HUMA Committee Report
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
CHAPTER 3 — INCREASING LABOUR FORCE
PARTICIPATION AND
STRENGTHENING WORK INCENTIVES
As shown in Chart 3.1, the proportion of Canadian workers within 10 years of the median retirement age has almost doubled in the last 30 years. In 1976 there were about 1.14 million workers so defined. By 2006, their numbers had risen to approximately 3.8 million. This trend clearly illustrates the momentum behind labour force aging and the potential exodus of workers from the Canadian labour market in the next decade and beyond. There has, however, been a noteworthy development of late, as displayed by the cessation of the downward trend in the average age of retirement.
As evidenced by the data illustrated in Chart 3.1, the average age of retirement declined from 64.9 years in 1976 to 60.9 years in 1998 and has since risen to 61.5 years in 2006. Underlying this trend is an increase in labour force participation among older workers (defined here as individuals 55 years of age and over). Between 1996 and 2006, the labour force participation rate among individuals in this age group increased by 8.5 percentage points, almost three and one-half times the increase in the participation rate for all individuals 15 years of age and over. Also of note, the participation rate of individuals between 60 and 64 years of age and 65 years of age and over increased by 12 and 2.4 percentage points respectively during the same period.
A. Strengthening Incentives to Work
Many witnesses indicated that, in order to make work more attractive to older workers, employers need to recognize the important role older workers can play in alleviating skills shortages and, in doing so, to implement more flexible employment policies such as gradual retirement and reduced hours of work. The importance of flexible work arrangements is evident from the results of Statistics Canada’s 2002 General Social Survey, which indicated that more than one-quarter of retirees might have changed their retirement decisions if they had been able to alter their work schedules.[160] Employers may also need to modify their workplaces to accommodate an older workforce.
There are issues around employer awareness. For example, many older workers, myself included, cannot work in low-light environments. If an employer wants me to bring my skills into his place, he has to give me a chair that supports my back and light levels so I can actually perform the work. We don't have enough awareness yet, and the government can provide leadership to say, look, we have this untapped resource of older workers, and a little bit of investment — not a huge investment — by the employer will actually get you the people you need. It will also help with knowledge transfer, so younger people can have the information they need to retain the corporate vision, the institutional memory.[161]
Ms. Elly Danica, Older Worker Transitions
Acadia Centre for Small Business and Entrepreneurship
According to a 2005 survey of corporate executives by the Conference Board of Canada, few Canadian employers are developing strategies to deal with an aging workforce, even though most recognize that their organizations will encounter aging-related labour problems within the next five years.[162] This survey revealed that “almost 80 per cent of the respondents indicated that their organizations will face problems related to an aging workforce within the next five years, with 23% admitting they are already experiencing difficulties.”[163] The absence of meaningful action to deal with this inevitable and imminent situation is worrisome.
Many witnesses expressed the view that the federal government should initiate measures to extend, on a voluntary basis, labour force participation among older workers. Given this group’s skills and experience, prolonging older workers’ attachment to work could help mitigate future skill imbalances across the country. Witnesses’ suggestions to facilitate this included eliminating mandatory retirement, phasing in retirement, enhancing financial incentives to work and providing more adjustment assistance to older workers.
While most jurisdictions in Canada have abolished mandatory retirement, some continue to treat forced retirement at age 65 as a non-discriminatory practice. British Columbia, Saskatchewan and, Newfoundland and Labrador still maintain an age cap of 65 in their human rights codes to accommodate mandatory retirement. Ontario recently abolished this practice. Only Quebec and Manitoba have banned contractual mandatory retirement (forced retirement according to the terms of a pension plan or a collective agreement).[164] Although mandatory retirement does not exist in the federal public service, this is not the case in other workplaces that fall under federal jurisdiction. In this regard, the Committee was reminded that section 15(1)(c) of the Canadian Human Rights Act states that it is not a discriminatory practice to terminate an individual’s employment because he or she has reached the normal age of retirement.
[W]e certainly are totally against mandatory retirement. We think it has to be choice, and what we're missing now is choice when there is mandatory retirement. We get calls almost every day. At a conference we had last week, we met someone who had worked for an airline. She said when she was 64 she was okay, and then when she turned 65 suddenly they were saying she wasn't able to do the job, but she wanted to continue working. Most people will retire. We're not even saying that most people will continue to work if they have a choice, but there should be incentives and benefits for those who do choose to work or to go back to work. We really don't promote making anyone retire at any age.
Ms. Judy Cutler
Canada's Association for the Fifty-Plus[165]
Members of the standing committee know that mandatory retirement at age 65 is still the rule in this country. With the exception of Quebec, Ontario, and Manitoba, governments permit mandatory retirement. Indeed, the Canadian Human Rights Act includes a special provision that allows employers to dismiss workers on account of age. Compulsory dismissal at age 65 was never a justified practice. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms forbids discrimination on the basis of age, but the persistence of ageism among powerful constituencies in Canada, including governments, the courts, unions, and employers, meant that efforts over the past twenty years to end mandatory retirement were unsuccessful until the historic decision of the Ontario government.[166]
Prof. David MacGregor
King's University College at the University of Western Ontario
While several witnesses called for the abolition of mandatory retirement in Canada, the Committee is mindful of the jurisdictional constraint associated with this proposal. In addition, the Committee stresses that its support for the abolition of mandatory retirement should not be construed as requiring older workers to work beyond the age of 65. We only intend to accommodate those who wish to do so voluntarily.
If you start depending on an aging workforce, you're going to run into health problems, and then you're no further ahead. It's got to be the younger workforce, but the training isn't there, and it should be, because that's who you're going to look to for employment. I've been working since I was 16, and it will be 50 years or more that I've worked. I worked hard as a child and I don't want to work beyond 65.[167]
Ms. Trudi Gunia
As an Individual
Recommendation 3.1
The Committee recommends that the Minister of Labour encourage provincial and territorial labour ministers to establish a working group to examine barriers to continued employment among workers once they reach the age of 65, especially with regard to mandatory retirement provisions that continue to operate in some parts of the country.
Recommendation 3.2
The Committee recommends that the federal government examine section 15 of the Canadian Human Rights Act with a view to defining as a discriminatory practice the termination of an individual’s employment because he or she has reached the normal age of retirement for employees working in similar positions.
Mandatory retirement and the absence of flexible work arrangements are not the only factors constraining labour supply decisions among older workers, many of whom also face significant financial disincentives to work. Individuals who receive the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) or Allowance have their benefits reduced if they report an increase in income, such as earnings from employment. Moreover, if these individuals pay income tax on these earnings the combined effective tax rate on income from employment can be substantial.
The clawback on GIS/Allowance payments depends on an individual’s marital status and on whether a spouse or common-law partner is receiving Old Age Security (OAS) or allowance payments. In the case of a single, widowed or divorced pensioner receiving the GIS, for example, monthly GIS benefits are reduced by one dollar for every $23.99 increase in yearly income (excluding OAS) above $24 (i.e., the reduction point). In other words, if this pensioner also pays income tax on earnings, he or she faces an effective tax rate exceeding 50%.[168] Even if there is no income tax paid on earnings, the GIS clawback renders paid employment an unattractive proposition.
Budget 2008 proposes to increase the earnings exemption associated with the GIS to $3,500 per year.
The Canada Pension Plan (CPP) also has drawbacks for those who would like to remain attached to the labour market. Although a partial CPP pension may encourage early retirement, it should be noted that this pension benefit is payable only if an applicant ceases to be engaged in paid employment or self-employment or if the applicant’s estimated earnings for the year in which the retirement pension would begin to be paid is less than 25% of maximum pensionable earnings.[169] This eligibility condition is potentially problematic for many older workers who are forced to experience a period of unemployment in order to become eligible for a partial pension. Once unemployed, some of these workers undoubtedly face serious challenges finding another job, an issue that is afforded more discussion below.[170]
Another potential disincentive to work associated with a partial CPP pension relates to a finding in a recent study by the CPP’s Chief Actuary. According to this study, the legislated actuarial adjustment is too generous for those who elect to receive their pension before the age of 65 and not generous enough for those who elect to receive their pension after the age of 65. In other words, the plan is subsidizing those who opt for early retirement.[171]
[W]e would suggest a review of the pension and income tax policies that currently create a disincentive for mature workers to consider part-time employment, because we do see this as being a primary source of an alternative labour market for the grocery retail sector, especially considering that demographics are projecting such a shrinkage in the youth workforce, which is currently our primary source.[172]
Ms. Cheryl Paradowski
Canadian Food Industry Council
[W]e have been advocating and in fact in the former government the Minister of State responsible for seniors advocated a band above the low-income cut-off line that seniors could receive through working, without endangering the guaranteed income supplement. I believe the band that had been recommended was around $2,000 or $3,000, and we said the same. It's not to force people to work, but if they have to work to augment their income, they should not lose the benefits they have […][173]
Mr. William Gleberzon
Canada's Association for the Fifty-Plus
Federal rules for private pension and Canadian pension plan encourage early retirement and discourage part time work past the age of 65. Pension regulations, especially those governing defined benefit plans, need to be modernized so that companies can set up phased retirement programs where mature workers can work part-time and draw on their pension to supplement their salary.[174]
Retail Council of Canada
Recommendation 3.3
The Committee recommends that in their next triennial review of the Canada Pension Plan the Ministers of Finance consider possible changes to the Plan to better accommodate concurrent work and partial pension payments, and examine the need for actuarial adjustments to Canada Pension Plan payments with a view to ensuring that the impact of this program on seniors’ decisions to remain in the workplace is, at the very least, neutral.
Recommendation 3.4
The Committee recommends that the federal government monitor and assess the impact of the proposal in Budget 2008 to increase the Guaranteed Income Supplement earnings exemption to $3,500.
In concert with the upward trend in labour force participation among older workers, the level of employment (and the employment rate) among workers 55 years of age and over has increased appreciably in the last decade. Between 1996 and 2006, job creation among older workers increased by 81%, more than three and one-half times the growth in employment for all ages during the same period. Almost four-fifths of this increase was attributed to growth in full-time jobs. It is also noteworthy that employment growth among workers 65 years of age and over was also quite robust during this period, increasing by 62% between 1996 and 2006.
Despite the relatively robust growth in job creation among older workers in the past ten years, this group’s labour market performance between 1996 and 2006, as measured by the unemployment rate, was less impressive. During this period, the unemployment rate among older workers declined from 7.3% in 1996 to 5.1% in 2006, only two-thirds of the decline in the unemployment rate for the labour market as a whole. Moreover, the unemployment rate among workers 65 years of age and over increased from 3.8% in 1996 to 4.4% in 2006.
While older workers tend to experience unemployment less frequently than their younger counterparts, when unemployment does occur older workers typically experience longer spells of joblessness. This observation is depicted in Chart 3.2, which shows the incidence of long-term unemployment (i.e., unemployment for 27 weeks or more) among older workers compared with the labour force as a whole. According to these data, the overall incidence of long-term unemployment declined between 1996 and 2006. This result is not surprising given that the national unemployment rate dropped by 3.3 percentage points during this period. Nevertheless, it is obvious from the data depicted in Chart 3.2 that proportionately more older workers experience longer periods of unemployment than their younger counterparts. Although this effect is not illustrated in this chart, in 2006, 14.7% of workers 55 years of age and over experienced unemployment for 52 weeks or more, almost 1.8 times higher than the proportion of all unemployed workers who were unemployed for 52 weeks or more.
Although there are many reasons why older workers tend to experience longer spells of unemployment than younger workers, inadequate skills and a lack of workplace training opportunities are undoubtedly key contributors. As discussed in Chapter 2 of our report, older workers have relatively fewer opportunities to participate in employer-sponsored training. In addition to a relatively shorter payback period for employers to recoup the costs of training older workers, we suspect that many older workers are unable to participate in training because a high proportion of them lack basic literacy and numeracy skills. According to the 2003 Adult Literacy and Life Skills Survey, more than one-half of Canadians aged 46 to 65 had low literacy skills.[175]
As previously mentioned, the federal government funds a number of labour market adjustment programs, the lion’s share of which is delivered under EI’s Employment Benefits and Support Measures (EBSMs). According to data contained in the Employment Insurance Monitoring and Assessment Report 2006 (the most recent available), workers 55 years of age and over were somewhat under-represented in terms of their participation in EBSMs in 2005-2006. In 2005, individuals 55 years of age and over represented roughly 14% of the labour force and 11.3% of unemployed people. Nationally, only 6.6% of similarly aged individuals participated in EBSMs in 2005-2006; this proportion varied considerably across the country from highs of 7.7% and 7.4% in British Columbia and Ontario respectively, to lows of 2.3% in Nunavut and 3.7% in the Northwest Territories.[176] Members of the Committee believe that older workers’ participation in federal labour market programs must increase to reflect this group’s growing share of the labour force.
In June 1999, the federal government introduced the Older Workers Pilot Projects Initiative, a program designed to test various approaches to helping unemployed older workers regain employment or maintain employment if job loss becomes a risk. Following a recent evaluation of this initiative, the federal government announced, on October 17, 2006, that it would introduce a federal-provincial cost-shared (70%-30%) program called the Targeted Initiative for Older Workers (TIOW). The federal government’s share of funding under this program is expected to be $70 million over two years. As of March 2008, nine jurisdictions — British Columbia, New Brunswick, Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Quebec, Saskatchewan and the Yukon — have signed agreements under this initiative.
The TIOW is targeted at older workers 55 to 64 years of age who have lost their jobs, are legally entitled to work in Canada, lack the skills needed to secure new employment and reside in communities that are experiencing high unemployment or that rely heavily on a single employer or industry affected by downsizing or a closure. Although witnesses were generally supportive of the TIOW, some raised concerns about limiting program participation to those aged 55 to 64. If the federal and provincial/territorial governments are genuinely interested in providing adjustment support to an aging workforce, consideration should be given to broadening the age-eligibility criterion under the TIOW and other labour market interventions. Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that the labour market adjustment problems currently facing older workers are concentrated in high unemployment communities or single-industry (employer) communities. It is for this reason that we recommended, in Chapter 2, the use of EI contribution rebates to help facilitate labour market adjustments among older workers (and others) across the country.
On January 23, 2007, the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development announced the appointment of an expert panel to study labour market conditions affecting older workers and potential measures to help this segment of the labour force. Members of the Committee note that this expert panel would be an appropriate vehicle for examining age- and community-eligibility criteria under the TIOW. This panel could also review the efficacy of supporting: (1) an internship initiative to assist older workers who want to remain in the workplace, but who lack job-specific experience and skills to fill job vacancies; and (2) a mentorship initiative to allow older workers to pass on their expertise to younger workers before leaving the labour force.
