|
|
     |
||
 |
     |
 |
|
This section focuses on the themes followed throughout the evaluation and summarizes the general findings based on the information reported in the previous nine sections. As well, this section of the report draws together overall implications for Part III of the Code, using information and ideas suggested from various sources in the previous sections. The thematic approach that has been followed generally is widened somewhat here to take into consideration several of the broader concerns of the evaluation study. The wide-ranging approach followed in this assessment has generated a number of useful analyses and ideas for the Code. A lot has been learned about the CWW, its challenges for governments, and the interface with labour standards and the Code. 10.1 Issues Related to Balancing Work and FamilyIn some ways the issue of balancing work and family is at the heart of the CWW issues and the challenges created for the Code. The literature review and our stakeholder interviews provided a fairly clear picture of change in Canada's labour market and the resulting challenges. Changes in practices and priorities are going on virtually everywhere. The CWW and related NSW changes have made it more difficult for both workers and employers in many areas. However, the social strains on family and personal life seem paramount. In particular, the trend towards NSW has been accompanied by an apparent increase in the level of job insecurity, income insecurity, and stress. The extent of willingness of employers to shift toward more flexible hours for employees helps to alleviate some of these problems and concerns, but the incidence of flexible hours — which meet worker needs, as well as those of employers — is still relatively small. Moreover, for workers, flexible hours have not necessarily improved their ability to manage home and work relationships. Far too often, the evaluation data suggest that flexibility for the employer does not necessarily mean flexibility for the worker. There is also little question that the incidence of long hours of work is increasing in Canadian workplaces. This phenomenon is particularly noticeable in the industries covered under the federal jurisdiction. It is clear that workers, as well as many employers, are concerned about the effect of long hours of work on families and that workers desire more flexibility in dealing with work hours. In particular, workers seem attracted to the notion of time off in lieu of overtime pay, a practice which many firms appear to support. The evaluation also suggests that federally regulated workers may have greater difficulty than their provincially regulated counterparts in managing the balance between home and work. Part of the explanation is that federally regulated workers work longer hours and are more likely to work irregular or unusual hours than other workers (e.g., travel away from home) due to industry requirements. In addition, workers under the federal jurisdiction seem to have less control than other workers in setting their own work schedules and appear to have a higher incidence of on-call, irregular hours of work. Family life appears to be closely linked with quality of work and productivity. Thus, from the perspective of work productivity, many workers believe that long hours of work not only impact on family life but also affect their productivity on the job. A high proportion of workers also see their work arrangements as a hindrance to fulfilling family responsibilities. Workers also see their working-time arrangements as limiting their access to leisure time and their ability to participate in the broader community. For example, within the federal jurisdiction, 31 percent of federal-sector workers reported overall work demands (long hours) as the most common obstacle to the quality of family life; 19 percent of the workers surveyed observed that their job schedules were incompatible with family needs; and a significant number of workers indicated that their jobs did not provide sufficient time to address the needs of sick children and parents. Employers accepted that employee work interferes with the family and personal lives of their workers. Overall, a substantial minority of federal-sector employers (41 percent) reported that they were aware of situations where work was in conflict with family life. Not surprisingly, employers were more concerned about negative impacts on work. Many employers have relevant family-support policies (time off for emergencies, etc.), but only an extremely low percentage of the employers (3.5 percent) have undertaken an assessment of the impact of work on the family lives of their workers. For that matter, the issue of how workers' family needs affect employers is virtually unexplored in our data. Employers perceive many conflicts, but the extent of negative impacts is not known. A recent United States study has articulated these effects, however, and could be a model for further Canadian research.35 Federally regulated employers and workers were found by the evaluation to be interested in considering time off in lieu of overtime and/or more flextime and job sharing. Indeed, time off in lieu of overtime was endorsed as a desirable workplace change by majorities of both workers (61 percent) and employers (58 percent) surveyed. This strong support for the time off alternative put it front and centre in our examination of workplace practices which could ease the chronic overtime problem (alternative approaches such as providing workers the right to refuse overtime, previously identified as a policy alternative by HRDC's Advisory Group on Working Time and the Distribution of Work (1994)) were also strongly supported by workers, but less so (supported by 44 percent of workers) and endorsed by only 24 percent of employers as a desirable workplace change. The convergence of worker and employer views on the "time off in lieu" strategy suggests some new possibilities of improving the Code. These findings indicate that positively improving the quality of the workforce may both improve the quality of family life and the productivity of businesses. This suggests that policies aiding these directions may be of benefit to Canada and thus a useful area for developing future labour standards. 