Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 95 of 95
Angella MacEwen
View Angella MacEwen Profile
Angella MacEwen
2021-05-20 12:34
Thank you very much. It's nice to be here with all of you.
The Canadian Union of Public Employees is Canada's largest union, with over 700,000 members. Our members work in a broad cross-section of the economy such as health care, education, municipalities, libraries, universities, social services, public utilities, emergency services, transportation and airlines.
With regard to this budget, we want to reiterate that investment in the care economy, including health care, child care and social services, will have social and economic returns far higher than the current cost of borrowing. A vibrant, accessible care sector ensures that everyone can participate in the workforce, which will be essential throughout the economic recovery. Government investment in care improves labour market outcomes for women and overall productivity, allowing governments to recoup the upfront costs at the end, so we're very glad to see the investment in child care that was proposed with the provinces.
To make sure this reaches its full potential, we need to see a strong workforce development plan alongside the proposed child care spending to make sure that we have enough trained workers and to ensure that the lower costs of child care we want to see for parents is not being subsidized by pushing the wages of workers even lower than they already are.
In terms of employment insurance, CUPE has long asked for some of the reforms to employment insurance that we see temporarily implemented here such as the lower-paying Canadian entrance requirement and the extra five weeks in high unemployment locations.
We were disappointed to see that the promised extension of EI sickness benefits to 26 weeks has been delayed until the summer of 2022, because that leaves a substantial number of long-haul COVID patients without the economic supports they'll need. They will have exhausted all other benefits, and implementing the EI sickness benefits right now would have been a way to kind of bridge that gap for a lot of people.
We are happy that there is substantial money for training; however, nearly all of it is being targeted for employer-led and employer-developed training. There is no direct support for workers themselves and no support for worker-selected training. The need for training supports and flexibility on training will only grow more urgent as Canada's economy transitions to create more green jobs.
On the minimum wage, CUPE is happy to see the federal government establish a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour. We recommend that the federal minimum wage be adjusted upward annually faster than CPI for the first five years, recognizing that the costs of essentials such as food, water and shelter are increasing faster than the overall rate of inflation, and the $15 rate is what was proposed several years ago and has already been eaten away by several years of inflation.
In terms of tax fairness, this budget was a big disappointment. Tax cuts since 2000 have reduced federal revenues by over $50 billion annually, and the major beneficiaries of these tax cuts have been large corporations and the wealthiest Canadians. These cuts have left a huge hole in federal budgets and have had a ripple effect across provincial budgets as the federal government stepped back from funding essential public services.
The federal government could have increased revenues by over $50 billion without increasing tax rates on middle- and low-income Canadians with fair tax measures like restoring the federal corporate tax rate to 21%; eliminating wasteful and regressive tax loopholes; changing how we tax capital gains deductions, the benefit of which goes to the top 10% of income earners; cracking down on tax avoidance in ways that we know will make a difference rather than just continuing consultations; and introducing a wealth tax on estates over $20 million. The federal government should also still consider introducing an excess profits tax that could raise up to $8 billion, even if it's only on 15% of excess profits for one year.
In terms of transparency and accountability for public supports, unions asked the federal government, when it was implementing supports such as the wage subsidy, to make sure the rules for this program were fair. What we've seen is that did not happen, so lots of very profitable companies have taken public money at the same time as they were paying out big bonuses to executives and dividends to shareholders, laying off or locking out workers and using the wage subsidy as a way to push workers to accept lower working conditions and wages.
There's substantial room for improvement in terms of the transparency of corporate support to ensure the effectiveness and fairness of public spending. CUPE has recommended several ways in which the government could strengthen these conditions and improve transparency and accountability. These include clauses that mandate labour protections for workers, including protection of benefits and health and safety protocols, and ensure protections for whistle-blowers. When there is a union in the workplace, include them in the negotiations for wage subsidies and other supports. For a year after a corporation receives public subsidies or loans, implement prohibitions on dividend capital distribution and share repurchases.
As well, make information about all of this, about how public money is being spent, clear and publicly available.
Thank you.
Jerry Dias
View Jerry Dias Profile
Jerry Dias
2021-05-20 12:51
Thank you very much, Mr. Easter.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. I’m pleased to be here today to provide input on the budget implementation bill. My name is Jerry Dias, and I'm the national president of Unifor.
Just as an aside, it's always my pleasure to appear before many MPs I have had some stimulating debates and conversations with over the years. Once I give my presentation I'm going to have to get off the call. I'll be speaking to the Prime Minister very shortly on a variety of things, but also I have my national executive board meeting going on as we speak and I'm going to get to that once I'm finished with the Prime Minister.
Since the beginning of the pandemic, Unifor has advocated for governments at all levels to put policies in motion to build a fair, inclusive and resilient economic recovery. We call it our “build back better” plan. This year’s budget and the first budget implementation bill show the government is at least on the right track. There are a number of items in the bill that are a good start but need some improvement.
These are the items I will bring to your attention today. First, I want to address the minimum wage. Reinstating the federal minimum wage and increasing it to $15 an hour is a long overdue move. It will significantly impact more than 67,000 people working in the federally regulated sector, but $15 an hour is no longer adequate. The truth is that we’ve been calling for a $15 minimum wage for many years now. It may have been enough five years ago, but it's certainly not enough today.
Frankly, the government was talking about implementing this in 2019, and even then it would have been somewhat short. The minimum wage should be set at 60% of the median wage for full-time workers. This was the recommendation of the government’s own expert panel on modern federal labour standards. Following this policy would set the minimum wage at $16.73. Government should be adjusting the minimum wage annually by inflation or by the average annual wage increase, whichever is higher, and establishing a federal low-wage commission to monitor the impact of low wages on workers and the labour market.
Second, I want to address the employment insurance and recovery benefit extensions.
Extending the wage subsidy program is an important step in keeping workers employed during this tumultuous time. The ramp-down rates make sense in many circumstances, but for the hardest-hit sectors, such as air transportation, this change can make the difference between a worker keeping their job or not. We recommend increasing the top-up rate for companies with significant, persistent revenue decline, as they may not be eligible for the Canada recovery hiring program because they are not yet ready to hire new workers.