[S]upport mentorship programs that are not age-restricted to facilitate career development in succession. It is in this area that we're starting to address the older part of the workforce. The federal government has been very supportive with youth internships, as well as addressing the issue of school dropout, etc., and that bridge between school and work. We're seeing that there is also a very big issue that's being addressed by older workers; if we could extend those youth internship programs to include other ages, you would be able to address succession issues and career transfer issues, transition issues, for older workers as well.[177]
Ms. Susan Annis
Cultural Human Resources Council
Recommendation 3.5
The Committee recommends that the federal government examine the efficacy of broadening the age and community eligibility criteria under the Targeted Initiative for Older Workers. In addition, consideration should be given to broadening the scope of this or some other program to support internship and mentorship opportunities for older workers. In the event that the Targeted Initiative for Older Workers program is broadened, funding could come from the newly announced $500 million investment in new labour market programming, given that one of the stated objectives of this spending is to increase the labour force participation of under-represented groups in the Canadian labour market.
The Aboriginal working-age population (i.e., 15 years of age and over) represents a growing segment of the Canadian labour force. According to the 2001 Census, 3.3% of Canada’s total population was of Aboriginal identity (almost 1 million people).[178] The Aboriginal population as a percentage of the total population is largest in Nunavut (85%), the Northwest Territories (51%), the Yukon (23%) and Western Canada, particularly in Manitoba (13.6%) and Saskatchewan (13.5%). It is a young population, with a median age in 2001 that was 13 years younger than that of the non-Aboriginal population (24.7 years as opposed to 37.7 years). By 2020, it is estimated that over 400,000 young Aboriginal people will be of working age.[179]
Canada needs a well-educated and skilled Aboriginal workforce. Research has shown that over the last decade Aboriginal people have made significant progress in terms of their educational and employment outcomes. However, their levels of education and employment are still well below those of the non-Aboriginal population.
Canada will face a skilled labour shortage as many Canadian baby boomers start retiring and the economy remains strong. At the same time, Aboriginal people in Canada are the nation's youngest and fastest growing segment of the population. We must find a way to change the high percentage of unemployment for Aboriginal people, utilizing both on- and non-reserve approaches. The Aboriginal population is the largest untapped human resource in Canada, and we believe we can solve Canada's labour shortage.[180]
Ms. Sherry Lewis
Native Women’s Association of Canada
In 2001, 38.7% of Aboriginal people aged 25 to 64 had less than a high school graduation certificate, as opposed to 22.7% of the total working-age population. In terms of trades-related training, Aboriginal people achieved better rates of completion than the non-Aboriginal population (16% as opposed to 13%). However, those results are an exception, in that a smaller proportion of Aboriginal people obtained a college or university degree than non-Aboriginal individuals. Fifteen percent of Aboriginal people had a college certificate or diploma, and 8% reported having a university degree. Among the non-Aboriginal population, 18% had a college certificate and 22.6% had completed a university education.[181]
1. Barriers to Post-Secondary Education
Aboriginal learners must overcome a number of barriers to post-secondary education. According to a study published by the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation, these barriers include: inadequate financial resources; poor academic preparation; a lack of self-confidence and motivation; an absence of role models who have post-secondary education experience; a lack of understanding of Aboriginal culture on campus; and racism. Of all the barriers constraining Aboriginal learners from attending post-secondary education, insufficient financial resources and poor academic preparation were cited most often by First Nations people living on reserves. Financial barriers do not stem only from low incomes. The Foundation’s study also revealed that Aboriginal students at the post-secondary level are, on average, older than other students and are more likely to be married and/or to have children. These student characteristics tend to augment household expenses and the need for child care.[182] Hence, effective financial assistance programs for Aboriginal students must account for the financial needs of an older student population and single parents.[183]
2. Federal Programs Supporting Aboriginal Education
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) spends about $1.6 billion on elementary, secondary, and post-secondary education for First Nations and Inuit students. The Department supports the provision of elementary and secondary education programs and services for First Nations students and offers financial support for post-secondary education to Inuit and First Nations (Status Indians) residing on or off reserves.[184]
The Post-Secondary Student Support Program (PSSSP) and the University College Entrance Preparation Program (UCEP) provide financial assistance to help cover the costs of tuition, books, travel and living expenses. The Indian Studies Support Program (ISSP) also provides support “to post-secondary institutions for the development and delivery of special programs for Indians.”[185] The three support programs are administered and delivered almost exclusively by First Nations Bands, whose Councils define their own selection criteria and policies.[186] INAC has a budget of about $300 million for post-secondary education programs. Most of this funding is earmarked for the Post-Secondary Student Support Program.[187]
According to a recent evaluation of INAC’s Post-Secondary Student Support Program, this program is relevant and effective. Most program participants indicated that they would not have obtained a post-secondary education without the support of this program. However, resources are limited and the guidelines for living allowances under the PSSSP are outdated. The demand for financial assistance exceeds the resources available. Organizations administering PSSSP funds indicated that about 22% of applicants were put on a waiting list. On the basis of all the information available, evaluators concluded that each year about 3,575 applicants are unable to access financial assistance under the PSSSP because of a lack of funding.[188] According to the Assembly of First Nations, about 9,500 First Nations students who are eligible and looking to attend post-secondary education are on waiting lists.
The employment rate for Aboriginal people in Canada is well below the rate for non-Aboriginal people, and there is a significant disparity between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal students enrolled in post-secondary education. Current federal funding programs are not accessible to all Aboriginal students who should have the option of accessing them. Additionally, federal funding has reached its maximum, which does not account for rising costs of tuition and the increase in Aboriginal enrolment. Developing a more highly skilled and educated Aboriginal population is vital for the future economic and social development of Canada.[189]
Sustained Poverty Reduction Initiative
The House of Commons Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development recently completed a study of Aboriginal post-secondary education and came to similar conclusions. While recognizing the progress made by Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal stakeholders in developing and delivering post-secondary programming to Aboriginal learners, the report states that “it appears there are uncounted numbers of aspiring Aboriginal learners who are unable to gain access to the funding they need to enroll in post-secondary programs.”[190] Although the report deals mainly with funding provided under INAC’s post-secondary education program, the lack of funding to meet the needs of Métis and non-registered First Nations learners is also recognized as a problem that requires immediate attention.
To support and encourage the attainment of higher levels of education by all Aboriginal learners, including Aboriginal populations that are not eligible to receive support under INAC’s programs, the federal government announced in 2003 a one-time $12 million endowment to establish a new post-secondary scholarship. The scholarship is offered to First Nations (status and non-status), Métis and Inuit learners enrolled full-time or part-time in programs of two or more academic years in duration. The scholarship fund is administered and delivered by the National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation (NAAF).[191] In Budget 2005, the federal government committed an additional $10 million in 2005-2006 to the NAAF to support the post-secondary education aspirations of Aboriginal students.
B. Aboriginal Labour Market Participation
Aboriginal people are also under-represented in the labour market. In 2001, the employment rate (i.e., employment expressed as a percentage of the population 15 years of age and over) for the Aboriginal population was 49.7%, well below the rate of 61.8% for non-Aboriginal people. These differences vary according to residential location and educational attainment. Aboriginal people living in urban metropolitan areas are more likely to be employed than those living elsewhere, particularly those living on reserves. Reserves are often located in remote locations and generally offer few employment opportunities. Approximately 53% of First Nations individuals live on reserves. In 2001, the employment rate was 37.7% for people living on reserves, compared with 54.2% for those who were living in non-reserve areas. Not surprisingly, the employment rate also increases with higher levels of educational attainment. Slightly over 82% of Aboriginal people (25 to 64 years old) with a university degree were employed in 2001, compared with 43% of those with some high school education or less.[192]
In 2001, Aboriginal people aged 15 years and over were more likely to be unemployed (19.1%) than the non-Aboriginal population (7.1%) in 2001.[193] The Committee was told that the unemployment rate for those living on reserves was as high as 28%. There were also clear variations from one region of the country to another. Aboriginal unemployment rates in Manitoba and Saskatchewan were three to four times those of the non-Aboriginal population (18% and 22% respectively).[194] These high unemployment rates are unjustifiable, particularly in view of the fact that Canada is experiencing skills shortages in certain economic sectors and regions of the country.
The reasons underlying low labour force participation rates and the high unemployment rates among Aboriginal people are complex and not yet fully understood. However, it is clear that high school completion rates must be addressed, access to post-secondary education must be facilitated, and barriers to employment must be dealt with if we are to improve the socio-economic status of Aboriginal people.
Research has also shown that poor health, poverty, unsuitable living conditions (e.g., inadequate housing), racism and discrimination have a direct impact on the social, educational, and occupational achievements of Aboriginal people.[195] Income is a basic indicator of economic well-being. The 2001 Census shows that there is a significant income gap between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people in Canada. In 2000, the median income of the Aboriginal population was $13,525, compared with $22,431 for the non-Aboriginal population. Aboriginal people who worked year-round, full time earned on average $33,416, whereas non-Aboriginal working Canadians had average earnings of $43, 486.[196]
To increase employment opportunities for Aboriginal people, we also need to consider mobility issues. Aboriginal individuals are much more mobile than other Canadians. In the year before the 2001 Census, 22% of Aboriginal people had moved compared with only 14% of non-Aboriginal people. Of those who moved, about one-third had moved to another community.[197] Young people moving off reserves to urban centres face particular challenges in their search for employment outside their own community. All of the activities associated with relocation must be accomplished without the support of the community and family they leave behind on reserves. They face language and cultural barriers. They must find suitable housing, look for a job and create a new social support network. The Committee was told that Aboriginal women face similar relocation challenges with the added difficulty that, as many are also single mothers, they need access to affordable, quality child care services that reflect Aboriginal culture and practices.
Our studies have found that child care and the costs of child care are difficult to access, and they are insufficient. This leads to single mothers having to carry the burden of child care on their own or having to receive government benefits and pass up the opportunities to train to re-enter the job market. Current initiatives do not have set-aside budgets for child care and limit the ability of aboriginal women to receive training by having such restrictive criteria.[198]
Ms. Sherry Lewis
Native Women’s Association of Canada
If you want to talk about employability, I would argue that the number one priority this committee should have is single women with children. If you get that young mother graduated through a program and into a well-paying job, you change her life and you change her child's life. Having been raised by a single mother, I can assure you that this mother will not allow her child not to succeed. She'll know the benefits and what it takes, and it will be a remarkable outcome for all of Canada. That's what I would say would be the ultimate success story.[199]
Mr. Peter Dinsdale
National Association of Friendship Centres
2. Enhancing Aboriginal Training and Labour Market Participation
During our hearings, some witnesses expressed concerns regarding the under-representation of Aboriginal people in the labour market and made suggestions to remove barriers to their full participation in education and employment. Most recognized that the Aboriginal population is part of the solution to existing and anticipated skills shortages. They also see the current labour market challenges as an opportunity to reduce the socio-economic woes that afflict Aboriginal people across Canada.
Aboriginal peoples and recent immigrants are experiencing very high rates of poverty and a very bad employment and employability situation, yet these are the very people we need to fill the gaps in our labour market resulting from Canada's aging population.[200]
Mrs. Sheila Regehr
National Council of Welfare
In our view, the acquisition of higher education, training and skills development provide the most promising approaches to increasing the labour market participation and living standards of Aboriginal people. The significance of education, apprenticeship training and the acquisition of basic skills in enhancing the participation of Aboriginal people in the economy was also highlighted in a recent report entitled Sharing Canada’s Prosperity — A Hand Up, Not a Handout.[201]
In light of the interest shown by Aboriginal people in trades-related occupations, some witnesses suggested that efforts should be made to facilitate Aboriginal participation in apprenticeship training and ensure that those who complete their training find jobs. A number of witnesses also indicated that there is a need for employers, Aboriginal workers and agencies that serve Aboriginal people to collaborate in the development of initiatives to provide the necessary supports to increase Aboriginal workers’ mobility and facilitate smoother transitions into the workplace. Some witnesses also thought that “mentorship programs” could be created so that Aboriginal people who have succeeded in breaking down the barriers to better employment could assist others to do the same.