10.2 Issues Related to Worker Security/InsecurityThere is little doubt that many Canadian workers today feel quite insecure in their working arrangements. This direction was not only verified through our surveys but also appeared as a consistent theme in stakeholder interviews and in the literature. Worker insecurity centres around a number of economic issues — job insecurity, the erosion of real earnings, the new modes of work, and the increased sense of insecurity associated with constant change and the need to adapt. Considerable insecurity also surrounds the issue of worker benefits. As well, NSW and self-employment continue to grow faster than traditional, full-time jobs. There is a sense emerging that with employers unwilling or unable to provide for non-traditional employed workers, governments could become more heavily involved in this area. As such, there is a possible interface with labour standards in providing a mechanism for new arrangements and providing for a new set of minimum standards regarding benefits. The evaluation survey data (Section 5.3.2) suggests that, on balance, federally regulated workers seem to earn superior wages and benefits, compared to provincially regulated employees, and thus that security levels may be relatively high.36 Federally regulated workers have a greater orientation to white-collar salary jobs than the provincially regulated sample group. Federally regulated workers also have a higher proportion of management and professionals in their workforces. This pattern was also evidenced with second jobs. In our interviews, representatives of several large employers we spoke to expressed concerns about harassment but emphasized the existing protections which fall under human rights legislation. There was general recognition among large employers that sexual/racial/ethnic harassment problems might be minimized by better training of managers. One large employer (a major bank) saw a need for "the respectful workplace" and developed a half-day "Respect in the Workplace" program for all its workers/managers. 10.3 Issues Related to Training and Life-Long LearningWorkers clearly desire to upgrade and train themselves for the new challenges in the workplace. Workers believe that governments and employers should do much more in terms of improving access to the necessary financing for educational upgrading. In general, workers indicated that their working-time arrangements were a hindrance to education and training. According to our surveys, the hindrance factor is much greater for federally regulated workers. The evaluation data suggest that the longer hours of work and the greater propensity for irregular hours of work among federally regulated firms provide some explanation. These same kinds of differences show up in terms of individuals' assessment of their own job productivity, learning opportunities on the job, personal fulfillment, and participation in decision-making — all of which are characteristics of a high-productivity workplace. However, federally regulated workers appear to receive slightly more employer-sourced training than their provincial counterparts. Federally regulated employers also seem more willing to accommodate training for their employees, particularly through paid tuition. One of the unresolved issues relates to the general access to training being often confined to management and professional staff. This emerges as an important policy dilemma for the public at large, since everyone accepts that lesser skilled workers are going to find it harder to adapt to the new world of work. Most telling in this regard was our observation from a Statistics Canada international report that Canada had the highest incidence of workers (33 percent) who wanted more training for career- or job-related reasons (see Constantine Kapsalis, "An International Comparison of Worker Training," in Perspectives, Spring, 1998). This points to a need for more research on the distribution of training — an issue that could potentially be affected by labour standards. Unions see a kind of supply-side justification for public and private investment in training and upgrading of the workforce. Unions also see this as generating stronger economic growth and higher wages and salaries over time. These types of needs are consistent with the view that the incentive structure associated with vigorous competition and labour mobility result in an under-investing in education and training by Canadian firms. While coming at this issue from different perspectives, the information for the evaluation gathered suggests that firms, employees, and the self-employed all see a need for investment in job training — with requirements for public investment, but also a role for all of the potential beneficiaries. These needs could be facilitated by more supportive labour standards. 