The executive compensation rule for publicly traded companies should be applied for all wage subsidy support received in 2021, and not just what is received after June 5.
The extension of the Canada recovery benefit and the temporary changes to employment insurance are important. Together, EI and the CRB have illustrated the incredibly important role income support plays in stabilizing workers' lives and the need to fix our currently broken EI system with permanent reforms. We recommend some additional items to strengthen the positive effects these programs can have, including reducing the qualifying hours from the current 420 to 360, and maintaining the minimum benefit rate at $500, while increasing the income replacement rate.
Third, the budget takes an important step in stabilizing employment at airports by reducing some of the negative effects of contract flipping. We support the change and encourage consultation on the regulations in order to ensure all workers are protected by it. In order to further reduce the negative effects of contract flipping, government should extend successor rights.
Fourth, implementing the digital tax on digital giants and extending HST to streaming services are important steps to creating a level playing field and ensuring that large, digital corporations are paying their fair share. We're very concerned that the laws put in place will result in the digital giants not paying their fair share. That outcome would be unacceptable.
Fifth, the modest changes to OAS acknowledge that the current retirement security system does not provide adequate income for retirees, but it is not enough. Government should be exploring innovation in providing defined benefit plans for workers instead of looking to modest changes for the worst off and annuities that mimic retirement security provided by a DB plan, but deliver less.
Finally, the nod to the importance of Canada-made, zero-emission vehicles through tax incentives is incredibly important and a worthwhile endeavour. I will take a moment to remind folks that we do not yet build ZEVs in Canada. We have to keep this in mind as we consider ways to encourage consumer adoption, but we don't need millions in public dollars subsidizing imports. If we want to build this industry in Canada, and I think we do, all policies, including the development of charging stations, must move in lockstep with our industrial development plans.
Thank you. Kaylie will look forward to taking your questions.
Once again, thank you all very much for your time today.
Chris Aylward
View Chris Aylward Profile
Chris Aylward
2021-05-18 16:16
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.
My name is Chris Aylward and I'm the national president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada. We represent 210,000 workers across Canada, most of whom work in the federal public service, but we also represent workers in the broader public sector and in the private sector.
Bill C-30 covers a lot of ground, as it should. These extraordinary times require extraordinary government intervention. The pandemic exposed many fault lines. Seniors became infected and many died in long-term care facilities because of numerous government policy failures. Low-wage workers, the majority of whom are women, Black, indigenous, Asian, racialized and people with disabilities, have suffered tragically and disproportionately because government policy has failed to address inequities embedded in every one of our systems. Now is the time to correct the mistakes of the past.
We welcome the promise of national standards for long-term care, although we regret that funding will be delayed until 2022. Despite its absence in the legislation, we hope the government will reconsider its efforts to improve long-term care by working to end the public sector pension plan's ownership of Revera Incorporated. Instead, let's put the second-largest Canadian network of for-profit long-term care facilities under public ownership and control. Revera is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Public Sector Pension Investment Board, which manages the investments of the pension plans of the federal public service, the Canadian Armed Forces, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the reserve force. PSAC made the call for a change in ownership of Revera as a result of mounting evidence that the incidence of death and illness attributable to COVID-19 is disproportionately large in private, for-profit long-term care facilities.
We are glad to see that workers will continue to see temporary support during the pandemic, but we also need far-reaching permanent improvements in income programs such as employment insurance. A federal minimum wage is a very good thing, but $15 an hour is still a low wage. Workers deserve a budget that creates conditions for decent jobs, paid sick leave and decent pay and benefits in every jurisdiction.
Also, the budget does not deliver the national pharmacare program that the government's own commission recommended. This will undoubtedly continue to create financial hardship and will lead to worse health outcomes for millions of Canadians. Nobody should choose between paying for critical medicine and paying for groceries, or have to skip prescription refills to pay the rent.
The transformative element of budget 2021 is the promise of a Canada-wide system of early learning and child care, backed by $30 billion over the next five years. Bill C-30 authorizes transfers to the provinces and territories of $2.9 billion in 2021-22, to be paid according to terms and conditions set out in bilateral agreements. PSAC started campaigning for federal action of this magnitude 40 years ago. Lowering parents' fees to an average of $10 a day while expanding the number of licensed child care spaces will bring down the obstacles stopping mothers from participating fully in the paid labour force. It will increase the social and economic security of women and will especially help those who now suffer the greatest inequity.
Furthermore, increasing women's access to paid employment will give the economy a huge boost now and in the future. The global pandemic has demonstrated this without question. When child care disappeared during multiple rounds of lockdowns and outbreaks, women were the ones most impacted and forced out of the workforce. The economic loss was immeasurable.
However, to realize these benefits, the federal government must use its $30 billion to negotiate meaningful changes in how child care is delivered. The economy needs a secure supply of publicly funded and managed child care. It should be predominantly not-for-profit or public. The quality must be high, and those who work in child care must be qualified and paid accordingly. The project is ambitious and expensive, but if done right it will pay for itself. We urge you to support it and hold the government to account for building the child care system Canada needs and wants.
Lastly, despite some gaps, we applaud the government's efforts to continue to work at increasing equity for all Canadians. We support the commitment to combatting systemic racism and anti-Black racism, both in the federal public service and across Canada.
We're encouraged by the funding dedicated to ensuring the rights of those living with disabilities, funding in support of the work of the LGBTQ2 secretariat and the development of an action plan, as well as continued funding to address long-standing issues in indigenous communities.
Mr. Chair, thank you for your time. I look forward to any questions.
Thank you.
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:00
Good afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My name is David Charter. I'm the director of the research and innovation division at the labour program at Employment and Social Development Canada. I'm here today with Sébastien St-Arnaud, the manager of policy development at the labour program. We're here to talk about the proposed amendments to part III of the Canada Labour Code in division 23 of the budget implementation act related to minimum wage.