In both Alberta and British Columbia, aboriginal people who have completed post-secondary education have higher participation rates than the non-aboriginal population with post-secondary education. Again, that is an indication that education matters.[202]
Ms. Maryanne Webber
Statistics Canada
As an example, there's little doubt that over the next five to seven years, Saskatchewan's tar sands will start to be developed just like Alberta's. The demand for skilled labour in this and other skill-starved sectors as well as other occupations could be filled by aboriginal people, but only if we start working on this now. We need a massive increase in financially supported academic and apprenticeship training opportunities for aboriginal people, and we need to start that now.[203]
Mr. Larry Hubich
Saskatchewan Federation of Labour
It's all about removal of barriers for aboriginal people to participate. It's all about significant investment by employers in making sure that aboriginal employees not only can be hired but can be retained and promoted. On the mining side, I think they've done an admirable job of training.[204]
Mr. Mark Hanley
Saskatchewan Labour Force Development Board
C. Federal Programs Promoting Employment for Aboriginal People
To increase the labour market participation of Aboriginal people and their standard of living, the federal government funds a number of education, training and employment services. Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC) oversees the Aboriginal Human Resources Development Strategy (AHRDS), an initiative launched in 1999 to facilitate labour market adjustment among Aboriginal people.[205] The Strategy was renewed in 2004 for a second five-year period with a total budget of $1.64 billion.[206] In 2006-2007, HRSDC spent $281.4 million under the AHRDS.[207] Funding under the Strategy is distributed via approximately 80 Human Resources Development Agreement holders, who design and deliver labour market, youth and child care[208] programs and services best suited to meet the local and regional needs of their communities. These programs and services help Aboriginal people prepare for, obtain and maintain employment and assist Aboriginal youth (15 to 30 years of age) in making a successful transition from school to work. According to HRSDC’s latest performance report, in 2006-2007 approximately 54,797 Aboriginal clients received assistance through the Strategy; of these 16,540 became employed or self-employed, and approximately 5,785 returned to school.[209] Each year, the AHRDS supports about 7,500 child care spaces.[210]
Other initiatives that complement the AHRDS include the Aboriginal Human Resource Council of Canada (a sector council) and the Aboriginal Skills and Employment Partnership (ASEP) program. The Council was established in 1998. Its goal is to develop career opportunities for Aboriginal people through partnerships with the private sector, Aboriginal organizations and various levels of government.[211] The ASEP program was introduced in 2003 as a five-year initiative with a budget of $85 million. As of February 2006, all of the funding for this initiative had been invested in nine projects established across the country.[212] It is estimated that these projects will result in over 5,000 Aboriginal clients being trained for over 3,000 long-term, sustainable jobs in various sectors, such as mining, oil and gas, forestry, construction and fisheries.[213] Budget 2007 has allocated an additional $105 million over five years to expand this program. It is anticipated that this increase will lead to 9,000 Aboriginal people receiving skills training and to 6,000 careers being created in major economic development projects.[214]
I noticed a doubling of the ASEP program in the budget. It's great and good news, but it's not even close to the amount of investment in human resources and human capital that is necessary to deal with that. If we don't make a financial and political shift, we're going to miss out enormously.[215]
Mr. Karl Flecker
Canadian Labour Congress
INAC offers two main programs to expand economic and employment opportunities for Aboriginal people. The Aboriginal Workforce Participation Initiative (AWPI) educates and informs employers about the advantages of hiring, retaining, and promoting Aboriginal people and works in partnership with various businesses and organizations to enhance the labour force participation of Aboriginal people throughout Canada.[216] The Procurement Strategy for Aboriginal Business (PSAB) helps Aboriginal firms do more contracting with federal departments and agencies. In 2006, 5,087 federal contracts worth $463 million were awarded to Aboriginal businesses.[217]
To support the development and enhancement of essential employability skills and to expose youth to work experience, INAC administers four programs offered under the First Nations and Inuit Youth Employment Strategy, a component of the federal government’s Youth Employment Strategy. These programs include the First Nations and Inuit Youth Work Experience Program, the First Nations and Inuit Summer Employment Opportunities Program, the First Nations and Inuit Science and Technology Program, and the First Nations and Inuit Career Promotion and Awareness Program. In 2006-2007, approximately 122,000 young Aboriginal people received support under the First Nations and Inuit Youth Employment Strategy.[218]
The federal government has also implemented a number of legislative measures to promote equality and safeguard people from discriminatory practices. Aboriginal people represent one of four designated groups whose under-representation in employment is covered under the Employment Equity Act. In addition, the federal government launched a Racism-Free Workplace Strategy as part of A Canada for All: Canada’s Action Plan Against Racism, initiated in 2005. Activities undertaken under this Strategy aim to remove discriminatory barriers to employment, job retention and upward mobility, and to promote a fair, productive and inclusive labour market. Aboriginal people and visible minorities are two groups that are particularly affected by racism in the workplace.[219]
Our second area of progress in the Labour Program is the Racism-Free Workplace Strategy. This strategy is vital to Canada's continued success, because in facing world markets, it ensures we are able to count on a highly competitive workforce that is uniquely rooted in diversity and inclusiveness. But let's be clear, this is the shared responsibility of employers, employees, government, business, and labour organizations. That's why this strategy is key. I recently completed a five-city tour to promote racism-free workplaces and the removal of barriers to employment and upward mobility for visible minorities and Aboriginal peoples. I announced our plan to hire nine anti-racism officers, whose mandate will be to work in the following three areas: to promote workplace integration of racial minorities — in other words, to be inclusive; to build a network between community resources and employers; and to provide tools and assistance to employers working toward equitable representation in their workforce.[220]
Hon. Jean-Pierre Blackburn
Minister of Labour
D. Closing the Gap in Socio-Economic Outcomes between Canada’s Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal People
Members of the Committee believe that the federal government must continue to invest in Aboriginal human capital and other initiatives that aim to close the gap in socio-economic outcomes between Canada’s Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal populations. The federal government must work in partnership with provincial and territorial governments, the business sector and Aboriginal organizations to create sustainable economic opportunities for Aboriginal people. We must ensure that Aboriginal children and youth have the necessary literacy skills, education, and training to meet current and future labour market demands. Aboriginal learners must be able to access, finance and complete apprenticeship programs and other post-secondary education programs. Innovative solutions must also be implemented to facilitate their transition from education to employment. Such innovations might include offering pre-employment training to provide information about the workplace culture and clarify employer expectations, as well as using Aboriginal employment role models or mentors to motivate young people to pursue an education or a particular career. Discriminatory barriers in the workplace that limit Aboriginal employment opportunities must be eliminated through measures such as campaigns to raise employers’ awareness of diversity issues. Other barriers to employment, such as the crisis in Aboriginal housing, relocation issues and the need for adequate funding for Aboriginal child care, must also be addressed to ensure that Aboriginal people have an equal opportunity to join the labour force. Federal programs and services offered to Aboriginal people and organizations must be culturally sensitive and inclusive.
Recommendation 3.6
The Committee recommends that Human Resources and Social Development Canada conduct a comprehensive evaluation, in full consultation with Aboriginal groups, of the Aboriginal Human Resources Development Strategy to assess the results to date and to determine whether the Strategy can: meet the needs of Aboriginal working parents (particularly single mothers); meet the needs of a rapidly growing young Aboriginal population that will reach working age in the near future; and achieve its long-term goal of raising the Aboriginal employment rate to a level comparable to that found among non-Aboriginal Canadians. Based on the results of this evaluation, the federal government should, if necessary, dedicate additional resources as needed, in particular by adopting long-term strategies of ten years to provide Aboriginal organizations, including band governments, planning and consultation time in the beginning years so they can take full advantage of the opportunities offered, and make any necessary modifications to the Strategy to enhance its effectiveness in meeting the employability needs of Aboriginal people.
Recommendation 3.7
The Committee recommends that the federal government, in partnership with provincial/territorial governments and Aboriginal stakeholders, take immediate steps to strengthen the commitment to provide high-quality, culturally relevant elementary and secondary education to Aboriginal students. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada should develop culturally sensitive measures and programs to reduce the high school drop-out rate among Aboriginal students and to better prepare students for post-secondary education. Pilot projects that would allow students to be linked with successful Aboriginal mentors should be used to strengthen school attendance and completion. The Committee recognizes the particular need to address education for First Nations and Aboriginal people from a lifelong learning perspective which includes: early childhood development; kindergarten to grade 12; post-secondary education; adult education and training. Part of this approach must include a commitment to build more schools on reserves to address the chronic lack of classroom space.
Recommendation 3.8
The Committee recommends that the federal government commit to better supporting Indigenous education institutions, taking into consideration the proposals in Budget 2008.
Recommendation 3.9
The Committee recommends that the federal government take the necessary steps to improve access to post-secondary education for Aboriginal people. Among other initiatives, the eligibility criteria for the Post-Secondary Student Support Program and the University College Entrance Preparation Program offered through Indian and Northern Affairs Canada should be broadened, and the budget for these programs should be increased and indexed to growth in the Aboriginal post-secondary school-age population. The federal government must continue to support the Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Post-Secondary Student Support Program and consider removing the two-per cent cap instituted in 1996.
Recommendation 3.10
The Committee recommends that the federal government, in collaboration with provincial/territorial governments and Aboriginal stakeholders, develop a program to raise awareness among Aboriginal people about the importance of, and economic benefits associated with, completing a post-secondary education.
Recommendation 3.11
The Committee recommends that Human Resources and Social Development Canada encourage the participation of Aboriginal people in trades-related training by working with Aboriginal stakeholders to examine initiatives and budgets geared specifically to meeting the needs of Aboriginal workers.
Recommendation 3.12
The Committee recommends that the federal government continue to support and implement fully the Racism-free Workplace Strategy to reduce discriminatory barriers to employment, promote a better understanding of Aboriginal cultural issues, and promote the socio-economic advancement of Aboriginal people.
Recommendation 3.13
The Committee recommends that the federal government, in partnership with other governments and Aboriginal stakeholders, develop innovative solutions to relocation problems that arise when Aboriginal people, especially youth and women, move to urban centres in search of employment.
Recommendation 3.14
The Committee recommends that the federal government examine the feasibility of developing incentive-based programs to encourage partnerships between employers operating near reserves and Aboriginal stakeholders that would foster training and employment opportunities on or near reserves.
Recommendation 3.15
The Committee recommends that the federal government, in partnership with provincial/territorial governments and Aboriginal organizations, develop a national Aboriginal housing policy to address the needs of Aboriginal people living on and off reserves. To maximize the socio-economic benefits of this policy, skills training should be provided to Aboriginal people who are interested in jobs related to residential construction, housing services and other occupations in the housing industry.
Recommendation 3.16
The Committee recommends that the federal government recommit to an Aboriginal Business Strategy, in which it would support Aboriginal economic development by setting fixed targets to make Aboriginal-owned businesses a preferred supplier of services and materials, especially in remote and northern regions.
In 2006, according to Statistics Canada’s Participation and Activity Limitation Survey (PALS), about 2.5 million Canadians aged 15 to 64 reported some form of disability, yielding a disability rate of 11.5% for the total working-age population.[221] As Canada’s population ages we can expect the proportion of people with disabilities to rise. The disability rate is higher among Aboriginal people: a recent report estimated that some 31% of Aboriginal people may have a disability.[222]
Studies have shown that, compared with adults without disabilities, Canadian adults with disabilities are less likely to have completed higher levels of education, less likely to be employed, and more likely to have a low income. In 2001, the most recent year for which national data have been published, 37% of persons with disabilities reported that they had less than a high school education. About 13% had a trades certificate or diploma, another 16% had a college education, and a little over 11% had a university education.[223] Among the population without disabilities, approximately 23% had a university education.
As we have seen in other groups in the labour market, the employment rate among people with disabilities increases with the level of education. However, many people with disabilities who have completed a post-secondary education have difficulty finding employment. In 2001, slightly more than 41% of working-age people with disabilities were employed compared with almost 74% of those without disabilities.[224] Despite this sizeable gap in employment rates between these two groups, the employment situation of people with disabilities has improved since 1999. For example, in the western provinces (Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta) where skills shortages are more acute, the employment rate for persons with disabilities has increased. Although people with disabilities are less likely to be employed in provinces with weaker economies, it should be noted that the employment rate among persons with disabilities living in those provinces has also increased in the last six years.[225]
In every sector in Alberta, we've seen businesses take on more folks from the non-traditional labour groups and have success in hiring them. The biggest increase has been among people with disabilities, with the number of firms having successfully hired them going from 16% to 27%. So they are moving in that direction.[226]
Ms. Corinne Pohlmann
Canadian Federation of Independent Business
Approximately 49% of working-age individuals with disabilities are not in the labour force. The Committee was told that a significant number of these individuals could work if it were not for the array of barriers they face (Statistics Canada estimates that in 2001 approximately 660,000 people with a disability could have worked).[227] The integration of these individuals into the workforce could help offset current and anticipated skills shortages. However, to achieve this goal, barriers to employment must be addressed. Those barriers include negative attitudes, inaccessible infrastructure and transportation services, a lack of education and training, a lack of accommodation in the workplace, and low availability and portability of disability-related supports.
One of the first findings that we can make is that a large percentage of persons with disabilities are currently inactive but feel they are able to work. However, these people say they experience problems of all kinds, such as negative perceptions by employers, transportation problems and a lack of training and experience. And yet persons with disabilities constitute a skilled labour force and are part of the response to the major labour shortage problem we are facing.[228]
Ms. Nancy Moreau
SPHERE-Québec
If we ensure that people have at least high school education, get back for some retraining, and get the disability supports they require — for example, the help from other people, technologies, wheelchairs, medications and so on — and if we ensure that the community transportation system is accessible for people, the chances are very good that the employment levels for people with disabilities will be very close to those of other Canadians.[229]
Mr. Cameron Crawford
Canadian Association for Community Living
They don't understand what they need to do to accommodate somebody with a disability. I think understanding that is the biggest barrier for them. Rather than trying to understand, they'd rather look elsewhere. In jurisdictions where they have no choice — and I think in Alberta you're seeing huge advancements in that particular area — employers are looking at people with disabilities more and more, because their options are fewer and they're making the accommodations they need. I think the biggest barrier is fear. They just don't know what they need to do to accommodate somebody with a disability.[230]
Ms. Corinne Pohlmann
Canadian Federation of Independent Business
1. Unmet Needs for Disability-Related Supports
Many witnesses indicated that the lack of accessibility to disability-related supports is a major barrier to employment. Disability supports are technical aids and devices, as well as human assistance, required by people with disabilities to accomplish the basic tasks of daily living. Without these supports, many people with disabilities are prevented from fulfilling their social and economic potential.
According to data collected from the 2001 PALS concerning people aged 15 and over who use assistive devices, 22% of those with moderate limitations, 33% of those with severe limitations and 50% of those with very severe limitations had unmet needs for specialized equipment. The main reason cited was cost (affecting 48% of those who needed help), while a lack of insurance coverage ranked second (affecting 36%).[231]
Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC) also reported that post-secondary students with disabilities have unmet needs for disability supports. In 2001, it was estimated that there were approximately 51,000 post-secondary students with disabilities, of whom 20% reported the need for disability supports to attend a post-secondary institution. Of these 10,000 students, only about 40% had their needs met, leaving approximately 6,000 students with disabilities with unmet needs for supports.[232]
Public coverage for aids and support devices is not available in all provinces and territories, and none of the provinces and territories provides access to the full range of disability supports. Eligibility for financial assistance to offset the cost of these supports is often linked to residency in a particular region or municipality, or to enrolment in public institutions (e.g., schools, residential facilities, etc.), and is based on income and eligibility for other benefits such as social assistance. Once a person leaves these settings, supports are generally withdrawn. This creates a disincentive to work, as the combined loss of income-tested benefits and disability supports often outweigh after-tax earnings from work. During our hearings, a number of witnesses raised this issue and argued that accessibility to disability supports should be universal, regardless of income or place of residence.
Some witnesses proposed the development of a more integrated and effective income and disability support system in Canada. The issue of a living wage was raised, since persons with disabilities are more likely to have a low income than persons without disabilities. In 2001, the average income of persons with disabilities aged 25 to 54 was 28% lower than that of similarly aged people without disabilities.[233] Several witnesses suggested that the federal government supplement the incomes of low-wage workers through the tax system by implementing a “working income tax benefit.” This measure, which has been discussed for several years, was finally introduced in Budget 2007. Under the Working Income Tax Benefit (WITB), a refundable tax credit is paid to low-income individuals who have annual earnings above $3,000. The maximum benefit for a low-income single individual is $500 (reached at $5,500), which is reduced at a rate of 15% when earnings reach $9,500. An additional supplement of $250 is paid to low-income workers who are eligible for the Disability Tax Credit.[234] In this case, the credit begins to accrue when the earnings of a single-earner with a disability reach $1,750, and the maximum credit is paid when earnings are between $5,000 and $10,000. The WITB is discussed further in this chapter in the context of low-income workers.