10.4 Issues Related to the CWW, Federal and Provincial Jurisdictions, and Quality of WorkThe evolution of NSW in both the federal and provincial jurisdictions has parallel and unique features, as is very evident from our survey data. The data suggest that federally regulated employers are more likely to use certain types of irregular, non-standard work situations than are their provincial counterparts. This finding is consistent with the worker responses. However, the surveys suggest that federally regulated employers are less inclined to rely on workers who work from home than their provincially regulated counterparts. As well, federally regulated employers appear less satisfied with workers working from home than their provincial counterparts. Federally regulated employers are willing to consider time off in lieu of overtime, as well as more flextime and job-sharing arrangements. Time off in lieu of overtime was a popular option for workers as well. Employees working in the federally regulated sectors are slightly more likely to have a second job than their provincially regulated counterparts, while the incidence of workers having three or more jobs is very low in the federally regulated sector. However, provincially regulated employees are more likely to work part time (20.5 percent provincial versus 8.2 percent federal), while federally regulated employees are more likely to be self-employed with one main client. Recent changes in employment have significantly increased the incidence of non-standard workers in the federally regulated sector, particularly in comparison with their provincially regulated counterparts. For example, according to the worker surveys, the incidence of unusual hours of work is generally higher for federally regulated workers. Federally regulated employers indicated that the average number of hours worked had increased for all kinds of non-standard workers. As well, a large number of employers report increases in the number of workers working at home. Earlier, this report, described a number of features of a high-performance workplace which generated real gains for both worker and employer stakeholders. The essential ingredients included a flexible approach to work rules and job descriptions, high levels of worker involvement in the operation of the organization, employers' willingness to train and upgrade their workers' skills, family-friendly policies, and a work environment designed to improve health and reduce stress. Clearly, when a substantial portion of employees report unpaid overtime, this cannot be regarded as a happy-workplace situation. In this respect, the incidence of unpaid overtime is higher for provincially regulated employees (34.5 percent of employees), compared to their federally regulated counterparts (28.8 percent). In addition, worker satisfaction with training opportunities is not consistent with the trend towards creating a high-performance work environment in Canada. Note that 48.7 percent of federally regulated workers in the survey reported excellent employer supports for learning, in contrast to the provincial-counterpart figure of only 27.5 percent. A significant proportion of employees surveyed (over half) suggest that their main job is a hindrance to learning and education, and in the federally regulated sector, fatigue and long hours of work are cited as a hindrance to training and education. 10.5 Issues of Relevance and Enhancing the CodeWith respect to views on what government should do to improve workplace practices, it is interesting to observe that both employers and workers favour a wide range of changes in workplaces. Worker Views Regarding Government Priorities: In the federal jurisdiction, when asked what was most important for government to require of employers, workers identified the most needed interventions by government to be in areas such as job security, in paid educational leaves, in ensuring more assistance for child care, in improving health and safety in the workplace, and in providing paid leave for family emergencies. Employers' Priorities for Government: Overall federal sector employers were more likely to reject any government role (a substantial minority, about 25 percent, favoured no government intervention). However, employer views of what government should do (what the other 75 percent prioritized) were generally similar to (but generally not as strong as) priorities for workers. Priorities for government as seen by these employers included skills training, child care, health and safety, allowing right to time off in lieu of overtime pay37; and other provisions. Overall, the key concern of improved flexibility generally. Role of Unions: In terms of the literature and our interviews, there were a number of general or principal issues which emerged, as well as a number of specific suggestions. This report notes that unions have been a key instrument in labour standards compliance and enforcement, but unions have been declining in their coverage of the labour force.38In other words, governments cannot rely on unions in the future to the same extent as they have in the past to ensure enforcement and compliance with standards. Productivity: The evaluation surveys, the literature review, and stakeholder interviews all suggest a relationship between enlightened human-resource policies and improved worker morale and productivity. But family-friendly human-resource policies (such as flexible schedules, working at home, job-sharing, the provision of family-care benefits) are rare in many workplaces. Chronic overtime as examined in the evaluation surveys, is a pervasive problem in Canadian workplaces and particularly in federally regulated workplaces. This is reflected in all sectors, but particularly in sectors such as trucking and communications. The trend towards longer hours is consistent with the trend towards part-time work and self-employment. Employers feel that they need the working-time flexibility to compete effectively and to lower costs. A number of reports, as well as the evaluation's survey, confirm that the phenomenon of long hours of