Part III of the Canada Labour Code establishes minimum working conditions, such as hours of work, annual vacations, various types of job-protected leave. It also sets the minimum wage for employees in the federally regulated private sector. The federally regulated private sector includes about 6% of all Canadian employees, employed in industries such as banking, telecommunications, interprovincial and international transportation and most federal Crown corporations and in certain activities on first nations reserves. Part III does not apply to the federal public service.
Currently, part III of the code sets the federal minimum wage as the general minimum wage established by the province or territory in which the employee is usually employed. The mandate letter of the Minister of Labour includes a commitment to raise the federal minimum wage to at least $15 per hour.
Budget 2021 announced this legislation, which amends part III of the code, to establish a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour, which would rise with inflation, and with provisions to ensure that wherever provincial or territorial minimum wages are higher, such a wage will prevail. The new minimum wage would come into force after royal assent.
To ensure that the federal minimum wage remains relevant and rises with inflation, on April 1 of each year after the year the amended minimum wage provisions come into force, the minimum wage would be adjusted based on Canada's consumer price index for the previous calendar year.
I'll finish my remarks by mentioning that our estimates are that approximately 26,200 employees in the federally regulated private sector earn less than $15 per hour and will benefit from the new minimum wage rate.
Thanks. I'm happy to take any questions you might have.
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
Thank you very much.
Are there any provisions for making the rise in the minimum wage quicker than the six months after royal assent?
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:02
No. Right now in the legislation, the $15 minimum wage would come into force six months after royal assent, and then it would be adjusted in April of the year after the provisions come into force.
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
Thank you for that.
I have just a brief comment, Mr. Chair, if you'll permit me. That was in the NDP's election platform for the last two elections, so it's good to see it there.
View Tamara Jansen Profile
CPC (BC)
I was wondering, first, if I could get a list again of who you are saying this is applying to—which jobs? I know you're saying it's federally regulated private companies, but what was the list that you gave us?
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:03
What I can say is that part III of the Canada Labour Code applies to federally regulated companies, and that includes industries such as banking, telecommunications, interprovincial and international transport and federal Crown corporations. I could also just add that I mentioned that 26,200 employees making less than $15 per hour would likely be impacted by this change. They work in industries like road transportation, non-road transportation, postal and courier, banking, telecom and broadcasting.
View Tamara Jansen Profile
CPC (BC)
You're suggesting that this minimum wage is tacked closely onto the inflation rate. What if inflation becomes exorbitant over the next little while under the impact of COVID?
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:04
As you mentioned, the new minimum wage will be indexed based on the CPI, in April of the year after these provisions come into force. There is a provision in the amendment whereby if the CPI goes down there would be no adjustment, so the minimum wage couldn't go down, but there is no provision in these amendments related to exorbitant inflation.
View Tamara Jansen Profile
CPC (BC)
If we would have, say, 10% inflation, then the wages would go up that much, and they would never come back down from that.
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:05
At the moment, the way the legislation is drafted, there's no provision to not have an adjustment, were inflation to be high.
View Ted Falk Profile
CPC (MB)
View Ted Falk Profile
2021-05-17 17:05
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Your team has obviously done a SWOT analysis on this program. Do you have any numbers at all as to how many of those 26,000 jobs would no longer exist if this happens?
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:05
I can answer that question for you if you'll bear with me.
It is possible that there could be some disemployment effects related to putting in place a federal minimum wage, which would have a negative impact on either employment or on hours worked, especially potentially for those who are lower skilled or who have less experience, maybe for young people, but there's growing international research suggesting that the disemployment effects such as these are not as high as previously thought.
Depending on assumptions, looking at different elasticity rates that my team looked at, our estimates are that it could range anywhere from say 162 to maybe to 800 jobs that could be impacted by disemployment effects where there might be a reduction in hours, or other impacts on employment as a result of this.
View Ted Falk Profile
CPC (MB)
View Ted Falk Profile
2021-05-17 17:06
Thank you.
You've probably also heard the adage that a rising tide lifts all boats, and if we're going to increase the bottom end of the wage structure, everything else will increase proportionateley. At the end of the day, there won't be a net benefit because costs are going to rise. This is actually going to fuel inflation. What is your study on that showing you as a result?
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:07
I think what you're asking about is spillover effects from this minimum wage, and it is true that it is possible that there could be some spillover effects like wage adjustments for employees who are making $15 or slightly above $15. Employers might do this in order to retain or attract employees. What I would say is that the size of the spillover effect or that impact is somewhat uncertain, and it's kind of difficult to estimate, but it's not likely to impact anyone making more than about $2 over $15 or $2 over that minimum wage rate.
View Julie Dzerowicz Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Charter, thank you for your presentation. I have four tiny questions for you. They're so small I'm sure you'll be able to respond very quickly.
You had mentioned there are 26,200 federally regulated employees who would benefit. How many in total do we actually have? How big is the bucket? Could you start off with that?
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:08
Certainly. I'm just scrolling down my list. It's roughly 919,900 employees.
View Julie Dzerowicz Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you.
In terms of the cost-of-living increase, Ms. Jansen had asked about inflation. Hopefully this never gets to 10%, but the way the legislation is written the increase would go to 10%. How is it different? As members of Parliament, we actually get an automatic cost-of-living adjustment every year as well. Is it written differently, or is it the same?
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:09
The way it's written in the amendments, the minimum wage will be set at $15 per hour, and then on April 1 the year after these provisions come into force, the minimum wage will be adjusted. It will be based on the increase in Statistics Canada's consumer price index for that year. Whatever percentage that increase was for the previous year, that will be the rate at which the minimum wage is adjusted upwards.
View Julie Dzerowicz Profile
Lib. (ON)
Do you know if that's the same as how it's written for members of Parliament in our annual increases?
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:09
I'm afraid I'm not aware of how the increases for members of Parliament are calculated.
View Julie Dzerowicz Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you.
What do you think the impact would be? I actually agree with this $15 minimum wage, which to Mr. Julian's comment was a promise in our Liberal platform and I'm glad that the NDP has followed us along.