In terms of disability-related supports, it is the priority for persons with disabilities across the country, it is the priority of the national disability organizations, because an investment in disability-related supports makes economic sense. If we are facing a labour shortage, if we are facing a shortage in the trades, if we are requiring an influx of human resources into our employment sector, well, for God's sake, provide disability-related supports so that people with disabilities can participate.[235]
Ms. Marie White
Council of Canadians with Disabilities
For at least a decade now, the issue of disability supports hasn't been the only priority, but it's been the single most important priority within the disability community, and there's been virtually no progress on this file. This is a key result of there being a lack of engagement by federal and provincial/territorial partners in this area, which is an absolutely vital concern to the disabled community.[236]
Mr. Cameron Crawford
Canadian Association for Community Living
Provinces have remarked over the last number of years they think that about half the people on their social assistance rolls are people with disabilities. The reason I got a little confused is that we also estimate the number of people with disabilities currently on social assistance who tell us through surveys they would be able to work but there are things that get in the way, like transportation or employers not being able to provide accommodation, or even what we call the “welfare wall”, where people get disability supports while they're on social assistance, and then in some jurisdictions lose them as they earn income. That creates a disincentive for them to participate in the labour market.[237]
Ms. Caroline Weber, Office for Disability Issues
Department of Human Resources and Social Development
The Committee was also told that the integration of people with disabilities in the labour market requires greater access to transportation, learning establishments and workplaces, as well as accommodations on the job (e.g., modified and flexible work hours, technical equipment, modified workstations, etc.). Persons with disabilities require access to labour market information, skills training and employment assistance services to prepare for, find and maintain employment. Some witnesses stated that there are gaps in employment programming for people with disabilities who do not have a strong attachment to the labour market. The Committee also heard about the unique challenges of people with a mental illness and those with episodic and “invisible” disabilities. Their attachment to the labour force may be more sporadic, and they may require flexible work arrangements to maintain employment. Employers also require assistance. They need support in identifying and recruiting employees with disabilities as well as information on job accommodation and assistive devices.[238]
In the workplace there are a myriad of barriers for women with disabilities. Research which has looked at the employment support needs of persons with disabilities has shown that the need for “modified work structures” such as handrails/ramps, accessible transportation to and from work, parking, elevators, and washrooms, and modified work stations, is almost twice as high (28% versus 15%) among persons with disabilities who are unemployed as compared to persons with disabilities who are employed. This suggests that a person’s need for such modified workplace structures may make them more vulnerable to job loss and increase their difficulty in finding employment.[239]
Nova Scotia Advisory Council on the Status of Women
Of all persons with disabilities, those with a serious mental illness face the highest degree of stigmatization in the workplace and the greatest barriers to mainstream employment. Adults and youth with psychiatric disabilities face many and varied employment obstacles, such as gaps in work history, limited employment experience, lack of confidence, fear and anxiety, workplace discrimination and inflexibility, social stigma, and the rigidity of existing income support and benefit programs.[240]
Ms. Jodi Cohen
Canadian Mental Health Association
Many employers have moved from hiring because of a corporate social responsibility, to actually viewing persons with physical disabilities as strengthening their corporate resources and capabilities, and in some situations as creating a competitive advantage. Still, there are some employers, particularly medium or small employers, for whom this is not the case. In addition, where the disability is hidden, such as a mental health disorder or epilepsy, that progress has not been as evident.[241]
Mrs. Andrea Spindel
Ontario March of Dimes
Employers certainly admitted to us that they do not know where to find qualified people with disabilities, and seldom do they even reach out to service providers in their community. There is certainly a need, then, to increase awareness of disability issues in the employer community, as well as to help employers to be more forthcoming and open with workplace accommodation.[242]
Mr. Alar Prost
Innovera Integrated Solutions
B. Role of the Federal Government
Although witnesses recognized that provincial and territorial governments as well as the private and non-profit sectors have significant responsibilities with respect to enhancing employability among persons with disabilities, they underlined that the federal government also has an important “role to play in disability, in making employment available for people with disabilities, and in facilitating the development of an inclusive labour market.”[243] Many identified a need for a national labour-market strategy for persons with disabilities. Others emphasized the need for better collaboration on disability issues among all levels of government, non-governmental organizations and stakeholders. Some witnesses recommended the creation of a national disability act that would not only address the issue of employment but would also provide systemic solutions and mechanisms to advance the goals of full inclusion, participation and citizenship of persons with disabilities in Canadian society.
The Government of Canada must take the lead in forging a new labour market strategy, based on the tenets of full inclusion and universal design, that will more effectively address the historic level of unemployment and under-employment that continues to confront so many Canadians with disabilities.[244]
Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians
The major initiative, I think, would be to look at a national disabilities act, which would require publicly funded organizations, institutions, crown corporations, and so on to make accessibility a higher priority and provide some funding and some incentive, and employer and institutional training, particularly human resource systems, but whole levels of the organization getting education about what they can do about it.[245]
Mrs. Andrea Spindel
Ontario March of Dimes
While our document recognizes that all levels of government and the private and non-profit sectors have a role to play, today we wish to emphasize the important role that the federal government needs to play as a catalyst for change, first — as our colleagues from the March of Dimes mentioned earlier — by setting the right context and framework through the establishment of a national disabilities act that would articulate national standards and definitions for many areas, including employment and income support, and would promote inclusion in all aspects of community life.[246]
Mr. Robert Collins
Partners in Employment-London/Middlesex
Recommendation 3.17
The Committee recommends that the federal government, in consultation with provincial and territorial governments and stakeholders, continue to develop and implement a national disability act to promote and ensure the inclusion of people with disabilities in all aspects of Canadian society.
Members of the Committee believe that the federal government must show leadership and, in collaboration with provincial/territorial governments and other stakeholders, support initiatives that remove barriers to labour force participation of persons with disabilities and that contribute to their integration into paid employment or self-employment. Over the years, the federal government has implemented a number of initiatives to achieve these objectives. This section of our report discusses some of these programs.
1. Human Resources and Social Development Canada Programs
HRSDC offers a number of programs to help persons with disabilities obtain and keep employment. Programs vary depending on whether an individual is eligible for Employment Insurance (EI) benefits. Federal funding is also distributed to provinces and territories to contribute to the costs of programs and services that increase employment opportunities for persons with disabilities.
Founded in 1997, the Opportunities Fund is a contribution program with an annual budget of $30 million. Most of this budget ($26.7 million) is spent on contribution agreements designed to help people with disabilities overcome barriers to employment. The remaining funds are spent on operating costs. To qualify for assistance under the fund, people with disabilities must not be eligible for EI (including Employment Benefits). Funding may be provided to cover the cost of participants’ wages or related employer costs, as well as overhead costs related to the organization, delivery, and evaluation of activities, including staff wages. Participants may also be eligible to receive contributions to cover all or part of the costs of various expenses, such as specialized services, equipment, dependant care, accommodation, transportation and tuition.[247]
Most witnesses who talked about the Opportunities Fund were very satisfied with the outcomes of this program. This finding is also supported by the results of an evaluation published in 2001, which showed that participants improved their skills, employability, self-confidence, self-esteem and quality of life. Employers and organizations also benefited from their participation in the fund. About one-third of employers saw a change in their organization’s attitude toward hiring persons with disabilities, and almost two-thirds hired at least one of the participants, mostly on a full-time permanent basis.[248] A second summative evaluation was undertaken in 2003. Preliminary results suggest that a majority of clients are satisfied with the program and that it continues to be relevant. The evaluation also showed “that the program fills a service gap in helping people with disabilities who are not well served by other federal or provincial government programs.”[249]
Despite the fact that the Opportunities Fund has a huge load to carry, its budget has not increased in the last decade. Therefore, its real value has declined. The Committee was told that the program has a waiting list. Considering the number of people with disabilities who are unemployed and ineligible for other federal labour market support, many witnesses recommended that the program’s budget be increased. Some witnesses also indicated that there is a need for longer-term interventions for those persons with disabilities who have been out of the labour market for long periods or who have never had a strong attachment to the labour market. As well, the need for flexibility in programming was raised by a few witnesses, particularly with respect to accommodating the unique needs of people with recurring or episodic disabilities who may require employment assistance over a longer period of time. We agree with our witnesses.
The Opportunities Fund is the only intervention available for those persons with disabilities who have had no EI attachment. This budget has been static since 1997. The $30 million allocated to this fund has been eroded by inflation and should be $36.5 million today to deliver the same level of service with no growth.[250]
Mr. Brian Tapper
TEAM Work Cooperative Ltd.
Quadruple the resources in the Opportunities Fund and expand its terms and conditions such that this critical federal instrument can more effectively support effective long-term interventions and skill development opportunities targeted primarily at those persons with disabilities who have multiple barriers to the labour force and as a consequence have become marginalized citizens of Canada.[251]
Neil Squire Society
Recommendation 3.18
The Committee recommends that the federal government increase funding for the Opportunities Fund and expand the terms and conditions of this program to support effective long-term interventions and skills development opportunities, especially with respect to essential skills training. A portion of the increased funding could be used to enhance the participation of employers and to provide employers and employees with knowledge about disability issues, accommodation in the workplace, and the tools available to create an inclusive workplace. Particular attention should be given to monitoring and reporting results to ensure that the program achieves its anticipated outcomes.
b) Multilateral Framework for Labour Market Agreements for Persons with Disabilities
The Multilateral Framework for Labour Market Agreements for Persons with Disabilities took effect on April 1, 2004. Under this framework, the federal government contributes to the costs of programs and services that improve the employment situation of persons with disabilities.[252] Provincial governments can determine their own priorities and approaches to address the needs of people with disabilities in their jurisdictions but they have agreed on a number of priority areas. These include education and training; employment participation and opportunities; bringing together employers and persons with disabilities; and building knowledge. The federal government contributes fifty per cent of the costs of the programs, up to the amount identified in each bilateral agreement. In 2005-2006, the federal contribution to participating provinces under these agreements was $218 million.[253] On November 22, 2007, the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development announced that the agreements would be extended until March 31, 2009 with an annual investment of $223 million.[254]
During our hearings, a number of witnesses questioned the success of Labour Market Agreements for Persons with Disabilities. Some suggested that there is a need to review and revise these agreements. Others argued that the level of funding is simply inappropriate and does not take into account the multiple barriers to employment that persons with disabilities need to overcome in order to participate in the labour market.
In 2003, the ministers responsible for social services approved the multilateral framework for labour market agreements for people with disabilities. It replaced what was then known as EAPD, or employability assistance for people with disabilities. While the goal of this framework is to improve the employability of Canadians with disabilities, it cannot do so at the current levels. The current funding levels are not adequate. We have an injection of funding in the 2003 budget of $193 million. It should be doubled, at the very least. That needs to occur because current labour market agreements don't take into account the situation of people with disabilities.[255]
Ms. Marie White
Council of Canadians with Disabilities
Other programs administered by HRSDC include Employment Benefits and Support Measures (EBSMs), the Canada Pension Plan Disability benefit, the Social Development Partnerships Program (disability component), the Aboriginal Human Resources Development Strategy (disability component) and programs that offer financial assistance for post-secondary education.
As discussed in Chapter 2 of our report, EBSMs are provided under Part II of the Employment Insurance Act. Eligible persons with disabilities may receive assistance through four employment benefits: Targeted Wage Subsidies, Self-Employment, Skills Development and Job Creation Partnerships.[256] A client-focused support measure is also offered through Employment Assistance Services. In 2005-2006, the rate of participation of persons with disabilities in EBSMs was 4.6%.[257] A number of witnesses argued that it is difficult for people with disabilities to accumulate the required number of hours to qualify for certain EI benefits as many do not have a strong attachment to the labour market. Some witnesses also questioned the effectiveness of these measures, as employers who hire persons with disabilities with the assistance of wage subsidies may terminate their employment once the funding is eliminated. An overview of results of summative evaluations conducted in different jurisdictions found that “EBSMs appeared to yield some modest positive net impacts on participants, depending on the program, client type and jurisdiction.”[258]
As the committee knows, labour market participation by people with disabilities is significantly lower than that by the mainstream population. Because the most effective federal government employment support programs are tied directly to people's attachment to the labour market and the EI system, many people with disabilities are ineligible and are therefore underserved.[259]
Mr. Bob Wilson
Social and Enterprise Development Innovations
Employers only willing to hire a person under a grant program, such as, Targeted Wage Subsidy may result in repeated periods of unemployment and short term employment. As soon as the funding is up, the person is let go and must start the job search all over again.[260]
Canadian Paraplegic Association
The Canada Pension Plan Disability (CPPD) benefit provides income protection to Canada Pension Plan contributors who cannot work because of a severe and prolonged disability. One of the program’s goals is to facilitate a return to work for those who are able to do so by offering the services of a vocational rehabilitation program.[261] Over the period 2003-04 to 2005-06, there has been a 39% increase in the number of CPPD recipients returning to work.[262]
The Social Development Partnerships Program (disability component) provides grants and contributions in support of national activities of non-profit social agencies working to address the social development needs and aspirations of persons with disabilities and to promote their inclusion and full participation as citizens in all aspects of Canadian society.[263] In 2005-2006, a portion of the $11 million allocated under this program was invested in employment-related projects for persons with disabilities.[264]
As mentioned in the previous section of our report, funding is also available to help Aboriginal people with disabilities prepare for, find and retain work through the Aboriginal Human Resources Development Strategy. In addition, HRSDC encourages Aboriginal Human Resources Development Agreement holders to include people with disabilities in all services and activities they offer.[265] Little is known about the success of this component of the Aboriginal Human Resources Development Strategy. Considering the low levels of employment among Aboriginal people in Canada, members of the Committee are concerned that Aboriginal people with disabilities face multiple barriers to employment and believe that more must be done to help them overcome these serious impediments.
Recommendation 3.19
The Committee recommends that one of the objectives associated with the recently proposed $500 million investment in new labour market programming be the successful integration into the labour market of persons with disabilities, with a goal to increase opportunities for those who face multiple barriers to employment. New funding levels for this objective should be established in accordance with federal–provincial/territorial agreements.
Recommendation 3.20
The Committee recommends that Human Resources and Social Development Canada conduct a thorough assessment of the disability component of the Aboriginal Human Resources Development Strategy and on the basis of this assessment make the necessary revisions to enhance the labour force participation of Aboriginal people with disabilities.
The federal government also provides assistance to post-secondary students with disabilities through several programs, including the Canada Student Loans Program, the Canada Study Grant for the Accommodation of Students with Permanent Disabilities and the Canada Access Grant for Students with Permanent Disabilities.[266] In 2004-2005, $22 million in grants were disbursed to students with permanent disabilities.[267]
The Committee was told that, beyond the need for financial assistance, post-secondary students with disabilities also encounter difficulty in accessing the learning environment. While members of the Committee think that a national disability act would help address general problems related to physical access to buildings and transportation services in Canada, we also believe that more needs to be done to immediately improve accessibility to post-secondary educational establishments in particular. In addition, it is our view that more can be done to assist post-secondary students with disabilities who have completed their education but need assistance to find and maintain employment.
