Status of Women Committee on June 4th, 2009

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Patricia Davidson]

Go ahead.

[Prof. Margot Young]

Okay.

I'll just say very briefly, so as to give others a chance as well, that I think we'll see a halt to pay equity progress in this sector, straightforwardly. And of course, as you noted, this has implications for the full economic lifespan of these women. I think, as well, an important message is being sent that this is not a government that prioritizes women's equality, and that it's willing to give only lip service to these important key measures.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Patricia Davidson]

Ms. Birenbaum.

[Joanna Birenbaum]

I would add to that, as I indicated in my initial statement, that when you have a marginalized group of workers, whether they're immigrant workers or aboriginal workers, and you don't have a regime that's actively working to address the discrimination they experience in the workplace--in this case, in terms of wages--that has fallout in other areas. As you've indicated, that can be in areas of benefits--so pensions and so on--but also in how these workers are viewed within the workplace, which can impact on sexual harassment and other indicia of discrimination arising from their being devalued as people and as workers.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Patricia Davidson]

Ms. Russell.

[Susan Russell]

I would agree with that statement.

I feel that it's very important to have the right to pay equity enshrined. I feel that it's difficult for people to bargain. I feel that it affects long-term poverty, because people are not as well able to put away money for old age. This is something that is really echoing with senior citizens today, because they lived under inequitable pay conditions during their working lives.

I would suggest that pay equity is actually one of the key factors in getting off the poverty treadmill and getting women to economic independence. They should not have to be dependent on another person in the household in order to be rich in their old age. They should not have to be dependent on another person in the household in order to be able to afford child care, and so on and so forth. It's a kind of spillover effect.

It's really important for women to get the same money as men do in the same job and be recognized as being equal with men. If their talents are equal, I don't see why their pay should not be equal. It seems to me that is only fair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Patricia Davidson]

Thank you very much.

We'll move now to Ms. Mathyssen for five minutes.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

The PSECA doesn't explicitly set out how complaints of discriminatory practices should proceed that don't involve predominantly female job groups but do involve issues pertaining to women's wages or other kinds of remuneration.

However, if a female employee is not being promoted to a senior level and is therefore receiving less overall wages, there's nothing there. Is the process, therefore, less efficient than was outlined by the pay equity task force report of 2004? Are there things here that we need to be concerned about?

That's for anyone who cares to answer.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Patricia Davidson]

Who would like to go first?

[Prof. Margot Young]

Should we hear from LEAF first, because that was an explicit part of their original submission or...?

[Joanna Birenbaum]

[Inaudible--Editor]...the question. Is this process less efficient than the pay equity task force--

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Or less fair.

[Joanna Birenbaum]

--and less fair? Yes, it is, in so many respects, in the respects identified in the various statements today. Yes, it is less fair, but it's hard to know where to even begin with the question, because fundamentally the PSECA is not about addressing or redressing discrimination against women in the workplace.

[Prof. Margot Young]

I would say there are three features that generally are sort of problematic, although with specific details. The first is its coverage. The second is the process. Thirdly, there's the content. What we might anticipate will actually be recognized as a situation where there is inequitable compensation, I think, is more narrowly defined as well. Those are all matters of concern, not just of efficiency but also of fairness.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Okay. We've talked a bit about the complaint mechanism within the act that is compelling employees to go to the Public Service Labour Relations Board. This, of course, is open only to unionized employees, and the burden of proof is on the worker. It's my understanding that it's a complex process and that the individual may not have access to all of the information.

I know specifically that in defining what is equal pay for work of equal value, a great many things go into it, and some of that has been mentioned today: skill, background, and the level of difficulty the job entails. In determining what is equal, it's a very complicated process. I went through it in Ontario back in 1990-91 and it took a great deal of effort.

With that in mind, how on earth does an individual without any support make her way through this process? Is this an imbalance of power? What are the implications of this kind of imbalance?

[Joanna Birenbaum]

Absolutely. You've identified many of the key concerns about the individual complaints process--or some of the key concerns. The information that is required to advance a pay equity claim is very complex, requires expert assistance, and is also generally not available to workers. It's exclusively within the hands of the employer and is systemic.

So the information the individual would require is systemic information, and our submission is that this information cannot and will not be available to individuals, which will make it impossible for them to advance complaints. As you say, the inequality between the government and one individual, one immigrant woman who wants to bring a complaint against the federal government, which is the employer, is immeasurable.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

And this information--

[Prof. Margot Young]

The short answer is that effectively she probably doesn't make her way through the process. You can compare this to the process in place for other workers under the Canadian Human Rights Act, whereby the Human Rights Commission would be available to some extent, at least in the initial investigation, to give some aid to the framing of the complaint and the informing of it. That's not available. Under this legislation, the woman has neither the assistance of her union nor the assistance of an agency or a body like the commission.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Certainly, the--

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Patricia Davidson]

Ms. Mathyssen, you have five seconds.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you very much. I appreciate the expertise.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Patricia Davidson]

Thank you.

We will now move to our last questioner, Ms. Tilly O'Neill-Gordon, please.

[Tilly O'Neill-Gordon, Conservative, Miramichi, NB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to congratulate you on how smoothly you keep things rolling. Everything just seems to be going right along.

I want to welcome the visitors here this afternoon.

First of all, my question is this. When you look at negotiations and unions—I was in a union all the time—do you agree, each one of you, with unions negotiating our salary and our health benefits, and why?

[Joanna Birenbaum]

That's an extremely broad question.

It sounds like Margot wanted to jump in.

[Prof. Margot Young]

I just want to say that if you're asking whether I support a collective bargaining regime, I do absolutely. I think it's a key feature of workplace justice in many circumstances, so I think unions have been important and continue to be important in terms of workers having fair, equitable, adequate employment contracts. But that is a very broad question you're asking, and if it leads to—