What do you think the impact could be on other provinces that might have a minimum wage below $15?
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:10
What I can say to that is, of course, that these changes will put in place a federal minimum wage. They're amending part III of the Canada Labour Code, which applies just to the federally regulated private sectors, and the provinces and territories will continue to set their own minimum wage rates. I can't speak to whether the provinces or territories might choose to raise their rate or not, but what I can tell you is that right now the rates in the provinces are between $11.45 and $16 per hour and that this federal rate will be equal to or on par with all jurisdictions with the exception of Nunavut, whose rate is set at $16 per hour.
As I mentioned in my remarks, these provisions include a provision whereby if the provincial or territorial rate is higher, that rate will prevail. There's also a trend in provinces and territories to automatically adjust their minimum wage rates based on indexing formulae. Quite a number of provinces and territories already regularly increase their minimum wage rates based on either the provincial or the federal consumer price index.
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:12
As I said, I can't speak to whether provinces and territories will choose to make a change, but this rate is amongst the higher ones in provinces and territories. However, many provinces and territories already have systems in place to regularly increase their minimum wage rates.
View Tamara Jansen Profile
CPC (BC)
I wonder if you looked at the impact this will have on small business—for instance, the local restaurant. Obviously if you're saying, okay, if you're federally regulated, you must get minimum wage, you must have looked at how much that will impact those that are not federally regulated.
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:12
In my last response, I just spoke to how it might have an impact on the provinces and territories, which are those that are not federally regulated, but I think I heard you asking how it might impact small business.
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:13
What I can tell you about that is that of the 26,200 employees who will benefit from this change, roughly 4,000 work in businesses employing 20 or fewer people and so in fairly small businesses, and another 4,400 work in businesses that employ 20 to 99 employees—still fairly small—and then 3,500 work in businesses that employ 100 to 500 employees. The majority, however, work in large businesses that employ 500 or more employees, to the tune of 14,200 of them. These make up 54% of the employees who will benefit.
There will be a cost. While there will be an impact in terms of impacted employees, the bulk work for the larger employers.
The same profile applies when it comes to cost. I can say, though, that the total cost we expect employers to pay in the additional wages to bring these 26,200 employees up to $15 is about $44.1 million for the first year, which is 0.1% of annual federally regulated private sector payroll.
View Tamara Jansen Profile
CPC (BC)
I was actually talking about those outside federally regulated employment, but extra cost after a pandemic is a huge issue. I'm just wondering whether you looked outside the federally regulated sector, because obviously, if federally regulated employers are changing their minimum wage, that will impact those who are not federally regulated—small business, mom-and-pop shops.
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:14
In terms of extra cost and COVID, as I mentioned there will be costs for federally regulated private sector employers. One thing that was also considered was that across provinces and territories, as I mentioned, many provinces and territories already have processes in place to increase their minimum wages, and during the pandemic they have continued to index, update and increase their minimum wages as time passes.
As far as looking at—
View Tamara Jansen Profile
CPC (BC)
I'm wondering about the dollar figure. You mentioned that you had figured out the dollar figure for those who are federally regulated—how much they're going to be impacted, dollar-wise—but outside of that, obviously small business is going to be impacted by these changes. It's one thing to say it's only going to cost this much, but you have the spillover effect: it's going to cost much more.
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:15
Right. I do have a cost figure for federally regulated small, medium and large businesses, as I just described. As I mentioned, it is possible that there will be spillover in the federally regulated private sector for employees making $15 or up to potentially $17 per hour. I don't have a costing figure for employers in provincially regulated sectors.
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
First, as a quick clarification, Mr. Chair, Ms. Dzerowicz said that the NDP was following the Liberals. Of course, you'll recall, Mr. Chair, that in 2015 the Liberals mocked the NDP for raising the $15 per hour minimum wage. Very clearly the evidence and the receipts are on the table.
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
Yes, absolutely.
There are two aspects. There's the aspect of the increase in the minimum wage, but also the economic stimulus that comes from it. You have people who are actually earning a more adequate salary and are spending more in the community.
I'm wondering to what extent the department has analyzed both the benefits, in terms of community positive economic ramifications of raising the minimum wage, and as well the increase in tax revenues that come with people earning a higher wage.
David Charter
View David Charter Profile
David Charter
2021-05-17 17:17
They're both good questions. I'm afraid I don't have data or figures on hand for the impact upon GDP or the economy, or on the additional tax revenues. As I mentioned, what we're looking at is about 26,2000 employees in the federally regulated private sector, and so the economic benefit would be commensurate with the number of employees impacted.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I will leave it to you to introduce the officials later on, but let me say thank you very much to the officials for being with us.
Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to speak to you today about Bill C-30, Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1.
After more than 14 months of uncertainty and challenges, Canadians are continuing to fight COVID-19, but we know there is light at the end of the tunnel. As we fight the third wave, more and more Canadians are getting vaccinated.
Bill C-30 is an essential piece of legislation that, once enacted, will allow us to implement our plan to finish the fight against COVID, create jobs and a swift recovery from the COVID recession and lay a foundation for robust, inclusive, green, long-term economic growth.
This budget is about helping middle-class Canadians, helping workers and helping more Canadians to join the middle class. It is about embracing this moment of global transformation to a greener, cleaner economy. It is a plan that will help Canadians and Canadian businesses heal the wounds of COVID and come roaring back.
First, we need to finish the fight against this virus. This bill includes a one-time payment of $4 billion to the provinces and territories to support their health care systems, support that is so essential as we fight the third wave. This is in addition to the $1 billion to support the provinces and territories as they ramp up their vaccine campaigns.
We are making progress in our vaccination efforts, and I know that team Canada can vaccinate even more Canadians even more quickly, and we will. I was vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine at a Toronto pharmacy 15 days ago, and I encourage all Canadians to get vaccinated as soon as it is their turn.
The pandemic has caused a recession, so we need to start by rolling out a comprehensive plan for jobs and growth, to address the disproportionate impact the recession has had on women, young people, racialized Canadians, low-wage workers and small business.