[T]he bigger issue in post-secondary education is actually the accessibility of the learning environment, that there are some things that students need that they actually can't just buy themselves. If you go into a lab and you need some special modification in that lab equipment, students can't just modify the lab with their own money or access to the grant. There may be personal aids also that they can't provide themselves or can't always bring into the classroom. So those are some issues that need to be addressed. There are other issues about accessibility in the post-secondary environment that I think we aren't quite able to reach with the individual grants and loans.[268]
Ms. Caroline Weber
Department of Human Resources and Social Development
Recommendation 3.21
The Committee recommends that the federal government, in consultation with provincial and territorial governments and stakeholders, assess the need for and develop initiatives to improve accessibility within the learning environment for students with disabilities.
Recommendation 3.22
The Committee recommends that the federal government, in consultation with provincial and territorial governments and stakeholders, assess the need for and develop initiatives to facilitate school-to-work transitions for young people with disabilities.
2. Entrepreneurs with Disabilities Program
Western Economic Diversification Canada offers programs to assist people with disabilities in developing or expanding their small businesses. The Entrepreneurs with Disabilities Program helps persons with disabilities living in Western Canada who need business support by providing services such as business plan development, mentoring and counselling, training in business management, and access to business loans up to $125,000.[269] Since its creation in 1997-1998, the program has provided 750 loans totalling $16.2 million to entrepreneurs with disabilities, 65% of whom are currently operating businesses.[270]
3. Legislative Measures and Policies to Achieve Employment Equity
Canada has a number of legislative measures, policies, programs, and practices designed to achieve employment equity for persons with disabilities. The federal public service, federally regulated employers and separate employers[271] are all subject to the Employment Equity Act, which aims to achieve equality in the workplace for four designated groups: women, Aboriginal people, persons with disabilities, and members of visible minorities. The Canadian Human Rights Act (sections 2 and 15) requires the federal government and federally regulated employers to provide workplace accommodation unless doing so would result in undue hardship. The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat has also developed a Policy on the Duty to Accommodate Persons with Disabilities in the Federal Public Service.
Taken together the federal public service, federally regulated employers (including Crown Corporations) and federal contractors are the nation’s largest employer. In 2004, persons with disabilities represented 3.1% of the workforce for all employers covered under the Employment Equity Act (not including federal contractors).[272] “When compared to labour market availability of 5.0%, based on the 2001 Participation and Activity Limitation Survey (PALS), the representation of people with disabilities was 61.8% of their availability.”[273] In 2005-2006, the level of representation of people with disabilities was higher in the federal public service (5.8%) than among federally regulated employers (2.7%).[274] However, according to the Canadian Human Rights Commission’s Annual Report 2006, the higher level of representation in the public sector is likely due to a higher level of self-identification and an aging workforce, as “persons with disabilities continue to receive less than their expected shares of hires” (2.6% as of March 2006).[275]
Many witnesses raised concerns with regard to the need to sensitize employers to disability-related issues and the duty to accommodate employees with disabilities. Some witnesses recommended the establishment of a program to assist employers, particularly small and medium-sized businesses, with the costs associated with accommodating employees with disabilities. Others proposed that the federal government provide incentives to employers to encourage them to offer long-term employment to people with disabilities. A number of witnesses also suggested that the federal public service should be a champion and a role model with respect to the employment of persons with disabilities.
We must continue to foster awareness, action, and a workplace culture that is welcoming to persons with disabilities. From both physical and cultural perspectives, we need a workplace that makes people feel comfortable to be able to identify their needs, and to accommodate them we all need to have greater sensitivity and willingness as well as accommodation practices.[276]
Ms. Karen Ellis
Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada
Smaller businesses will probably need some support in terms of being able to cover the costs of technical equipment. There is, of course, a duty to accommodate already in place through human rights law, but to make that possible — and here I think the Government of Canada could help, either directly or through the provinces — create a new fund so that some of the costs of accommodation can be covered by public funds.[277]
Mr. John Rae
Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians
I think that's a very big piece of it, because in my mind we have to do a better job, with the support of the government, in selling the concept of hiring people with vision loss, because there are very many people out there who are working at all different levels. But it's overcoming that initial fear. We usually find that once an employer has hired somebody with vision loss, they tend to hire more people with vision loss. But it's getting that first person through the door, getting them convinced that a person with the proper supports, with adaptive equipment and a few other changes, can quite easily do a job that's very competitive, beside their peers.[278]
Mr. Bill McKeown
Canadian National Institute for the Blind
Another thing the federal government could do is
lead by example, as one of the biggest employers in Canada, if not the biggest.
The private and non-profit sectors also need to see that you, as a national
government, value the abilities of people with disabilities. If
you're not able to increase the representation of people with disabilities in
your workforce, that sends a very strong negative message to other employer
groups.[279]
Mr. Louis Buschman
As an individual
Members of the Committee believe that the federal government should be a role model for employers across the country and an employer of choice for people with disabilities. The federal government must strive to build a respectful and inclusive work environment that recognizes and values the diverse skills and abilities of people with disabilities, and must ensure that appropriate accommodations are implemented.
Recommendation 3.23
The Committee recommends that the federal government, in consultation with employers and stakeholders, develop new tax incentives to encourage employers to make the necessary accommodations to hire and retain employees with disabilities (e.g., technical equipment, modified workstations, etc.).
Recommendation 3.24
The Committee recommends that the federal government assess and enhance its role as a champion and role model in the creation and development of employment opportunities for persons with disabilities, including by using its purchasing power to acquire products and services produced or provided by persons with disabilities; by extending coverage of the federal contractors program to include more employers; by reviewing and enhancing employment equity measures; and by ensuring that the full spectrum of employment opportunities of the federal government and its agencies include persons with disabilities.
Recommendation 3.25
The Committee recommends that the federal government take further steps to enhance pay and employment equity in Canada; affirm that pay equity is a fundamental human right protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and human rights law; and devise an effective methodology for job evaluation, job comparison and wage adjustments.
In Canada, provincial and territorial governments are responsible for most programs that provide disability supports for persons with disabilities and that assist informal caregivers. The federal government provides financial resources for these supports through the Canada Health Transfer and the Canada Social Transfer. It also offers direct assistance through income tax relief to persons with disabilities and their caregivers. Income tax measures include: the medical expense tax credit; the disability tax credit; the child disability benefit; the disability supports deduction; the caregiver credit; the infirm dependant credit; the refundable medical expense supplement; and other personal income tax measures.[280] In addition, the federal government is directly responsible for regulating supports for First Nations and Inuit peoples, as well as for veterans and members of the Armed Forces.
Members of the Committee recognize that access to disability-related supports is essential to the health, safety, quality of life and productivity of persons with disabilities. People with disabilities do incur additional costs for these supports. To enhance the participation of persons with disabilities in post-secondary education and in the labour force, we need to increase access to disability-related supports.
Recommendation 3.26
The Committee recommends that Human Resources and Social Development Canada establish pilot projects under the Labour Market Agreements for Persons with Disabilities to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of providing disability-related supports (including mobility devices) to eligible participants to facilitate their integration into the labour market. The list of disability-related supports that would be eligible for funding should be developed in consultation with the provincial and territorial governments, disability groups and Aboriginal organizations.
A more competitive international marketplace, rapid technological change, the shift toward a knowledge-based economy and a host of other structural forces continue to shape the way Canadians work and the relationships they have with their employers. These structural changes have had a pronounced impact on the Canadian workplace, especially with regard to low-skilled, low-wage workers. According to Statistics Canada, the incidence of low-wage jobs (i.e., earning less than $10 per hour in 2001 dollars) remained fairly stable (around 16%) between 1981 and 2004, while the incidence of well-paid jobs ($30 or more per hour) increased from 8.5% to 11.4% during the same period.[281] Between 1981 and 2004, average real wages for workers aged 17 to 64 in low-wage jobs increased by 2.6%, compared with a 3.1% increase in other jobs. In terms of the former, average wage growth among women in low-wage jobs was about one-half of that among men. The opposite result occurred with respect to average wage growth in other jobs, as women’s average wages grew by more than two and one-half times those of men, a result that is no doubt due, in part, to the fact that the proportion of female workers with a university degree more than doubled between 1981 and 2003.[282] Low-wage work is prevalent among workers with low levels of education.[283]
Changes in the labour market over the past decade or two have had a significantly detrimental effect on many employees. Precarious forms of employment are increasing, with more temporary work, part-time contracts, and seasonal jobs. This means that fewer workers are able to obtain enough pay, enough hours, and enough benefits to allow families to make ends meet.[284]
Mrs. Susan Nasser
Nova Scotia Association of Social Workers
In the past, the “welfare wall” has been a key issue, meaning that many people who are trapped in welfare do not have the opportunities to get off social assistance. We would suggest that there is also a “low-wage wall” behind which hundreds of thousands of workers are trapped in poorly-paying jobs with few if any benefits. These kinds of jobs offer almost no opportunities for education, training or advancement and even act as barriers to those objectives. Many workers who occupy these jobs are working long and/or irregular hours and many are also working far below their level of education and training.[285]
National Council of Welfare
Although low-wage workers are vulnerable to living on a low income, relatively few experience low income as a permanent state.[286] Despite the fact that about 20% of Canada’s population experienced low income for at least one year between 1999 and 2004, only 2.2% lived on a low income every year during this period, roughly half the rate of persistent low income during period 1993 to 1998. Almost 50% of low-wage workers are their family’s major income earner. Single individuals and lone parents tend to exhibit the highest incidence of low income. The percentage of Canadians living on a low income after taxes fell to 10.8% in 2005, a rate substantially lower than the peak of 15.7% in 1996.[287]
Another symptom associated with the current structural changes in the Canadian workplace relates to growth in non-standard, temporary jobs, also known as “precarious work.” According to a recent report on federal labour standards under the Canada Labour Code, today roughly 32% of Canadian workers are employed in temporary, part-time or self-employed jobs, seven percentage points above that found at the end of the 1980s. Although not all of this employment is involuntary, it is thought that 75% of temporary workers, and 25% of part-time and self-employed workers would prefer full-time permanent work, as these jobs usually pay more, provide insurance and pension benefits and often entail less employment strain (e.g., employment uncertainty).[288]
Currently 13%, or close to 1.7 million workers, are working in temporary situations doing contract, seasonal, casual, or agency work. In 1989, one in ten new hires was a temporary worker. Right now the ratio is five to one in the number of workers who do not have full-time jobs. Two million Canadians work in poverty situations. They put in 40 hours a week but don't even reach the poverty line.[289]
Mr. Jorge Garcia-Orgales
United Steelworkers
In the context of federally regulated enterprises, it is estimated that about 26% of the workforce is employed in non-standard employment. Moreover, non-standard employment is concentrated in certain sectors such as road transportation, where 23% of workers are self-employed or contract workers hired directly by federally regulated employers, while another 6% are supplied by employment agencies. The incidence of temporary and contract work is also thought to be relatively high in small- and medium-size enterprises.[290]
Federal labour standards cover well below 10% of the Canadian workforce. Despite the relatively small number of workers covered under Part III of the Canada Labour Code, the federal government has a responsibility to ensure that labour standards governing federally regulated employers and their workers promote fair, healthy, stable, and productive workplaces — a truncated version of HRSDC’s strategic outcome for the Labour Program.[291] At the moment, the federal government is analysing the recommendations contained in the Final Report of the Federal Labour Standards Review and is consulting with stakeholders. Many changes have occurred in federally regulated workplaces since the introduction of Part III of the Canada Labour Code, and all members of the Committee encourage the Minister of Labour to move swiftly to update this legislation by proposing amendments that promote more productive federally regulated workplaces and provide workers with the best minimum employment standards possible.
In addition to the growing preponderance of precarious employment in the Canadian labour market, our testimony pertaining to employability among low-income workers encompassed several other issues, including the need to provide stronger work incentives (e.g., higher after-tax earnings) and better access to affordable housing and child care.
High marginal personal income tax rates imposed on individuals can create significant disincentives to work. In the case of individuals receiving social assistance, for example, increased income from earnings results in higher income taxes, lower social assistance payments, and a reduction in means-tested refundable tax credits and social services. As illustrated in Figure 1, a typical single parent with one child who increases his or her earnings from $0 to $10,000 would lose 78 cents of every dollar earned. This situation compares unfavourably to, for example, that of a single parent with one child who increases his or her earnings from $40,000 to $50,000. In this case, the single parent would lose 41 cents for every dollar earned, which is still a significant reduction but not as large as that faced by the single parent on social assistance. The high marginal tax rate for social assistance recipients is sometimes referred to as the “welfare wall.”
Figure 1 – Effective Marginal Tax Rates in Canada
Notes: “Net income tax” refers to taxes less benefits (including social assistance). Effective marginal tax rates represent the reduction in benefits, and increase in taxes, for each additional dollar earned. The chart is based on a weighted average of Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Quebec and Saskatchewan. Social assistance benefits levels and reduction rates vary significantly across provinces. No earnings exemptions have been applied.
Source: Department of Finance, The Economic and Fiscal Update, November 2005, p. 129 http://www.fin.gc.ca/ec2005/ec/ecce2005.pdf
The Committee was told that if Canada is to remain competitive, we must facilitate stronger labour market attachments among all Canadians. The National Council of Welfare reminded the Committee that by addressing the issue of employability for low-income Canadians we will also lower current and future economic costs to our social services, health care and justice system. Many groups called for measures to increase the economic resources of low-income individuals, to remove financial barriers to labour force participation and to reduce the impact that poverty has on the lives of Canadians.
There are different ways you can deal with the working poor, but it just seems fundamentally wrong to think about having a system where somebody can work full-time, a full year, and not meet the poverty level. That just does not make sense in a society that’s trying to be productive and competitive anywhere.[292]
Mrs. Sheila Regehr
National Council of Welfare
Many proposals were suggested by witnesses to help raise income levels among low-wage workers. These included a national antipoverty strategy, an employment tax credit, reduced tax rates and/or a higher basic personal tax exemption, an income-tested basic refundable tax credit, higher minimum wages, and reforms to Employment Insurance (e.g., to enhance the adequacy of benefits, extend coverage, etc.).
Two of these proposals — a higher federal minimum wage and an income-tested refundable tax credit — received the most attention. Responsibility for establishing federal minimum wage rates was delegated to provincial/territorial governments more than a decade ago. Effective December 1996, the applicable provincial/territorial adult minimum wage became the federal minimum wage for workers (including workers under 17 years of age) covered under Part III of the Canada Labour Code. Although most witnesses who supported an increase in the federal minimum wage thought that $10 per hour was sufficient to meet the needs of low-income workers, there was no consensus on the economic impact of increasing the federal minimum wage.[293] The Committee was told that a single federal minimum wage rate would not accommodate regional labour market conditions and, if set too high, could result in job losses.
