Science and Research Committee on Oct. 30th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Welcome to meeting number 61 of the Standing Committee on Science and Research.

Today's committee meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person in the room. We also have members and witnesses here via Zoom.

I'd like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and the members.

First of all, please wait for me to recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click the microphone icon to activate your mike. When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly. If you're not speaking, please mute your mike. For those on Zoom, we have interpretation services. You have the choice, at the bottom of your screen, of floor, English or French. For those in the room, you can use your earpiece and select the desired channel.

Although this room is equipped with a powerful audio system, we do have feedback from time to time. That can be very harmful to our interpreters and can cause serious injuries. Most commonly, the feedback happens because the earpiece being worn is too close to the microphone, so please keep your earpiece away from the mike. When your headset is plugged in, avoid manipulating the earpiece when it's not in use by placing it on the table and away from the microphone.

In accordance with the committee's routine motion concerning connection tests for witnesses, I am informing the committee that all witnesses have completed the required connection tests in advance of the meeting.

As a reminder, all comments, again, should come through me, as the chair.

Now we'll get started.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(i) and the motion adopted by the committee on Monday, December 5, 2022, the committee resumes its study on the long-term impacts of pay gaps experienced by different genders and equity-seeking groups among faculty at Canadian universities.

It's now my pleasure to welcome, as an individual, Dr. Malinda Smith, vice-provost and associate vice-president of research, equity, diversity and inclusion, at the University of Calgary, where the sky is big and blue today. We also have, from the Canadian National Institute for the Blind, Dr. Mahadeo Sukhai, vice-president, research and international affairs, and chief accessibility officer.

They are here by video conference.

Each of you will have five minutes for your opening statements.

We'll start with Dr. Malinda Smith from the University of Calgary.

[Malinda Smith, Vice-Provost and Associate Vice-President, Research (Equity, Diversity and Inclusion), University of Calgary, As an Individual]

Good afternoon. Thank you very much for the opportunity to discuss the impacts of pay gaps among faculty at Canadian universities.

Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge that I'm speaking to you from the traditional territories of the people of the Treaty 7 region in southern Alberta. The city of Calgary is also home to the Métis Nation of Alberta, districts 5 and 6.

Pay inequity is a significant obstacle to achieving an equitable, diverse, inclusive and accessible Canadian post-secondary sector. Its impacts are uneven. It differentially impacts members of federally designated groups, including women, indigenous people, racialized or visible minorities and persons with disabilities. While lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and two-spirit people are not yet included among FDGs, this absence is recognized as an equity issue, as highlighted in the consultations by the Employment Equity Act review task force.

In the post-secondary sector, we have significant data gaps on the representation, attainment, experiences and wage gaps for all FDGs, and this is the case for members of the LGBTQ2S+ community. I might point out that these gaps were identified in the Royal Commission on Equality in Employment in 1984—the Abella report. We are still dealing with these issues 40 years on.

To understand pay gaps among faculty, we need to use an equity lens and an intersectional lens, because pay gaps disproportionately impact members of some groups of Canadian university professors more than others.

I want to briefly answer four questions: What does an intersectional equity lens show? What are some common articulated reasons for the gaps? What are the impacts of the gaps? I'll focus on those. What needs to be done to ameliorate those pay gaps? I will emphasize those.

First, with regard to what an intersectionality lens shows about the pay gaps of faculty, we can look at “Differences in Representation and Employment Income of Racialized University Professors” by Howard Ramos and Peter Li, in The Equity Myth. They highlight that incomes show that white male professors earn the most, followed by visible minority South Asian men and aboriginal men. Among those with the lowest mean incomes were visible minority Black women, Arab women, Asian women and South Asian women, all earning half of the average. While white female professors had the highest income, it is also notable that their income was clearly below the average of white males.

They go on to argue that, for some, this might be the result of underperformance, hiring, publication records, success in funding or willingness to offer services, but that's not enough. The data shows.... For that argument to hold convincingly—that visible minority professors systematically underperform in productivity compared to white professors at all levels—we would need to see this in the data. However, representation and earning outcomes cannot be easily dismissed by productivity differences alone.

Secondly, the Canadian Association of Universities Teachers' “Underrepresented & Underpaid” highlighted that full-time women university professors, on average, continue to earn significantly less compared to their white male counterparts. Racialized women professors experience a rate of unemployment that is almost twice as high as that of non-racialized women, and there's a persistent and indeed worsening gap between this group and both women who are not racialized and racialized men.

I can highlight, as well, that in the policy brief for the Employment Equity Act review task force, it was shown that the wage gap was wider for indigenous women, women with disabilities, racialized women and newcomer women. In effect, intersectional analysis matters.