work has become a major social problem for workers and their families. Unique Approaches: The Collective Reflection report suggested that labour standards policies and other labour-market policies do not have to be the same for all sectors. However, the Collective Reflection report did stress that labour standards should deliver the same set of basic rights to all workers, including those in contingent and precarious employment. For these workers, who may be most at risk, enforcement emerges as an important priority. The raison d'être of the Code is to ensure that minimum labour standards are available to all workers. But the CWW, together with the expansion of NSW, means that the Code is diminishing in its capacity to ensure that these minimum standards are being met. This problem exists not only for the Code but also for labour standards in provincial jurisdictions. To many, including stakeholders who were interviewed, this implies that addressing the non-standard work issue, particularly with regard to dependent contractors, is essential for the Code to be effective. This, in turn, implies that compliance and enforcement need to be pursued more vigorously than is presently the case. This also points to the potential value of providing new resources to those involved in the implementation and enforcement of the Code. Strategic Implications: Considering this wide range of findings, some possible strategies are suggested for Part III by the evaluation, including the following: Partnership Models: 1. A stronger partnership model: The evaluation findings suggest that partnerships could be a key strategy for improving compliance and enforcement with the Code. On a sectoral basis, the Code could be pragmatically and voluntarily enforced using more partnering arrangements. One possibility suggested by these results might be to have HRDC work more closely with particular industry associations in Canada as a means of dealing with CWW and NSW issues. Another possibility suggested by these results might be to broaden the partnership model to include unions and professional associations. 2. Federal/Provincial co-operation: The study identifies some possible new avenues for improved federal/provincial co-operation in labour standards and operations. Operational and research applications in particular are interesting. For example, as one provincial labour standards official pointed out to us, a particular initiative that would be of value would be the development of joint databases of employers, where provinces and territories could draw on the substantial database resources of the federal government. One partnering direction implied by the findings is that labour standards in all jurisdictions in Canada could move towards delivering the same set of basic rights to all workers, including those in contingent and precarious employment. In other words, standards in different jurisdictions could be examined to see if there is scope for harmonizing the treatments vis-à-vis the same industry group. The harmonization approach would consider not only actual standards but also the means of ensuring compliance and enforcement. Labour Standards — Issues and Approaches: 3. Balancing family priorities with work will, the evaluation data suggests, continue to be a struggle for most Canadians. There is considerable stress involved in balancing work and family responsibilities, hence a rising level of employee absenteeism and various types of stress. At the core of the struggle is the problem of time management. The variety of workers' needs implies value in a "bundling" or "cafeteria" approach within the Code to provide more options and flexibility for managing work and family issues. The cafeteria of items might include longer parental leaves, education leaves, family leaves, shorter or more flexible workweeks, and longer vacations. 4. Need for Information: This study (and research from Phase I of the evaluation) suggests that many Canadians cannot exercise their entitlements under the Code because of lack of knowledge and as well because of economic realities. The fact that a significant number of employees do not know their rights and a large number of employers are also unaware of the details of the Code issue is a real problem. As well, the findings indicate that more research on information needs of workers could be helpful, and a more systematic assessment of how the known information needs of employers can best be resolved could also be useful. 5. Dependent Contractors: Another possible avenue to consider, implied by this study, relates to better identification of dependent contractors and ensuring that they achieve a fair allotment of entitlements under the Code. Part of this approach could include establishing a registry of dependent contractors with the assistance of the firms, industry associations, and individuals affected. The possibility of identifying dependent contractors through a registry of sectoral associations (as many argued in our interviews) could result in the expansion of benefits to these workers and might also improve the monitoring of these important labour-force groups. 