With regard to an income-tested refundable tax credit, many witnesses supported a measure called the Working Income Tax Benefit (WITB), a policy proposal first raised in the November 2005 Economic and Fiscal Update and finally introduced in Budget 2007. This measure is intended to help people over the welfare wall and to strengthen the incentive to work among low-income workers already in the labour market by providing a supplement to help “make work pay.”
I recommend a fairly general policy, such as an income tax credit on employment. This would give workers a subsidy. For example, it could be approximately $3 or $4 per hour for all hours worked. This kind of policy, which is in place in the United States, has been fairly effective in reducing poverty. In Canada, the Department of Finance briefly touched upon a similar policy in a previous budget but it has not yet been developed. In short, I think that a tax credit on employment would be a beneficial policy.[294]
Dr. Andrew Sharpe
Centre for the Study of Living Standards
I think all of us would support tax credits for low-income earners. It's good for a lot of our small and mid-sized businesses and it's good for the community, so it would be difficult to speak against that position. I think all of us would agree.[295]
Ms. Diane Brisebois
Retail Council of Canada
Indeed, for many low- and modest-income families, the effective marginal tax rate, after factoring in income-tested benefits, is higher than 60% and higher than the rate facing Canada's top income earners. This is not only inequitable but it also sends a strong negative message about the merits of working, saving, and upgrading one's skills in the economy.[296]
Mr. Michael Murphy
Canadian Chamber of Commerce
As previously noted in this chapter of our report, the WITB is a refundable tax credit paid to low-income individuals whose earnings are above $3,000 ($1,750 in the case of workers eligible for the Disability Tax Credit). The maximum benefit for single workers is $500 (when earnings reach $5,500), $750 (when earnings reach $5,500) for workers who are eligible for the Disability Tax Credit, and $1,000 (when earnings reach $8,000) for single parents and couples. The WITB is reduced at a rate of 15% when earnings reach $9,500 (in the case of single individuals) and $14,500 (in the case of couples and single parents). It is estimated that this measure will strengthen the attachment to work of more than 1.2 million individuals already in the workplace as well as help to encourage roughly 60,000 individuals to begin working.[297]
The Committee supports this measure and considers it to be a good foundation on which to strengthen work incentives among low-income workers in the years ahead. We encourage the federal government to consult with provincial and territorial governments to ensure that the WITB is implemented in harmony with provincial and territorial social assistance and support programs.
Recommendation 3.27
The Committee recommends that the federal government expand the Working Income Tax Benefit to address the low-income wall by including more low-income workers, specifically by raising the maximum income amounts for single workers and single parents. The federal government should assess the Quebec and Saskatchewan models for ways to reduce the lag time between assessment of income and receipt of benefit.
Recommendation 3.28
The Committee recommends that the federal government consider requesting that provincial and territorial governments devote some portion of the Canada Social Transfer to finance comprehensive and effective labour market adjustment support to help social assistance recipients enter financially rewarding employment. Income support paid to social assistance recipients participating in these labour market adjustment programs should be treated as earnings for the purposes of the Working Income Tax Benefit.
Housing is undeniably an important employability support. The Committee was told that without acceptable housing, individuals are unable to focus on finding and maintaining employment.[298] Low-income households and the working poor are more likely to live in rented accommodation and to live in “core housing need” than other households.[299] According to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), in 2001 “45.6% of working-age renter households whose maintainers had weak ties to the labour force were in core housing need.”[300] Groups particularly at risk of falling into core housing need include Aboriginal households, recent immigrant households, people living alone and single-parent households.[301]
I'm glad we've been able to have this opportunity to speak about some of the underlying issues related to employability, such as affordable housing, and it's great that we've spoken so much about it. It's hard for us to believe here in Calgary that we would ever have an excess of affordable housing, but I can understand how that could happen in other communities. That's why a national housing initiative couldn't distance itself from the local community. Certainly, the federal government should not ever be working in isolation from the provincial governments and the local municipal government.[302]
Ms. Ramona Johnston
Vibrant Communities Calgary
It's really on the affordable housing side of things that we have a massive shortage. Unfortunately, we now have an economy where it's costing so much for government to put another unit out in the marketplace to satisfy need. It's a big problem. It's going to take years and years to try to build that stock.[303]
Mr. Ken McKinlay
Saskatchewan Home Builders' Association
Some witnesses suggested that the federal government should establish a national affordable housing strategy and increase the supply of affordable housing. In 2001, the federal government established the Affordable Housing Initiative, an investment commitment of some one billion dollars delivered through bilateral, cost-shared agreements with each province and territory. The second phase of the Initiative, announced in 2003, focuses on funding for housing targeted at low-income households in communities where there is a significant need for affordable housing. As of September 30, 2007, four-fifths of the federal allocation was committed, and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) continues to work with its provincial and territorial partners to take up the remaining funding to increase the supply of affordable housing.[304]
The Committee notes that in 2006, the federal government established the Off-reserve Aboriginal Housing Trust, the Northern Housing Trust and the Affordable Housing Trust, which combined entail a spending commitment of $1.4 billion to be notionally allocated over a three-year period on a per capita basis. In addition, the federal government recently announced $526 million (over two years) for a new Homelessness Partnering Strategy aimed at combating homelessness in communities across Canada and extending the renovation programs for low-income households delivered through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. [305]
Recommendation 3.29
The Committee recommends that the federal government maintain and extend affordable housing programs — in consultation with the provinces and territories and stakeholders — to increase the supply of affordable housing and thereby enhance the employability of low-income individuals, including Aboriginal people, recent immigrants and single-parent families, three groups whose core housing needs are relatively high.
C. Early Learning and Child Care
Virtually all of the growth in Canada’s aggregate labour force participation rate in the past decade is attributed to growth in labour force participation among women. The labour force participation rate among women 15 years of age and over increased from 57.8% in 1997 to 62.1% in 2006. By comparison, the rate among men increased from 72.2% to 72.5% during the same period.[306] In fact, Canada’s participation rate for women aged 15 to 64 has approached levels comparable to that found in most Nordic countries and, in 2005, was almost 13 percentage points above the average for all OECD countries.[307] One of the reasons underlying the upward trend in female labour force participation in Canada is thought to be the introduction of several child- and family-related policies (e.g., National Children’s Agenda, Early Childhood Development Agreement, extended EI parental benefits, and Multilateral Framework on Early Learning and Childcare, etc.) during this period.[308]
There is no doubt that access to affordable and high-quality early learning and child care in Canada contributes to increased labour force participation among low-income individuals, especially women. Several witnesses told the Committee that the high cost of child care is a major financial disincentive for low-income parents to strengthen their attachments to work, including participation in training and other labour market interventions. Early learning and child care also has implications for the development of children, Canada’s future workers.
Many witnesses supported the creation of a national publicly funded early learning and child care system that would respect the principles of quality, universality, accessibility and developmentally appropriate programming (the QUAD principles). Some witnesses also described a need for additional affordable and high-quality child care spaces, pointing out that waiting lists in some regions are an impediment to labour force participation.
We know child care services support the employability of parents, particularly women. Women are now the majority in virtually all university programs. Without adequate child care services, we will have decreased labour force attachment among mothers, and that will continue to contribute to skilled labour shortages. We acknowledge the new choice in child care allowances, and we recommend the development of a publicly funded child care system and the immediate action of the federal government on a commitment to create new child care spaces.[309]
Ms. MacFarlane
Sustained Poverty Reduction Initiative
We recommend that the government institute a quality early childhood care and learning system that is universally accessible and affordable. Good quality accessible child care is a support that is needed by many, including single mothers, to make employment a viable option. The government must give this much greater priority for it to become a reality. This would really go a long way to addressing some of the barriers that women in particular face in reentering the paid workforce.[310]
Mrs. Susan Nasser
Nova Scotia Association of Social Workers
Canada's productivity relies on working mothers with young children. They contribute $53 billion annually to Canada's GDP. That reliance is only increased due to widely predicted shortages in skilled labour, yet Canada and most provinces have not built a network of income supports and public services, such as quality affordable child care, to broadly facilitate women's economic and social contribution.[311]
Mrs. Jody Dallaire
New Brunswick Child Care Coalition
Recently, I was looking over Statistics Canada numbers, and surprisingly, Alberta has the lowest participation of women in the workforce. I said, no, no, no, they have it wrong. So I looked twice, and it's true. Apparently, Quebec has the highest participation of women in the labour force. The reason is very easy — it took me two pages to find it — the day care system. There are factors in the market that work differently than just a job offer. The day care system in Quebec — and I'm not going to say whether it's good or bad, it's just the way it is — encourages women to go back to work much sooner after they have children. Alberta doesn't have that, and a lot of women still tend to stay at home.[312]
Ms. Andreea Bourgeois, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island
Canadian Federation of Independent Business
Members of the Committee recognize that low-income Canadians are a diverse population that faces multiple barriers to full participation in Canadian society and the workplace. We believe that a range of policy instruments is needed to address these barriers, including assistance to facilitate greater access to affordable early learning and child care. In 2006, the federal government announced its intention to terminate the Early Learning and Child Care agreements with the provinces and replace these with a Universal Child Care Benefit and support for the creation of child care spaces in the workplace. In terms of the latter initiative, Budget 2007 announced that $250 million would be added to the Canada Social Transfer base beginning in 2008-2009 to help provinces and territories create child care spaces. In addition, a 25% investment tax credit will be available to businesses that create child care spaces in the workplace to a maximum of $10,000 per space created. Moreover, Budget 2007 announced that the federal — provincial/territorial arrangements regarding early learning and child care that were established in 2000 and 2003 would be extended to 2013-2014.[313]
Recommendation 3.30
The Committee recommends that the federal government ensure full funding for a national public early learning and child care system, including existing private child care centres, and pass legislation to enshrine principles of accessibility, quality and accountability in such a system, in consultation with provinces, territories and stakeholders.
WORKERS IN SEASONAL EMPLOYMENT
As illustrated in Chart 3.3, seasonal employment exists to varying degrees in all main industry groups in Canada. Although the incidence of seasonal employment for the labour market as whole is small, it has grown marginally from 2.8% of total employment in 1997 to 3.1% in 2006. Despite this modest growth, it is thought that the average monthly variation in employment accounted for by seasonality has declined over the years as a consequence of technological change and relative growth in demand for services and manufactured goods.[314]
As evidenced by the data shown above, workers in seasonal employment are key contributors to economic activity in many businesses, especially those operating in primary industries (e.g., agriculture, forestry, fishing, etc.); construction; and information, culture and recreation industries. Seasonal employment is most prevalent in agriculture, where almost one in four workers is employed in a seasonal job.
Although these data are not shown in Chart 3.3, of the 431,000 workers aged 15 and over who were employed in seasonal jobs in 2006, the largest proportion (16%) was employed in the construction industry, followed by the information, culture and recreation industry which accounted for 14.4% of total seasonal employment. Prince Edward Island had the highest proportion of seasonal workers (11.4% of total employees in 2006), followed by Newfoundland and Labrador (10.6%), New Brunswick (6%) and Nova Scotia (5.2%).
The Committee was told that seasonal workers are vital to many local and regional economies across the country, especially in Atlantic Canada. Moreover, seasonal employment is a reality of the Canadian labour market, and part of this reality is seasonal unemployment. Many factors can impede year-round employment among those engaged in seasonal work including limited employment opportunities; policy-induced work disincentives; immobility; limited education, training and job skills; and inadequate labour market information.[315]
Short of eliminating the fisheries industry in Atlantic Canada, there is no way to get around the problem of seasonal workers in the short run. It is not the fault of the workers that it is seasonal work.[316]
Ms. Shirley Seward
Canadian Labour and Business Centre
Most of the witnesses who raised the issue of seasonal employment did so in the context of EI. Some witnesses argued that EI is providing a subsidy to seasonal industries and workers. In this context, it was argued that the EI program was not designed to support individuals who make regular and frequent claims for benefits. Others felt that EI does not sufficiently recognize the importance of seasonal workers.[317]
Some witnesses suggested that measures should be implemented to encourage seasonally employed workers to obtain full-time, full-year employment. Those who opposed policies designed to attract workers away from seasonal activities and encourage them to accept non-seasonal, year-round jobs argued that this approach would exacerbate skills shortages in seasonal industries. We need to find a way to enhance the productive skills of workers in seasonal employment and lengthen their employment spells without creating labour market imbalances in seasonal sectors of the economy.
Enhancing labour mobility among seasonal workers and establishing labour-sharing arrangements to extend the duration of seasonal jobs was proposed as one way of lengthening employment spells among seasonally employed workers. We believe this approach has merit, provided workers are not forced to move.
Immobility in the seafood industry is particularly important, as the seasons for employment can be short. Broader food-processing seasons can be linked together to extend the period of seasonal employment. This would allow fish workers to engage in employment opportunities in other areas. A number of the skills are transferable, especially in the areas of quality control sets. There must be at least some incentive, however, to assist the workers to move to other locations. The Province of New Brunswick is working with fish processing employees to provide a measure of support to facilitate employment in other seasonal industries that complement the crab season, for example particularly in blueberry and potato processing.[318]
Ms. Johanna Oehling
National Seafood Sector Council
The Committee was told that because EI imparts disincentives to work, some employers, including seasonal ones, are unable to find enough workers to meet their needs. Others stated that seasonal employers face recruitment challenges and need to allocate resources to staff training at the beginning of every season. In the absence of EI, seasonal employers would face greater challenges retaining their seasonal workforces from season to season.
It has been a common occurrence for industry to communicate to us that local EI offices are suggesting to seasonal workers that they find employment in other industries that can offer year-round employment. This short-sighted action has exacerbated the labour shortage for industry and led to more industry frustration and discontent.[319]
Mr. Victor Santacruz
Canadian Nursery Landscape Association
At the Moncton office, where I often answer the telephone, I received a call from an employer who has a fish processing business in Shédiac. He asked me very honestly how he could help his employees obtain employment insurance benefits. I thought I had misunderstood; he repeated his question. He told me he worked from May to October and did not want to lose his qualified employees. He told me they were the best and if they went elsewhere to find a fulltime job, he would really be in trouble. He had no one to replace them. He asked me what he should do so his employees qualify for employment insurance. I gave him the information he asked me for and that was it. That happens often.[320]
Ms. Andreea Bourgeois, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island
Canadian Federation of Independent Business
Some witnesses argued that training should be offered to seasonally employed workers during periods of unemployment to enhance their skills and employability. These workers would then be in a better position to take advantage of other jobs that may be available at different times of the year, a situation that could help alleviate skills shortages experienced by seasonal employers. Another measure to alleviate short-term skills shortages in seasonal industries is to expand the use of temporary foreign workers, an issue that is discussed in greater detail in the next chapter of our report. Opponents of this approach maintained that labour market policies should focus on providing workers already in Canada with the necessary skills to ensure that an adequate supply of labour is available season after season.