A cornerstone of our plan is a historic investment of $30 billion over five years, reaching $9.2 billion annually, in permanent investments to provide high-quality, affordable and accessible early learning and child care across Canada. Our goal is that within five years, families everywhere in Canada should have access to high-quality child care for an average of $10 a day. Dear colleagues from all political parties, let's make a commitment together today to all Canadians. Let's get this done.
I want to take a moment to recognize Quebec's leadership, especially that of feminist Quebeckers, who have led the way for the rest of Canada.
While we know better days are ahead, many families are still struggling. Around a million Canadians either remain out of work or are working significantly fewer hours than they were pre-pandemic. We must support hard-hit Canadians and businesses across the country so they can recover as soon as possible.
Bill C-30 includes emergency supports for Canadian workers, businesses and families.
The legislation extends the Canada emergency wage subsidy, the Canada emergency rent subsidy, and lockdown support through to September 25, 2021 which will help protect millions of jobs.
With this legislation, we are providing a bridge for people who are unable to work because of COVID by extending income supports, maintaining flexible access to EI benefits, and extending the EI sickness benefit from 15 to 26 weeks.
Bill C-30 also introduces a $15 an hour federal minimum wage. It expands the Canada workers benefit, extending income top-ups to about a million more low wage workers, and lifting nearly 100,000 Canadians out of poverty. These are measurable concrete steps to help Canadians who need help.
We must also help small business, the backbone of our economy and every main street in the country. To do that, we need to improve access to capital and help businesses hire more workers, in particular, through the new Canada recovery hiring program.
Young Canadians have made tremendous sacrifices this past year to protect their elders, and now, they need our collective support.
Through Bill C-30, we will make college and university more accessible and affordable by extending the waiver of interest accrual on federal student loans until March 2023. This will mean savings for more than 1.5 million Canadians repaying student loans. We will not let young Canadians become a lost generation.
Mr. Chair, I have spoken today about just a few of the measures included in Bill C-30, measures which will make a tangible positive difference in the lives of millions of Canadians.
This is a plan for jobs, growth and the middle class. It is a plan built around helping Canadians recover, succeed and thrive.
I recognize the critical role parliamentary committees play in scrutinizing government legislation, and I'm grateful to all of you for your hard work.
Bill C-30 is a historic first step towards recovery and new economic growth for future generations of Canadians.
I would be pleased to answer any questions you have as you study this critically important piece of legislation.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
View Julie Dzerowicz Profile
Lib. (ON)
Perfect.
Thank you for that, and thanks to everyone for this really great conversation on a multitude of issues.
I will start off with ACORN Canada.
One of the things in my great riding of Davenport, which is a downtown west Toronto community and a very working-class community, is they put these little signs on their lawns and they've been asking me for years, “Julie, when is the federal government going increase the minimum wage to $15?” They've been very much lobbying for it. I know that they've been delighted to see that it's been introduced into budget 2021. Can you talk to how our announced $15 federal minimum wage can help low-income Canadians?
Blaine Cameron
View Blaine Cameron Profile
Blaine Cameron
2021-04-29 17:32
That's going to be of great benefit to them. It means that they can afford to eat better, to live better, to provide for their families. You kind of cut out there, so I didn't get what was introduced federally.
View Julie Dzerowicz Profile
Lib. (ON)
I just talked about what we introduced, which was the $15 minimum wage in our federal budget, and I wanted to get your thoughts about how you think it's going to be helpful to low-income Canadians.
Blaine Cameron
View Blaine Cameron Profile
Blaine Cameron
2021-04-29 17:33
I'm not versed on the subject in terms of who exactly will benefit from that, since it's federal and not provincial legislation. I would have to refer you to our head office to answer that particular question. I apologize.
Blaine Cameron
View Blaine Cameron Profile
Blaine Cameron
2021-04-29 17:34
I think if they're setting that standard federally, it definitely puts pressure on the provincial governments to follow suit.
View Julie Dzerowicz Profile
Lib. (ON)
That's great.
Mr. Cameron, it's interesting, because I was going to say exactly that. I think it's beyond just that people were happy that the federal minimum wage has gone to $15; there's also the example that it's going to set for the provinces, and I think that was just as important for my residents as well.
The other thing is that there's a lot of changeover happening in my riding, where 43% of the population were born in another country. As they're getting older, they're moving out, moving back with their families. We have a lot of young families who have moved in. As part of our budget, we have introduced a national child care program. We call it the early learning and child care plan. Can you talk about how a program like this serves to help low-income Canadians like single mothers, new Canadians and young families?
View Lindsay Mathyssen Profile
NDP (ON)
If I can squeeze this in, in terms of that push for gender equality within care work, it is seen entirely in a gendered way. It is underpaid. It is undervalued. In addition to things like pay equity, a federal minimum wage and a livable wage that we can provide those standards for, what are the things the federal government can do to take apart that inequality?
Hélène Cornellier
View Hélène Cornellier Profile
Hélène Cornellier
2021-02-18 12:54
I believe you're alluding to the guaranteed minimum income. On that issue, Afeas…
Hélène Cornellier
View Hélène Cornellier Profile
Hélène Cornellier
2021-02-18 12:54
So that's not what you were talking about.
View Lindsay Mathyssen Profile
NDP (ON)
I was talking about potentially the minimum federal wage, a minimum wage and raising that, but a guaranteed livable income could be part of that conversation as well.
Hélène Cornellier
View Hélène Cornellier Profile
Hélène Cornellier
2021-02-18 12:54
I don't want to commit myself on the guaranteed minimum income issue. We don't have a position on that.
View Louise Chabot Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Madam Minister, we are pleased to have you here. I hope you are doing well.
I wanted to ask you some questions related to pay equity, but I will come back to that.
My first question is this. Your first mandate letter, after the election, called for a minimum wage of $15 per hour for people working in the federally regulated sector. The crisis revealed that the guardian angels or essential workers we heard so much about were, for the most part, the lowest-paid workers. The mandate you had makes so much sense.
In the main estimates, money was to be allocated to implement this amendment to the Labour Code.