6. Flexibility: Some firms complain that they are unable to meet worker needs because of stringent Code requirements. This implies that labour standards should be sufficiently flexible to accommodate appropriate working arrangements mutually agreed to by employers and workers in light of these data. Discovering new forms of flexibility that would satisfy firms' competitive needs and that would not at the same time reduce the basic rights of employees for minimum standards seems to be an interesting possible avenue for developing the Code. 7. At-Home Work: The evaluation suggests that the percentage of the workforce working at home will continue to rise in the future. Indeed, between 1991 and 1995, "Statistics Canada indicates that the proportion of employees working at home increased from 6 percent to 9 percent" (Perspectives, summer 1998, p.16). Related to the above concerns, the evaluation data implies that employers could be required to file reports on labour standards for their home workers and their dependent contractors. The basic idea behind this broader form of registry would be to gather useful information relating to the working conditions, benefits, etc., of those who work out of their homes. 8. Learning: A significant number of workers suggest that they would like to increase their training and education. Workers believe that employers and governments should take on more responsibility in this direction. Several ideas surfaced out of the findings of this evaluation report relating to lifelong learning. One possible avenue would raise a training levy to support sectoral training bodies (e.g., in trucking or First Nations). Such an approach could reduce the problem of "poaching" trained workers by one firm from another. A second concept implied is the notion of using industry associations to establish their own training standards for selected sectors.39 A third idea that emerges would be to entrench some form of employee entitlement into the Code for training and upgrading. For example, the Advisory Group On Working Time recommended entrenching an unpaid entitlement for training leaves. In this latter case, there are many possible variations to consider. Administrative Considerations: 9. Enforcement and Compliance: With respect to the efficiency of enforcement, the risk assessment and risk management programs adopted in several of the provinces and US states seem impressive. Essentially, these governments use special communication devices to reach at-risk groups, including recent immigrants, young people, and minimum-wage earners. Data suggests that complaints to government agencies have been reduced using this approach. 10. Alternative Approaches to Disputes: The concepts of "early and alternative disputes resolution" concerning labour standards issues also emerge from this study's findings and could also be considered. Once again, this is an avenue a number of other jurisdictions have already taken. Part II and Part III Issues: 11. Part II/Part III Research: This evaluation study points to a need for more research on the Part II/Part III linkup to articulate the potential for improving enforcement and to understand the flow of resources between the two programs. 12. Part II Evaluation: Based on this study's findings, there is an apparent need for an evaluation of Part II generally. This program has not been evaluated in a number of years, and OSH issues are responsible for substantial costs to society (and to the federal government directly, where the federal public service is concerned) in the areas of compensation for worker injuries. 10.6 Labour Standards and First NationsLabour standards are an important issue for First Nations, as well as for the Labour Program. Findings of the First Nations component of the evaluation point out the following:
These findings suggest that, to deal with some of the types of issues noted, a joint working process could be initiated, perhaps within a single region at first, to assess issues and remedies in the areas of types of information distribution, training for LAOs, and cultural orientation. Alternatively, these needs could be met by adding First Nation's representatives to the Labour Program's existing consultation group. 10.7 Occupational Safety and HealthFindings of this component of the evaluation point out the following:
Overall, considering issues of Part II/Part III linkups, costs of injuries and workers compensation (including costs for the federal public service), and operational issues, the assessment here points to value in considering a variety of research, including a formal and comprehensive evaluation of Part II. 10.8 Education, Enforcement, and ComplianceThe evaluation identified a wide range of practices among different departments and agencies, such as TBS, Health Canada, Revenue Canada, INAC, AECB, and various programs of HRDC. Findings of this component of the evaluation point out the following:
On this basis, consideration could be given to widening consultation processes for the Labour Program's review of legislation and to discussing the issue of strategies for improving communications, compliance, and enforcement with the Code. Two results stood out in this data: First, the results allow one to consider certain changes to the compliance strategy as set out for the Labour Program, specifically through cost-saving efforts in the areas of education, the pooling of experiences, flexible policies, and ready response to requests for clarification. Second, these results reaffirm certain conclusions drawn in the 1997 evaluation, specifically the value of an effort to formally assess the impact of both stronger education and stronger enforcement strategies. These issues will be considered below in the discussion of a possible Phase III evaluation and related research activities.
| |||||||
![[To Top]](/web/20060127003612im_/http://www11.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd-img/top.gif){kind=small}
![[Previous Page]](/web/20060127003612im_/http://www11.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd-img/back.gif){kind=small}
![[Table of Contents]](/web/20060127003612im_/http://www11.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd-img/content.gif)
![[Next Page]](/web/20060127003612im_/http://www11.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd-img/next.gif){kind=small}