What accounts for these gaps?

It's educational attainment, job tenure, part-time versus full-time, unionized versus non-unionized, but also biases in discretionary university compensation, for example, merit determination, retention determination, salary adjustments and market supplements. Sociologists Ramos and Li also highlighted human capital factors, seniority, productivity and discrimination. Economists Blau and Khan also say that 62% of the wage gap can be explained by factors such as “occupational segregation”, full-time versus part-time, rank and experience.

However, the full 38% cannot be explained by these quantitative factors alone. They suggest that discrimination is a factor.

What are the implications? They're profound—

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

I'm sorry, Dr. Smith. I'm going to have to call time on you, but maybe we can get to the implications through the questions and answers.

Thank you very much for your testimony.

We're going to go to Dr. Sukhai from the CNIB for five minutes, please.

[Dr. Mahadeo Sukhai, Vice-President Research and International Affairs and Chief Accessibility Officer, Canadian National Institute for the Blind, As an Individual]

Good afternoon, honourable members of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Science and Research.

I'm Dr. Mahadeo Sukhai, the vice-president of research and international affairs and the chief accessibility officer of the CNIB—

[The Clerk of the Committee, Ms. Hilary Smyth]

Dr. Sukhai, I apologize. It was lagging a bit and there was some latency. We'll let you know if we run into any technical problems.

You may resume.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

It looks like we're going. I've paused your time, but let's keep going.

Thank you.

[Dr. Mahadeo Sukhai]

Today I wish to discuss a critical issue—the enduring pay gaps experienced by different genders and equity-seeking groups among faculty at Canadian universities—and I want to specifically emphasize researchers with disabilities.

The recent Statistics Canada report “Reports on Disability and Accessibility in Canada: Earnings pay gap among persons with and without disabilities, 2019” reveals that individuals with disabilities age 16 and older “earn 21.4% less than [those] without disabilities”. This gap widens for individuals with cognitive disabilities, who earn up to 46.6% less, and the gap also widens over time as persons with disabilities who are 40 years of age earn significantly less in comparison to their peers living without disabilities than those who are in their twenties. These gaps present significant obstacles to inclusion, diversity, equity and accessibility—IDEA—in the workplace.

In the sciences, researchers with disabilities often bear the burden of advocating for their own workplace adjustments or accommodations while grappling with systemic biases. This cognitive load or access work can hinder their career progression and well-being. Furthermore, the health impacts of continual stress, often referred to as weathering; the additional living costs associated with living with a disability; the barriers to publishing; the lack of accessible spaces within research, such as meetings, conferences, classrooms, seminars and laboratories; and the prevalent biases in hiring and promotion processes—among others—present substantial barriers for researchers with disabilities. These barriers further exacerbate the experienced pay gap. Additionally, these affect not just the financial security but also the mental health of researchers with disabilities. The stress of navigating existing systemic barriers, advocating for accommodations and dealing with pay inequity can significantly impact mental health, affecting productivity and career progression.

In research environments, one of the most significant challenges in addressing long-term pay gaps is the lack of comprehensive demographic data about researchers with disabilities in academia and outside of academia. Without this data, ethically sourced and carefully handled, we cannot fully grasp the breadth and depth of this issue. We must remember that disability is not a monolith. It is, in fact, a spectrum of unique experiences shaped by intersecting identities, including but not limited to gender, race and career trajectory, thereby creating unique experiences and challenges. Recognizing these nuances is critical for understanding the current existing barriers and pay gaps.

One nuance in particular that must be very clearly acknowledged is that of a person's age when they first identify as living with disabilities. A faculty member who is a full professor when they first experience disability will have a very different career trajectory, career quality and, hence, resulting pay-equity gap than a person born with a disability who experiences ableism and many significant barriers, both personal and systemic, as they work to become and stay faculty.

In addressing these issues, the role of policy cannot be understated. Policies that enforce pay equity, promote accessibility and ensure inclusive representation within academic spaces are vital. However, they are not enough on their own. We also need a cultural shift that values diversity, champions inclusivity and acknowledges the significant contributions of researchers with disabilities.

Universities, research institutions and granting agencies play an imperative role in either perpetuating or mitigating these pay gaps. It is their responsibility to take proactive steps to understand and address existing pay gaps, promote pay equity and create supportive and inclusive environments for all researchers, regardless of their identities.

That being stated, it is also imperative to acknowledge that there is a substantial lack of appropriate training and understanding of accessibility specific to research environments, and this knowledge gap perpetuates the barriers that are faced by researchers with disabilities. As such, there is an urgent need for systemic change in perception and attitudes towards disability in academia.