Where are you in the process of increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour?
View Filomena Tassi Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you for the question, Ms. Chabot.
It's very nice to see you. Thank you for the important question.
As you can appreciate, my focus, of course, has been on occupational health and safety, ensuring that workers are kept safe. Of course, the pandemic has presented a lot of challenges, but there are other commitments in my mandate letter. I think COVID-19 has absolutely demonstrated the importance of our moving forward with the $15 federal minimum wage.
This was a commitment we made during the campaign, again then reaffirmed in my mandate letter, and we want to make sure that we get this right. I agree with you absolutely that we have a lot of workers who are packing our groceries, stocking shelves and keeping us safe during this time, and although the federal minimum wage would apply to federally regulated workers, this is an opportunity to show leadership. I am committed to maintaining this as a priority as we move forward.
View Louise Chabot Profile
BQ (QC)
Has money been earmarked in the estimates to raise the minimum wage to $15? Has money been budgeted for that mandate?
Gary Robertson
View Gary Robertson Profile
Gary Robertson
2020-11-24 19:59
As the minister said, the system has a plan to implement this initiative in the near future.
View Matthew Green Profile
NDP (ON)
Ms. Picco, do you believe that non-profit and charitable sector staff deserve a minimum wage?
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
Both you and Mr. Aylward have pointed to the overriding of minimum wage laws. What are the consequences for overriding provincial minimum wage laws that have been set up to protect workers of any age—whether they're students or not—right across the country? What kind of liability and what kinds of legal consequences could be engendered from overriding those minimum standards?
Joshua Mandryk
View Joshua Mandryk Profile
Joshua Mandryk
2020-07-21 12:55
First of all, it's interesting, in that the federal government here is initiating this program, but these are workers who are under provincial employment standards. Presumably it's the provincial employment standards that would apply. The federal government can't do away with those. These positions have to comply with provincial employment standards. If these folks are found to be employees, these workers would be entitled to minimum wage, overtime, etc. There could also be administrative penalties that could be put in place against those involved. Those vary somewhat province to province. Certainly there are real potential liability issues under provincial employment standards legislation.
View Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thanks very much.
While Mr. Weston couldn't be here today, unfortunately, I want to read some of his words to start:
I continue to be a strong believer in a progressive minimum wage and would support any government-led effort to establish a living wage.
I'll go around to the three of you. Yes or no, do you agree with that statement?
I'll start with Ms. Davis.
Michael Medline
View Michael Medline Profile
Michael Medline
2020-07-10 14:35
Of course, I want fairness for our people, but I think it's disrespectful to ask me, on such a complex question, to answer in one second.
Michael Medline
View Michael Medline Profile
Michael Medline
2020-07-10 14:35
I think, Honourable Erskine-Smith, that living wage, basic income and minimum wage is a great discussion to be having, but I'm not sure any of you or even your parties would agree on those terms or even define some of it the same way—
View Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Medline, we committed to a $15-an-hour minimum wage in our platform, so I think you'll find that we do agree.
My second question is, on what day—
Michael Medline
View Michael Medline Profile
Michael Medline
2020-07-10 14:36
Sorry, is the minimum of $15 the living wage? I was looking for that in your platform. Is that a living wage everywhere in the country, $15?
View Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Profile
Lib. (ON)
We committed to a $15-an-hour minimum wage, far above what you pay your employees, Mr. Medline, across the country.
On what day—
View Sébastien Lemire Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Madam Chair.
My question is for Ms. Davis.
On June 11, your chief executive officer, Mr. Weston, stated the following on behalf of your company:
I continue to be a strong believer in a progressive minimum wage and would support any government-led effort to establish a living wage.
What is a living wage?
Sarah Davis
View Sarah Davis Profile
Sarah Davis
2020-07-10 15:17
What he was referring to is that we believe in a progressive minimum wage. What I said in my opening remarks, and what Mr. Weston was referring to, is that we would be very pleased to work with the government on determining what a living wage for the various areas of Canada would be. We would support that and we would work with the government on that.
Our comment would be that it can't be one company that determines a living wage. It can't be one industry. It has to be done in consultation between the government, the companies and of course the unions as well.
View Jeremy Patzer Profile
CPC (SK)
Right, but then ultimately everybody has the same level of appreciation. If you really wanted to show your employees you value them, why not make it more than your competitors? Particularly if your company philosophically believes in a basic liveable income, why do you need to wait for the government to legislate around it?
Sarah Davis
View Sarah Davis Profile
Sarah Davis
2020-07-10 15:52
As I said before, the reason I'm saying we would want to do it in concert with the government and with the unions is that it can't be done by just one company, by just one industry. We're competing against large multinationals, large e-commerce companies, so it's just not feasible for one company to do it on its own. We need to do it together, as a group, with the government.
View Ali Ehsassi Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Ali Ehsassi Profile
2020-07-10 16:00
I can assure you that the people who are working as cashiers don't think this is normal. They're just as concerned going into work every single day. That, to me, would seem to be the reality we're faced with.
Now, in that statement by Mr. Weston, it says, “I continue to be a strong believer in a progressive minimum wage”. That's something you've echoed as well. You keep telling us that, if the government provides some guidance and there's some co-operation that takes place and you're not the only company, you would agree to better wages.
However, if memory serves, in 2017, when the Province of Ontario was thinking of increasing the minimum wage, I understand that your company was very much against that. Is that not right?
Sarah Davis
View Sarah Davis Profile
Sarah Davis
2020-07-10 16:01
No, that is not true. Our company was not against the minimum wage. Our company was against the speed at which it was being implemented.
View Ali Ehsassi Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Ali Ehsassi Profile
2020-07-10 16:01
I have numerous different articles that say Loblaw was against these wage increases.
Sarah Davis
View Sarah Davis Profile
Sarah Davis
2020-07-10 16:01
Do you have the words that Mr. Weston said? That is not what he said.
