vandenbeld]

You still have one minute.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Oh.

Well, you can go.

[An hon. member]

No, you go for it.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

I was not even on this rotation.

One thing we have discussed a little bit, and I'll just quickly put it out to the panel, is that in the United Kingdom they are moving forward with what's called pay transparency in the private sector. For firms of over 250 employers, they simply put out an average for all the employees, for both men and women, and that's displayed publicly. Many of them then form committees, and then independently start working as to the reasons. Every company is slightly different, and some have different dominant genders in their workforce.

What does this panel think of that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Anita Vandenbeld]

You have 10 seconds.

[Julie Shugarman]

Transparency is good, but does it have teeth? What comes with transparency?

[The Chair, Liberal, Anita Vandenbeld]

Thank you very much for being succinct.

We'll go to the next question now.

Ms. Benson, you have seven minutes.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much for the presentations. I have a couple of comments and then maybe we can get your reflections back on them.

I want to thank you for bringing up one thing we have stumbled with a little bit on this committee. That is thinking we are solving the wage gap with pay equity, which gets us off the conversation around a human right and the fact that we're trying to implement—or at least I want to implement—pay equity legislation so that we have a process in place for all federally regulated employers so that they can implement pay equity and we can know whether they are getting there and how far they have to go and that kind of thing.

I'm not saying that because I don't think the other issues that make the wage gap are much more complicated. I think pay equity legislation is complicated but the wage gap is very complex. Sending a rocket to the moon is complicated, but you just have to follow the steps, I think, like rocket scientists or whatever. That's what I feel we have here with the Bilson report.

I'm not really sure what I'm saying except that I would like to have you reiterate some of those key pieces about the difference. I certainly am not someone who thinks we're going to implement pay equity legislation and then we're going to be able to tackle sexism and discrimination and all those variables that impact women's lives and vulnerable women's lives. Maybe you could talk about why this piece of work is so important to women and human rights.

[Johanne Perron]

Well, it's because it's unfair to be paid less than you should be paid for the value of your work. That's really what it is. It's unfair that you're not paid as much just because you happen to have chosen a job that is done mainly by women. It's not fair that you're not paid enough when you're taking care of everybody around you and you are paid less for your work than you would be if you were a janitor or a technician. You are always there to take care of kids in child care, people in their old age, or vulnerable people, and you earn $12, $13, or $14 an hour. That's wrong and it has to be fixed. That's really what it is.

[Julie Shugarman]

I would add that pay equity is a recognized human right and that at a really basic level, legislation is necessary, not just in order to comply with domestic and international obligations and commitments but because it's important to recognize that what we're talking about is the situation in which work that has traditionally been done by women and even more acutely by racialized, aboriginal, or disabled women is undervalued because it is considered women's work. I think the Minister for Status of Women was here last night, and I believe she said this is because of patriarchy. There's a lot to bite off here, but I think you have a template and a blueprint for where to start.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

If you could, reflect on this piece. We haven't had a lot of private employer groups come here. We've had the public sector, obviously, the minister as the employer of the public sector. We heard from the two largest groups in that private sector, that federally regulated group, some hesitation to be mandated or legislated to do pay equity. At the same time, although they shared with us that they felt they were doing things, and I sincerely believe that they were, they were not able to tell us how close they were or how far they've gone. There were no outcomes. There was no accountability.

I think that will be one of the challenges when we talk about that push-back from employers, because regardless of how often we have said there is a business case, it's not enough to get employers there. Why are some employers so hesitant? You can sort of assume there is the obvious reason, but is it just money or not knowing how big it will be?

[Julie Shugarman]

I guess there are a couple of things. One is that pay equity is the law. It might be challenging, it might be unpleasant, and it might be costly, but it's the law and it's human rights law, so it's not the kind of thing that we can dilly-dally on. I'll leave it at that.

[Johanne Perron]

It is difficult for us to speak on behalf of employers.

In New Brunswick, as I have explained, they participated in a roundtable where the pay gap issue was discussed. Employer associations have all recognized that there were problems with pay inequity and work needed to be done. They said that they would make changes voluntarily, but we have seen that this has not been the case.

I think we need legislation, because this is a human right and also because it will be fairer. Everyone will be in the same game and follow the same rules. I think this is also important. In my view, it may be easier for employers to solve the problem if they know that all employers will be in the same situation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anita Vandenbeld]

I'm sorry, but your time is up.

Thank you very much. We will now go to Mr. DeCourcey for seven minutes.