Finally, it is important to highlight the benefits of IDEA in research. IDEA leads to better outcomes and innovation. By addressing pay gaps and promoting pay equity, we can create an environment where all researchers thrive, leading to a more robust, innovative and inclusive research community.

Understanding and addressing pay equity is not just an issue of fairness, it is a issue of quality, innovation and excellence in research.

We must act now to ensure that all researchers, including those with disabilities, have an equitable opportunity to contribute to the advancement of knowledge in Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Terrific. Thank you very much.

Thank you both for your testimony.

Now moving to our questions, we're starting a six-minute round with Ben Lobb, please.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Chair—

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Just one second, we have a point of order.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

I simply want to say that the interpreters were having difficulty with the last witness. His microphone is not good enough.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

Thank you.

I was watching the interpreters for a sign during the testimony. I didn't see one come.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

I can confirm that they told me that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lloyd Longfield]

To the presenters, if you could maybe speak up and speak slowly when you're answering the question, we'll see whether that can work.

Thank you for pointing that out, Monsieur Blanchette-Joncas.

Now for six minutes we go to Mr. Lobb, please.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Thanks very much.

Thank you to both our guests for coming today. My first question is for Dr. Smith.

I'm just wondering. Dr. Smith, do you work with human resources on your mission in equity, diversity and inclusion? How does that relationship work with human resources at the university?

[Malinda Smith]

The short answer is, yes, I do. The relationship is well. Equity, diversity, inclusion and accessibility at the University of Calgary, as at most universities, is a collaboration with human resources, offices of institutional analysis on data and the registrar's office, among others. The relationship, I think, is well, because it's vital to our standards in data collection.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

How do you track your compensation to know if it's fair across Canada or even within the university? How do you track that personally to know that you're getting fair compensation for the work that you do?

[Malinda Smith]

There are a number of ways to do that. The UCASS system, of course, is probably the.... Statistics Canada is authoritative on publicly disclosed data. Also, I'm in Alberta, so we have public transparency data.

There are a number of studies, some of which I highlighted, where people do comparative data analysis. What I also highlighted in my comments is that there are parts of the data that are discretionary and we might not be able to track. For example, anything that's, say, a market supplement might not be revealed publicly, or if there is something that might be a retention offer, which is made on a discretionary basis, those are generally made to men more than women, as an example, because men are more likely to seek jobs elsewhere and therefore need to be retained. That also changes the factor. Also, if you're a woman, things like maternity leave impact your income. Whether one's family-friendly or...child care also impacts one's income over time.

The data on racialized women is so persistent across studies—Statistics Canada, sociologists, economists, the Conference Board of Canada, Catalyst Canada—that one has to take seriously the need for intersectional analysis.

I'm making it clear that it's needed, but it's not sufficient.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Universities have the most educated people, I suspect, in all the workforces across the country. There are many highly paid professionals there—the dean, all the people in HR, people like you. Let's drill into, let's say, the University of Calgary. You could go across all universities, but you work there so we'll talk about this one. Are there people at your university who are not receiving fair compensation based on all the classifications you provided?

If there are people who aren't receiving fair compensation, why not? Everybody's there, so they should know who makes what. Why is this not happening?

[Malinda Smith]

There are three responses to your question.

First, the public disclosure is for a certain amount. That's for those who are higher up. I would say that's clear. That's less so for many staff members who work in universities. It's not clear for job offers. We don't see until much later on the pay gap that emerges—probably around the senior associate or full professor....

At the University of Calgary, as probably at many U15 universities, there is a commitment to pay equity. The important thing about tracking the data is to ameliorate inequities, so there are mechanisms in place that are important to ensure those gaps are closed.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Does HR see the offer letters that go out to prospective university employees?

[Malinda Smith]

HR sees the letters because it has to implement these in its system.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Then why wouldn't HR say to a professor, “Whoa, you're way low here. You can't offer that.” How come that doesn't take place?

[Malinda Smith]

That's a very good question.

Who should be accountable for pointing out discrepancies? I would say hiring is the prerogative of a provost or a vice-president academic, in relation to a dean or a chair. It's not necessarily HR, per se, although HR may implement practices to close those gaps.

I like your question, because it highlights accountability. If you know there are gaps among assistant, associate and full professors across racial lines, whose responsibility is it to identify and ameliorate this proactively? I believe it's the chairs, deans and provosts who should do this.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

I think it's also HR or legal. It's also a dean at a university and the president of the university—