There has been much discussion and debate recently on the topic of bringing in foreign workers to meet the shortages of the Canadian labour market; yet more efforts should be made to maximize and effectively utilize the Canadian labour pool.[321]
Ms. Johanna Oehling
National Seafood Sector Council
In recent years, the federal government has launched a number of EI pilot projects to test ways to reduce EI disincentives and other shortcomings facing claimants residing in areas of the country with high unemployment rates (i.e., 10% or more). For example, in 2005, three pilot projects were introduced to test the impact of: (1) averaging “the best 14 weeks” of earnings in the qualifying period to make EI benefits more reflective of the earnings of those with sporadic work patterns; (2) reducing the qualification requirement of new entrants and re-entrants from 910 hours to 840 hours of insurable employment; and (3) raising the earnings exemption to the greater of $75 or 40% of weekly benefits (from $50 or 25%) to strengthen attachments to work of those receiving benefits.[322]
In addition to these pilot projects, on December 3, 2007 the federal government announced a further extension (until June 6, 2009) of a pilot project that was introduced in June 2004 to address a problem commonly referred to as the “black hole,” a situation that arises when seasonally employed claimants are unable to obtain enough weeks of EI benefits to bridge the period between the end of one work season and the beginning of the next. This pilot project provides five additional weeks of benefits to claimants residing in high unemployment regions of the country. According to an evaluation of this pilot project, “large proportions of non-seasonal (65.5%) and seasonal (73.2%) claimants without a gap in their income stream have also been entitled to five additional weeks of benefits under the pilot project.”[323] Some witnesses regarded the intent of this pilot project as providing vital support for seasonal sectors of our economy; others were critical of the project’s design since, it also applies to non-seasonal workers. In addition, the increased benefit duration provided under this pilot project could have the unintended effect of restricting labour supply, a result contrary to the goal of addressing skills shortages and strengthening attachments to work.
As noted in Chapter 2, members of the Committee support and encourage the use of pilot projects to test, evaluate and identify ways of strengthening EI’s labour market support for both employers and employees. Furthermore, we make a number of recommendations to increase investments in human capital that could serve to benefit seasonally employed workers. Beyond this, we support the establishment of pilot projects that provide: (1) incentives for seasonally employed workers to prolong their seasonal jobs, where possible, through increased mobility; and (2) EI benefit top-up payments for seasonally unemployed workers who accept employment during the off season or enrol in training that provides the skills needed to increase employment opportunities during the off season.
We also believe that the federal government, in partnership with provincial and territorial governments, should do more to support community-directed economic development in localities that are highly dependent on seasonal industries.
Recommendation 3.31
The Committee recommends that Human Resources and Social Development Canada develop and implement an EI pilot project to test the effectiveness of providing mobility assistance to seasonally employed workers who extend the duration of their seasonal jobs by moving within a region. This pilot project would assess the effects on employability of providing, in addition to mobility support, a supplementary EI benefit once a claim is established. The value of the supplementary benefit would depend on the number of additional weeks of seasonal employment worked. Participation in the pilot project would be voluntary.
Recommendation 3.32
The Committee recommends that Human Resources and Social Development Canada develop and implement a pilot project that provides financial incentives to seasonal claimants who accept employment or enrol in training during the off season.
Recommendation 3.33
The Committee recommends that federal regional economic development agencies, in consultation with the provinces, territories and stakeholders involved in community economic development, establish initiatives that support community-driven economic development projects designed to create off-season or year-round employment opportunities in communities experiencing relatively high levels of unemployment.
[160] R. Morissette, G. Schellenberg and C. Silver, “Retaining older workers,” Perspectives on Labour and Income, Vol. 5. No. 10, Catalogue no. 75-001-XIE, Statistics Canada, October 2004, p.15.
[161] Evidence, Meeting No. 22, October 24, 2006 at 1:40 p.m.
[162] O. Parker, “Too Few People, Too Little Time: The Employer Challenge of an Aging Workforce,” Executive Action Report, Conference Board of Canada, July 2006, p. 1 http://www.conferenceboard.ca/documents_EA.asp?rnext=1732.
[163] Ibid.
[164] M. Gunderson, “Banning Mandatory Retirement: Throwing Out the Baby with the Bathwater,” Backgrounder, C.D. Howe Institute, No. 79, March 2004, p. 5 http://www.cdhowe.org/pdf/backgrounder_79.pdf.
[165] Evidence, Meeting No. 26, October 26, 2006 at 10:55 a.m.
[166] Evidence, Meeting No. 27, October 26, 2006 at 1:20 p.m.
[167] Evidence, Meeting No. 3, November 10, 2006 at 9:00 a.m.
[168] It should be noted that high-income seniors must repay some or all of their OAS benefits. These OAS recipients are subject to a 15% clawback on OAS benefits if their income exceeds a certain threshold ($63,511 in 2007). The number of seniors subject to this clawback is thought to be small, at less than 5% of individuals aged 65 and older (see: K Mulligan, “Making It Pay to Work: Improving the Work Incentives in Canada’s Public Pension System,” C.D. Howe Commentary, No. 218, October 2005, p. 4 http://www.cdhowe.org/pdf/commentary_218.pdf.
[169] See: Section 67(2)(c) of the Canada Pension Plan and section 54.3 of the Canada Pension Plan Regulations.
[170] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Ageing and Employment Policies: Canada, 2005, pp. 70-71.
[171] Office of the Chief Actuary, Canada Pension Plan Actuarial Adjustment Factors Study, March 2003, p. 38 http://www.osfi-bsif.gc.ca/app/DocRepository/1/eng/oca/studies/CPP_ActuarialStudy2_e.pdf.
[172] Evidence, Meeting No. 28, October 26, 2006 at 2:50 p.m.
[173] Evidence, Meeting No. 26, October 26, 2006 at 11:00 a.m.
[174] Retail Council of Canada, A Submission to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, September 6, 2006, p. 9.
[175] OECD and Statistics Canada, 2005, Table 2.7 B, p. 53.
[176] Canada Employment Insurance Commission, March 31, 2007, Chapter 3, pp. 19-37.
[177] Evidence, Meeting No. 15, October 5, 2006 at 11:35 a.m.
[178] According to Statistics Canada, the Aboriginal identity population includes individuals who identified themselves as North American Indian, Métis or Inuit (Eskimo), and/or who reported being Treaty Indians or Registered Indians as defined by the Indian Act of Canada and/or who were members of an Indian Band or First Nations. In 2001, 62% of Aboriginal people identified as North American Indian, 30% as Métis and 5% as Inuit.
[179] Statistics Canada, 2001 Census: analysis series, Aboriginal Peoples of Canada: A demographic profile, Catalogue no. 96F0030XIE2001007, January 2003 http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census01/Products/Analytic/companion/abor/pdf/96F0030XIE2001007.pdf.
[180] Evidence, Meeting No. 64, March 22, 2007 at 3:50 p.m.
[181] Statistics Canada, 2001 Census: analysis series, Education in Canada: Raising the standard, Catalogue no. 96F0030XIE2001012, 2003 http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census01/Products/Analytic/companion/educ/pdf/96F0030XIE2001012.pdf.
[182] Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation, Changing Course: Improving Aboriginal Access to Post-Secondary Education in Canada, Millennium Research Note #2.
[183] In response to these findings, the Foundation launched pilot projects, Making Education Work and LE,NONET, to better prepare Aboriginal students for post-secondary education and to help lower the costs of their studies. The effectiveness of these pilot projects will be carefully measured but final results are not expected until 2010. For more information on these pilots projects, see Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation, Pilot Projects http://www.millenniumscholarships.ca/en/research/Pilot.asp.
[184] Métis and Non- status First Nations students are not eligible to receive financial support offered through INAC’s post-secondary programming. They can apply to receive financial support under the Canada Student Loans Program and other funding sources that are available to all non-Aboriginal learners, as well as to Inuit and Registered First Nations people.
[185] Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Post-Secondary Education Programs http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ps/edu/ense_e.html.
[186] R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd., Aboriginal Peoples and Post-Secondary Education: What Educators Have Learned, prepared for the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation, January 2004, p. 19.
[187] Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Fact Sheet — Education http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/nr/prs/s-d2004/02539bbk_e.html.
[188] Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Corporate Services, Evaluation of the Post-Secondary Education Program, Project 01/29, prepared by the Departmental Audit and Evaluation Branch, June 2005 http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/pub/ae/ev/01-29/01-29_e.pdf.
[189] Sustained Poverty Reduction Initiative, Federal Policy Recommendations Regarding Employability in Canada, Brief to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, October 30, 2006, p. 4.
[190] House of Commons Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, No Higher Priority: Aboriginal Post-Secondary Education in Canada, February 2007, p. 29 /content/committee/391/aano/reports/rp2683969/aanorp02/aanorp02-e.pdf.
[191] For more information on the National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation, see its Web site at: http://www.naaf.ca/html/education_program_e.html.
[192] Statistics Canada, The Canadian Labour Market at a Glance 2005, Catalogue no. 71-222-XIE, June 2006, pp. 95-97 http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/71-222-XIE/71-222-XIE2006001.pdf.
[193] The unemployment rate of 19.1% among Aboriginal people represents, however, a significant decline from a rate of 24% registered in 1996. Ibid., p. 95 http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/71-222-XIE/71-222-XIE2006001.pdf.
[194] These findings are particularly relevant since 61% of Aboriginal people lived in Western Canada in 2001. A recent study published by Statistics Canada shows that Aboriginal people in Western Canada have improved their labour market performance since 2001, but substantial gaps remain between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal individuals. For more information on this study, see: Jacqueline Luffman and Deborah Sussman, “The Aboriginal labour force in Western Canada” in Perspectives on Labour and Income, Vol. 8, no. 1, Statistics Canada, Catalogue no. 75-001-XIE, January 2007, pp. 13 - 27 http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/75-001-XIE/10107/art-2.pdf. For more information on education and labour market trends facing Aboriginal people in Western Canada, see: Ben Brunnen, Working Towards Parity: Recommendations of the Aboriginal Human Capital Strategies Initiative, Building the New West Report #24, Canada West Foundation, February 2004; and Ben Brunnen, Achieving Potential: Towards Improved Labour Market Outcomes for Aboriginal People, Building the New West Project Report #19, Canada West Foundation, September 2003 http://www.cwf.ca/abcalcwf/doc.nsf/(Publications)/7A5543A67268D8C687256DB0007BA6F3/$file/Achieving%20Potential.pdf.
[195] For more information on the health status of Aboriginal people in Canada as well as an assessment of the current gaps in information on their health status, see: Health Council of Canada, The Health Status of Canada’s First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples, A background paper to accompany Health Care Renewal in Canada: Accelerating Change (January 2005), Toronto, 2005. For more information on Aboriginal housing, see: Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Canadian Housing Observer 2005, with a special feature on Aboriginal housing, 2005, pp. 39-43.
[196] Statistics
Canada, 2001 Census, Topic-based Tabulations http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census01/products/standard/themes/
RetrieveProductTable.cfm?Temporal=2001&PID=73634&APATH=3&GID=355313&METH=1
&PTYPE=55496&THEME=45&FOCUS=0&AID=0&PLACENAME=0&PROVINCE=0&SEARCH=0
&GC=0&GK=0&VID=
0&VNAMEE=&VNAMEF=&FL=0&RL=0&FREE=0.
[197] Statistics Canada, 2001 Census: analysis series, Aboriginal peoples of Canada:A demographic profile, Catalogue no. 96F0030XIE2001007, January 2003, p. 11 http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census01/Products/Analytic/companion/abor/pdf/96F0030XIE2001007.pdf.
[198] Evidence, Meeting No. 64, March 22, 2007 at 3:50 p.m.
[199] Ibid. at 4:50 p.m.
[200] Evidence, Meeting No. 13, September 28, 2006 at 11:15 a.m.
[201] Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, Sharing Canada’s Prosperity — A Hand Up, Not a Handout, Final Report, Special Study on the involvement of Aboriginal communities and businesses in economic development activities in Canada, March 2007 http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/com-e/abor-e/rep-e/rep06-e.pdf.
[202] Evidence, Meeting No. 7, June 13, 2006 at 9:25 a.m.
[203] Evidence, Meeting No. 37, November 10, 2006 at 8:55 a.m.
[204] Evidence, Meeting No. 38, November 10, 2006 at 11:20 a.m.
[205] For more information on the Aboriginal Human Resources Development Strategy, see: http://srv119.services.gc.ca/AHRDSInternet/general/public/thestrategy/thestrategy_e.asp.
[206] Canada Employment Insurance Commission, March 31, 2006, p. 27 http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/ei/reports/eimar_2005.pdf.
[207] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, 2006-2007 Departmental Performance Report, 2007, p. 58 http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2006-2007/inst/csd/csd-eng.pdf.
[208] Funding for child care is provided through the First Nations and Inuit Child Care Initiative. This initiative was created in 1995 and is currently being administered under the AHRDS. Child care services are delivered through 56 regional First Nations and Inuit organizations that have signed Human Resources Development Agreements. The current ongoing budget for this initiative is $50.1 million, “of which 87 per cent is allocated to First Nations communities while the remaining 13 per cent goes to Inuit communities.” See Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Fact Sheet — The First Nations and Inuit Child Care Initiative http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ps/ecde/fni_e.html.
[209] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, 2007, p. 53 http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2006-2007/inst/csd/csd-eng.pdf.
[210] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Aboriginal Labour Market Development, Presentation to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, March 22, 2007, p. 10.
[211] Service Canada, Aboriginal Human Resources Development Strategy (AHRDS) Sector Council http://srv119.services.gc.ca/AHRDSInternet/general/public/SectorCouncil/SectorCouncil_e.asp.
[212] Service Canada, Aboriginals Skills and Employment Partnership Program (ASEP) http://srv119.services.gc.ca/AHRDSInternet/general/public/asep/asep_e.asp.
[213] Service Canada, Aboriginals Skills and Employment Partnership Program (ASEP), Fact Sheet http://srv119.services.gc.ca/AHRDSInternet/general/public/asep/FAQ_e.asp.
[214] Evidence, Meeting No. 64, March 22, 2007 at 3:40 p.m.
[215] Evidence, Meeting No. 62, March 20, 2007 at 4:55 p.m.
[216] For more information, see Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, What is the Aboriginal Workforce Participation Initiative? http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ai/awpi/ini_e.html.
[217] Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Canadian Polar Commission and Indian Specific Claims Commission, Performance Report for the period ending March 31, 2007, 2007, p. 33 http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2006-2007/inst/ian/ian-eng.pdf.