View Ali Ehsassi Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Ali Ehsassi Profile
2020-07-10 16:01
Yes. In fact, this says, “Mr. Weston called the wage increases 'the most significant in recent memory' adding that the company is expediting measures to save money, such as...rolling out more self-checkouts at Shoppers Drug Mart. 'We have a lot of work ahead of us.'” That's one.
Sarah Davis
View Sarah Davis Profile
Sarah Davis
2020-07-10 16:02
That doesn't say that he is against a minimum wage.
View Ali Ehsassi Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Ali Ehsassi Profile
2020-07-10 16:02
Another one here, from the Toronto Sun, reads, “Loblaws was the latest to get on the anti-minimum wage raise bandwagon”.
Sarah Davis
View Sarah Davis Profile
Sarah Davis
2020-07-10 16:02
Those are not Mr. Weston's words.
View Ali Ehsassi Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Ali Ehsassi Profile
2020-07-10 16:02
No. I'm just saying there are numerous.... Were you guys in favour of the raise in the minimum wage?
Sarah Davis
View Sarah Davis Profile
Sarah Davis
2020-07-10 16:02
We found that the speed at which the minimum wage was being increased was difficult for a company like ours to deal with, but we are very much in favour of a progressive minimum wage.
View Helena Jaczek Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you.
Mr. Dias, you've argued for a federal minimum wage, of course, and presumably an enhanced minimum wage. As you are aware, provinces set their own minimum wages. I just scanned what they are across Canada, and I was fairly appalled at how low they are.
View Helena Jaczek Profile
Lib. (ON)
It doesn't seem that any sort of federal leadership to date has influenced provinces to follow in any meaningful way.
How would you see that process going forward? Again, from our point of view as a committee, what kinds of tangible recommendations could you make that might be influential on provinces?
Jerry Dias
View Jerry Dias Profile
Jerry Dias
2020-07-06 14:03
Well, first of all you have to lead by example. The fact that there is no federal minimum wage is a red light right there. I look at the workers at airports who suffered through contract flipping, such as the Swissport workers, who are suffering the same fate as it relates to scheduling and poor wages.
Ultimately, the federal government is going to have to say to the provinces that there has to be a broader study. There has to be a better bringing together of the minds and a discussion at the premiers' meeting, which the Prime Minister will address. We need to say, “Listen, we've just lived this, and these are the essential workers.” You can't have the Jason Kenneys of the world, and frankly, the Doug Fords, saying when they first come into power, “Look, the problem is we're open for business, so we have to freeze the minimum wage”, which, we now know, impacts the most vulnerable essential workers in society.
There has to be a broader discussion. There has to be a challenge from the Prime Minister to the premiers, saying, “What are you going to do about this?” This is a public discussion that's going on from coast to coast to coast. I believe that premiers who are now negatively impacting these essential workers are going to have one heck of a price to pay.
As for the argument about corporate tax cuts creating jobs, I think we've watched what's happened in Alberta. We're watching what's happening here in Ontario. I think everybody knows that those are sad old arguments that are going nowhere. The federal government has to lead by example.
Jerry Dias
View Jerry Dias Profile
Jerry Dias
2020-06-01 15:19
Good luck with that.
Good afternoon, honourable Chair, members of the committee, and Dominic and Ken.
My name is Jerry Dias. I'm the national president of Unifor, Canada's largest trade union in the private sector. Unifor represents 315,000 members across the country who are working in nearly every industrial sector, including health and long-term care, retail, passenger transit, food processing, utilities, logistics and many others on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic.
It is a pleasure to be addressing all of you, despite having to do so remotely. I hope you have all been managing to stay safe and healthy during these difficult times. On behalf of Unifor, I sincerely appreciate the invitation to share our views on the federal government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and I hope what I share here will go some way towards advancing this committee's work.
We are in the midst of an unprecedented public health and economic crisis that is being felt across the entire globe. There have been 5.8 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 worldwide, with approximately 360,000 deaths, including nearly 7,000 here in Canada. With 7,000 Canadian lives lost and families in mourning, losses of this magnitude are simply beyond comprehension.
Unifor is proud to be a Canadian union. Every inch of our organization is dedicated to ensuring that the livelihoods, jobs and health of workers in Canada are protected. From our vantage point, the crisis has revealed many of the underlying flaws and weaknesses in our country's labour market institutions.
For example, early on in this crisis, it became blindingly clear that our unemployment insurance wasn't going to cut it. Decades of cutbacks and terrible rule changes all but guaranteed that this vital program wasn't equipped to deal with a sharp increase in unemployment.
For one, the system simply couldn't handle the flood of claims as workers were laid off in the millions, but more than that, many workers just simply didn't qualify. On a good day, less than half of unemployed Canadians actually qualify—42%, to be exact—for an insurance system they all pay into. If you can imagine it, those with low incomes, including the precariously employed, benefit less from the program than those who are financially well off.
EI has become a needlessly complicated program that punishes workers for being unemployed, denying them benefits, clawing back earnings and replacing only a small amount for them to live on. Then a crisis like this hits and the systems seizes. To their credit, the federal government quickly realized that they had to change tack. They created the Canada emergency response benefit program. The CERB is a simpler program to administer and provides income support to far more workers in need than EI would have. Still, the gaps remain.
A couple of weeks ago, I spoke to the House finance committee and shared my frustration that hundreds of thousands of workers are denied supplementary unemployment benefits under the CERB. This is money set aside by employers that would normally top up unemployment benefits, but which cannot be paid out under the current rules of the CERB program.
To call this restriction absurd would be an understatement. Unifor has launched a national campaign to fix it. I strongly encourage this committee to join us in calling on ministers Morneau and Qualtrough to address this loophole in the CERB program. This is the immediate challenge.
The bigger challenge is that of developing a more inclusive, equitable and responsive EI system once and for all, an EI system that is one part of a basic guaranteed floor of income support for those in need. Over the coming months, our EI system will once again be tested. Millions will see CERB claims expire and will look to re-enter the EI rolls. Many won't be eligible. We need to make immediate changes to the EI program to ensure CERB claimants aren't left to fend for themselves. If we don't do this, we risk a second wave of economic panic as people find it impossible to make ends meet and then default on their bills. This is not something the economy can handle at this time, especially as provinces continue to ramp up their reopening efforts.
The Canada emergency wage subsidy is another important tool to help bring workers back onto payrolls. However, recent reports indicate that only 10% of the $76 billion set aside for the program has been spent. Clearly, employers have been reluctant to apply for the program, which we also know anecdotally from the experiences of our own members. Some of the large employers we negotiate with have been dragging their feet on applying for the wage subsidy. In other cases, however, the program simply does not provide enough of an incentive for employers to apply.
By the time applications opened in late April, many employers had already laid off workers by the hundreds of thousands. It was simply too late. Now employers are looking at the cost of bringing workers back under the subsidy and wondering why they should pay health insurance premiums, pension contributions and payroll taxes out of pocket just to keep workers on paid leave.
There have also been problems with eligibility. Employers in the broader public sector, including our members in universities, colleges and municipal transit authorities, are not eligible even though they have expressed interest in the program. Finance Canada recently issued a call for feedback on the program, and Unifor has urged the government to revamp the program by expanding eligibility and covering workers' health insurance premiums and other non-taxable contributions.
All told, our income security policies in Canada need a major rethink. This obviously includes EI and the wage subsidy program, but our understanding of income insecurity has to extend well beyond that. This crisis has shone a spotlight on the low pay and increasingly precarious working conditions many workers have been forced to bear over the last few decades. It has also brought into clear view the gendered pay divisions of care and service work and how deeply undervalued this work is.
Unifor would like to see continued progress on implementing deep and lasting labour law standards reform, including a new federal minimum wage of at least $15 an hour and permanent paid sick days amongst other changes. The provinces must follow suit.
We recognize too that income security has as much to do with employment as it does with other affordability issues such as housing and rent, transit and mobility, drug coverage and child care. These matter as much to a seamless economic restart plan today as they do to a developing vision for a better, fairer Canada tomorrow. This is not a time for Canada to think small. This is a time to bring our best ideas to the table, ideas such as universal pharmacare, universal child care, a four-day work week, ideas like these that enable us to reverse course on rising job market precariousness. These are ideas that Unifor will be raising in more detail over the coming weeks as we unveil a comprehensive framework for Canada's economic recovery.
If anything, this pandemic has shown us that lack of government investments and dependency on global markets for essential goods and services can only backfire during a time of crisis. Whether it is for PPE, food or critical products like zero-emission vehicles, we need to rebuild our domestic supply chain strategically to strengthen the economy, protect the environment and stabilize jobs. This means a more active, dynamic and engaged government, a government working in the public interest, a government that is willing to be an active economic player, one that is ready to roll up its sleeves and chart a path to generate economic activity and good jobs, and not simply slash taxes, sign terrible trade deals and then hope that private industry comes to the pump.
Workers in Canada deserve better than that. Let's use this crisis as an opportunity to change how we approach industrial development, one that puts workers in Canada first. Unifor stands ready to help.
Thank you. I look forward to your questions.
View Elizabeth May Profile
GP (BC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and greetings from Saanich—Gulf Islands.
The petition I'm presenting today is petition e-2509, which has been duly certified. It relates to what I think many of us will regard as the real heroes of the last few months.
In this pandemic, there have often been very underpaid and overworked front-line workers who receive minimum wage and nothing more, and who are of course deemed essential services. The petitioners have asked the government to implement a wage supplement as a temporary measure to bring the wages for those who are in contact with the general public and working in what has been deemed an essential service to no less than $20 an hour, in light of their service and the risks they're taking for all of us.
View Louise Chabot Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good evening to all the witnesses.
Thank you for joining us, for being available and for your presentations. I'll start by asking Mr. Kassam a question.
You spoke about the CERB and the CESB, which are adverse incentives for workers. You said that a $2,000 taxable benefit should have been provided instead. My question is as follows. In your analysis, you didn't mention the minimum wage. Do you believe that a higher minimum wage could be a potential solution?
View Louise Chabot Profile
BQ (QC)
Yes, I'm currently on the French channel, Mr. Chair.
I asked a question about the minimum wage. We know that the minimum wage, at 40 hours a week, amounts to barely over $2,000.
View Louise Chabot Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My question is for you, Mr. Kassam. You said that the CERB and CESB were adverse incentives and that a $2,000 taxable benefit should have been provided instead.
Based on your analysis, should the federal minimum wage rate be higher in order to provide better benefits?
Shamez Kassam
View Shamez Kassam Profile
Shamez Kassam
2020-05-25 18:41
Thank you for the question. It came across much better, so thank you to the IT folks as well.
The question of minimum wage, of course, has many sides to it. I think in this particular case it may have made some difference. The higher minimum wage, I think at the margin, would have made some difference. How much, I do not know. I'm not an expert on that subject. Through our community, in speaking with several accountants and other business people, I did hear instances where they had trouble finding workers for the summer because of this reason, so that's what my comments were focusing on.
I hope that helps somewhat.
View Louise Chabot Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you.
I'd like to come back to the new programs announced for students, including the Canada student emergency benefit. I don't know if you have heard the comments about the new jobs being announced in certain sectors of the economy.
While helping students is beneficial, how will we reconcile this new aid with student employment needs?
In other words, given the programs in place, will students still be attracted to minimum wage jobs? Won't we do the opposite of what we wanted to do?
View Carla Qualtrough Profile
Lib. (BC)
We worked closely with student organizations to develop these measures. They asked us for assistance, not only in the form of a benefit, but also as loans and grants. They asked us to create employment and volunteer opportunities because young people want to work and serve their communities. That's why we made a number of announcements yesterday about all of these measures.
So it is not just about the benefit. If it were, what you are saying could turn out to be true. However, people have asked us to create these opportunities and these jobs, because they want this experience, and if they cannot work, they want to serve their community. That is why we established the Canada student service grant.
Those who have volunteered for a certain number of hours over the summer will be eligible to receive a Government of Canada grant of $1,000, $3,000 or $5,000 at the end of the summer.
Results: 1 - 95 of 95

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data