[218] Ibid., p. 25.
[219] Human
Resources and Social Development Canada, Summary Report for the Engagement
Sessions for a Racism-Free Workplace, by John Samuel and Associates Inc.
for Labour Program, March 2006
http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/lp/lo/lswe/we/special_projects/RacismFreeInitiative/consultation-2005/Summary-Report-2005.pdf.
[220] Evidence, Meeting No. 17, October 19, 2006 at 11:15 a.m.
[221] Statistics Canada, Participation and Activity Limitation Survey 2006: Analytical Report, Catalogue no. 89-628-XIE, December 2007, p. 9, http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/89-628-XIE/89-628-XIE2007002.pdf.
[222] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Advancing the inclusion of People with Disabilities 2006, Chapter 3, 2006, p. 55 http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/hip/odi/documents/advancingInclusion06/messagefromtheminister.shtml.
[223] Statistics Canada, Education, employment and income of adults with and without disabilities — Tables, Participation and Activity Limitation Survey, 2001, Catalogue no. 89-587-XIE, September 2003 http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/89-587-XIE/pdf/89-587-XIE03001.pdf.
[224] Ibid.
[225] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Advancing the Inclusion of People with Disabilities, Chapter 3, 2006, p. 43.
[226] Evidence, Meeting No. 65, March 27, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.
[227] Statistics Canada, Employability Issues, For the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, Ottawa, June 13, 2006, p. 13.
[228] Evidence, Meeting No. 23, October 25, 2006 at 8:55 a.m.
[229] Evidence, Meeting No. 30, October 27, 2006 at 11:20 a.m.
[230] Evidence, Meeting No. 65, March 27, 2007 at 9:45 a.m.
[231] Statistics Canada, Participation and Activity Limitation Survey, 2001, Disability Supports in Canada, 2001, Catalogue no. 89-580-XIE, p. 6 http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/89-580-XIE/89-580-XIE03001.pdf.
[232] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Diagnostique: People with Disabilities and the Labour Market, Presentation to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, September 26, 2006, p. 4.
[233] Ibid. p. 6.
[234] Department of Finance, March 19, 2007, pp. 80-81.
[235] Evidence, Meeting No. 19, October 23, 2006 at 9:55 a.m.
[236] Evidence, Meeting No. 30, October 27, 2006 at 11:50 a.m.
[237] Evidence, Meeting No. 12, September 26, 2006 at 11:40 a.m.
[238] Canadian Council on Rehabilitation and Work, A brief on Increasing the Employment of Persons with Disabilities, Submitted to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, September 6, 2006.
[239] Nova Scotia Advisory Council on the Status of Women, Employability of Women with Disabilities: Breaching the Disability Wall, A Brief to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, Consultations on Employability in Canada, September 2006, p. 3.
[240] Evidence, Meeting No. 35, November 9, 2006 at 8:35 a.m.
[241] Evidence, Meeting No. 29, October 27, 2006 at 8:45 a.m.
[242] Evidence, Meeting No. 63, March 21, 2007 at 3:50 p.m.
[243] Evidence, Meeting No. 19, October 23, 2006 at 9:50 a.m.
[244] Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians, Canadians with Disabilities Need a New Labour Market Strategy, Notes and recommendations to be presented to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, October 27, 2006, p. 2.
[245] Evidence, Meeting No. 29, October 27, 2006 at 9:50 a.m.
[246] Evidence, Meeting No. 30, October 27, 2006 at 10:20 a.m.
[247] For more information on the Opportunities Fund, see: http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/disability_issues/funding_programs/opportunities_fund/index.shtml.
[248] Human Resources and Development Canada, Summative Evaluation of the Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities, Evaluation and Data Development, Strategic Policy, HRDC, August 2001 http://www.sdc.gc.ca/asp/ gateway.asp?hr=/en/cs/sp/edd/reports/2001-000459/page02.shtml&hs=pyp.
[249] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Advancing the inclusion of People with Disabilities, Chapter 3, 2006, p. 51.
[250] Evidence, Meeting No. 20, October 24, 2006 at 8:55 a.m.
[251] Neil Squire Society, Executive Summary, A brief prepared by the Neil Squire Society for the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities Consultations on Employment in Canada, August 31, 2006, p. 2.
[252] The province of Quebec did not endorse the framework but has signed a distinct bilateral agreement with the federal government. The territories support the principles of the framework but have not signed bilateral agreements due to issues with the Territorial Financing Formula. For more information on the Multilateral Framework for Labour Market Agreements for Persons with Disabilities, see: http://socialunion.gc.ca/pwd/multi2003_e.html.
[253] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Advancing the inclusion of People with Disabilities, Chapter 3, 2006, pp. 49-50.
[254] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, The Government of Canada helps people with disabilities to fully participate in the workplace, News Release, November 22, 2007, http://nouvelles.gc.ca/web/view/en/index.jsp?articleid=363029&.
[255] Evidence, Meeting No. 19, October 23, 2006 at 9:50 a.m.
[256] For more information on Employment Benefits and Support Measures, see: http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/epb/sid/cia/grants/ebsm/terms_conditions.shtml.
[257] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, 2006-2007Departmental Performance Report, p. 26 http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2006-2007/inst/csd/csd-eng.pdf
[258] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Employment Insurance 2005 Monitoring and Assessment Report, submitted to the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development Canada by the Canada Employment Insurance Commission, March 31, 2006, p. 89 http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/ei/reports/eimar_2005.pdf.
[259] Evidence, Meeting No. 27, October 26, 2006 at 1:15 p.m.
[260] Canadian Paraplegic Association, Executive Summary, Brief submitted to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, 2006, p. 3.
[261] For more information on the Disability Vocational Rehabilitation Program, see: http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/asp/gateway.asp?hr=/en/isp/pub/factsheets/vocrehab.shtml&hs=.
[262] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, CPP Disability Overview, submitted to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, September 26, 2006.
[263] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Social Development Partnerships Program – Terms and Conditions http://www.sdc.gc.ca/asp/gateway.asp?hr=/en/hip/sd/04_SDPP_TCs.shtml&hs=pyp#1.
[264] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Federal Government Employment Related Programs for People with Disabilities, Presentation to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, September 26, 2006, p. 9.
[265] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Advancing the inclusion of People with Disabilities, Chapter 3, 2006, p. 55.
[266] For more information on these grants, see the CanLearn Web site at http://www.canlearn.ca/en/shared/pay/apply/ON/ft/public/apply_grant/disabilities.shtml.
[267] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Canada Student Loans Program — Annual Report 2004-2005, 2007, pp. 23-24, http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/learning/canada_student_loan/publications/CSLP-AR-0405E.pdf.
[268] Evidence, Meeting No. 12, September 26, 2006 at 11:55 a.m.
[269] Western Economic Diversification Canada, Business Financing for Western Canada — Entrepreneurs with Disabilities Programs http://www.wd.gc.ca/finance/programs/edp_e.asp.
[270] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Advancing the inclusion of People with Disabilities, Chapter 3, 2006, p. 54.
[271] Separate employers are listed in Schedule I Part II of the Public Service Staff Relations Act.
[272] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Advancing the inclusion of People with Disabilities, Chapter 3, 2006, p. 61.
[273] Ibid.
[274] Canadian Human Rights Commission, Annual Report 2006, 2007, pp. 11-15 http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/pdf/AR_2006_RA_en.pdf.
[275] Ibid., p. 11.
[276] Evidence, Meeting No. 12, September 26, 2006 at 11:35 a.m.
[277] Evidence, Meeting No. 30, October 27, 2006 at 11:15 a.m.
[278] Evidence, Meeting No. 65, March 27, 2007 at 10:20 a.m.
[279] Ibid. at 11:25 a.m.
[280] For information on tax measures for persons with disabilities, see: Canada Revenue Agency, What can people with disabilities claim as a deduction or credit?http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tax/individuals/segments/disabilities/deductions/menu-e.html.
[281] R. Morissette and G. Picot, Low-paid Work and Economically Vulnerable Families over the Last Two Decades, Statistics Canada, April 2005, pp. 8-9 http://www.statcan.ca/english/research/11F0019MIE/11F0019MIE2005248.pdf.
[282] Ibid., p.5 and Table 6, p. 29.
[283] Statistics Canada, Low Wage and Low Income, Income Research Paper Series, Catalogue no. 75F002MIE — No. 006, April 2006, p. 9 http://www.statcan.ca/english/research/75F0002MIE/75F0002MIE2006006.pdf.
[284] Evidence, Meeting No. 20, October 24, 2006 at 8:45 a.m.
[285] National Council of Welfare, Brief to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities concerning Employability in Canada, September 28, 2006, p. 5.
[286] It is important to differentiate between low-wage and low-income workers. Although low-wage workers refer to workers with low hourly rates of pay, it does not necessarily follow that all of these workers live on low incomes, since income from other family members must be considered. Low-income workers are those whose family income is below Statistics Canada’s after-tax low income cutoff. Statistics Canada low-income cutoff is a statistical measure that identifies the income threshold below which a household will spend, on average, at least 20 percentage points more of its income than the average family on food, clothing, and shelter (given family and community size).
[287] Statistics Canada, Income in Canada, 2005, May 2007, p. 86 http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/75-202-XIE/75-202-XIE2005000.pdf.
[288] H. Arthurs, Commissioner, Fairness at Work: Federal Labour Standards for the 21st Century, Final Report of the Federal Labour Standards Review, 2006, p. 27 http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/labour/employment_standards/arthur_report/pdf/final_report.pdf.
[289] Evidence, Meeting No. 63, March 21, 2007 at 4:00 p.m.
[290] H. Arthurs, 2006, p. 231.
[291] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, 2007-2008 Estimates: Report on Plans and Priorities, 2007, pp. 58 to 62 http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rpp/0708/hrsdc-rhdsc/hrsdc-rhdsc-PR_e.asp?printable=True.
[292] Evidence, Meeting No. 13, September 28, 2006 at 12:10 p.m.
[293] The issue of a federal minimum wage was also discussed in the recent report on the review of federal labour standards. See: Federal Labour Standards Review, Fairness at Work: Federal Labour Standards for the 21st Century, 2006, pp. 245 to 249 http://www.fls-ntf.gc.ca/doc/fin-rpt-e.pdf.
[294] Evidence, Meeting No. 13, September 28, 2006 at 12:30 p.m.
[295] Evidence, Meeting No. 36, November 9, 2006 at 10:55 a.m.
[296] Evidence, Meeting No. 9, June 20, 2006 at 9:45 a.m.
[297] Department of Finance, March 19, 2007, pp. 78 to 82 http://www.budget.gc.ca/2007/pdf/bp2007e.pdf.
[298] The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation defines acceptable housing as housing that is in adequate condition, of a suitable size for the household and affordable.
[299] Households in core housing need do not have acceptable housing.
[300] John Engeland and Roger Lewis, “Exclusion from Acceptable Housing — Canadians in Core Housing Need” in Horizons, Volume 7, Number 2, Policy Research Initiative, December 2004, p. 27 http://policyresearch.gc.ca/page.asp?pagenm=v7n2_art_05.
[301] Ibid.
[302] Evidence, Meeting No. 35, November 9, 2006 at 9:55 a.m.
[303] Evidence, Meeting No. 38, November 10, 2006 at 11:00 a.m.
[304] Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Affordable Housing Initiative, http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/fias/fias_005.cfm.
[305] Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Canada’s New Government Commits $526 Million to Combat Homelessness and Extend Funding to Renovation Programs, Press Release, Ottawa, December 19, 2006 http://news.gc.ca/cfmx/view/en/index.jsp?articleid=263819.
[306] Statistics Canada, Labour Force Historical Review 2006, 71F00004XCB, 2007 CD1, Main Tables.
[307] OECD, OECD Employment Outlook: Boosting Jobs and Incomes, 2006, Statistical Annex, Table B, p. 250.
[308] E. Tsounta, Why are Women Working So Much More in Canada? An International Perspective, IMF Working Paper, WP/06/92, April 2006, pp. 11-12 http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2006/wp0692.pdf.
[309] Evidence, Meeting No. 36, November 9, 2006 at 10:45 a.m.
[310] Evidence, Meeting No. 20, October 24, 2006 at 8:45 a.m.
[311] Evidence, Meeting No. 21, October 24, 2006 at 10:45 a.m.
[312] Evidence, Meeting No. 22, October 24, 2006 at 2:10 p.m.
[313] Department of Finance, March 19, 2007, pp. 124-125 http://www.budget.gc.ca/2007/pdf/bp2007e.pdf.
[314] S. de Raaf. C. Kapsalis and C. Vincent, “Seasonal Work and Employment Insurance Use, ”Perspectives on Labour and Income, Statistics Canada, September 2003, Vol. 4, No. 9, p. 5 http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/75-001-XIE/0090375-001-XIE.pdf.
[315] According to a recent research report prepared for Human Resources and Social Development Canada, there are basically four ways to address seasonal unemployment: 1) encourage unemployed people to move to regions with better employment opportunities; 2) accept seasonal unemployment and provide permanent income support for the unemployed in the off-season; 3) extend the season for part-year jobs to as close to a full-year as possible; and 4) create either full-year jobs or part-year jobs in the off-season through an economic development strategy. See: A. Sharpe and J. Smith, Labour Market Seasonality in Canada: Trends and Policy Implications, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, Research Report Number 2005-01, February 2005, p. 15 — http://www.csls.ca/reports/csls2005-01.pdf.
[316] Evidence, Meeting No. 9, June 20, 2006 at 10:10 a.m.
[317] According to the most recent data available, seasonal claims represented 30.4% of all regular claims made in Canada in 2005-2006. There were significant regional differences in the incidence of seasonal claims, ranging from a low of 11.8% in Nunavut to a high of 54.6% in Prince Edward Island (Canada Employment Insurance Commission, 2006 Employment Insurance Monitoring and Assessment Report, submitted to the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development Canada, March 31, 2007, p. 14, http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/ei/reports/eimar_2006.pdf .
[318] Evidence, Meeting No. 15, October 5, 2006 at 11:30 a.m.
[319] Evidence, Meeting No. 25, October 26, 2006 at 8:40 a.m.
[320] Evidence, Meeting No. 22, October 24, 2006 at 2:15 p.m.
[321] Evidence, Meeting No. 15, October 5, 2006 at 11:30 a.m.
[322] Canada Employment Insurance Commission, March 31, 2007, p. 63 http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/ei/reports/eimar_2006.pdf.
[323] Canada Employment Insurance Commission, 2005 Employment Insurance Monitoring and Assessment Report, submitted to the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development on March 31, 2006, p. 83, http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/ei/reports/eimar_2005.pdf.