Soumission

Canada Labour Code Part III Review: Developing a Labour Code for a Competitive Economy

Table of Contents

Introduction

Setting the Bar for Federal Labour Standards

Looking at Existing Federal Labour Standards: What Works? What Does Not Work?

New Forms of Employment Relationships

Balancing Work and Personal/Family Responsibilities

Workplace Productivity

Diversity and Changing Demographics in the Labour Market

Modernizing and Clarifying the Code's Enforcement and Administrative Provisions

Summary of Recommendations to the Federal Government for Developing a Labour Code for a Competitive Economy References

Introduction

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce is Canada's largest and most representative business association. We represent more than 170,000 members from every industry and every region of Canada. The vast majority of our members are employers who have a direct interest in Canada's labour market policy and the administration of Part III of the Canada Labour Code (CLC).

The Canadian Chamber believes that a skilled, highly productive and mobile labour force is essential to achieving many of Canada's economic and social objectives. As we look to the future, it is clear that high levels of productive "human capital" will be essential to maintaining long-term economic growth, competitiveness and prosperity in Canada. This is more important now than ever when we consider that Canada is rapidly embracing the emergence of a global, knowledge-based economy. We must ensure that all government laws and regulations are conducive to fostering productivity and, in turn, economic growth.

The unemployment rate is currently 6.8%, which is, historically, very low for the Canadian economy.¹ Competition for workers is very strong. Many sectors of the economy, such as oil and gas and construction, have seen their labour cost increase significantly due to the fact that wages have been driven up as a result of labour shortages. Strong labour demand, which is prevalent in all sectors of the economy in every region of the country, has afforded workers with the ability to better negotiate working conditions that best suit their needs.

Over the long term, flexibility is the key to an efficient labour market that has strong job creation, low unemployment, and is highly productive. A flexible labour market can adjust to market changes and allows employers to easily dedicate resources to increase productivity. For employees, flexible labour laws allow them to supply their labour to efforts that provide the greatest benefit. Further, flexibility allows employers to change the allocation of capital and labour to respond to market changes. Therefore, in order for Canadian business to respond to market realities, the Canadian economy requires a federal labour code that is flexible, while maintaining adequate protection for workers, and consistent with the federal government's Smart Regulation initiative.

Based on input from members, the Canadian Chamber will respond to selected questions posed in the federal consultation paper entitled "Modernizing Federal Labour Standards: Review of Part III of the Canada Labour Code".

Setting the Bar for Federal Labour Standards

As stated in the federal government's consultation document, one of the overarching goals of federal labour standards has been to protect employees who are not in a collective bargaining situation. Further, Part III of the Canada Labour Code has been amended to meet social policy objects; examples include job protection for parental and maternity leave.

The overall objective of Part III of the Canada Labour Code should be to define minimum standards of employment in areas such as hours of work, minimum wage levels, recognized holiday and vacation eligibility, and minimum requirements for termination of employment. These provisions will provide a minimum level of protection for workers while ensuring the appropriate level of flexibility for employers so that they are able remain competitive and viable as a business. The mandate of the CLC should be limited to defining minimum standards related to the basic contract of employment between an employer and employee. The Canadian Chamber believes that only employers and employees can select the approach that best suits their particular circumstances and maximizes their ability of reaching appropriate agreements of highest mutual benefit. Company level agreements, whether individual or collective, should be encouraged by allowing their implementation with a minimum of scrutiny.

This direction, with regard to the employer/employee relationship will allow for employees to directly involve themselves in negotiating workplace agreements. Agreements could be tailored according to business and staff needs and circumstances. Further, agreements could focus on mutual interests and mutual responsibilities, not just on rights. This will allow companies and employees to develop working relationships that are mutually beneficial, which will enhance the prospects for productivity improvement. Further, this will result in workplace arrangements that reflect what employers and employees decide what is important to them. Finally, employees are able to form agreements on the individual rather than the collective level.

International bodies such as the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) have conclude that "increased flexibility of working time, making wages and labour costs more flexible and reforming employment security provisions are essential policy components of an economic agenda capable of delivering sustained economic growth in employment and living standards of domestic economies"². Through economic growth and increased productivity, the income for workers will rise, resulting in a higher standard of living; a goal that should be common for both employers and employees.

The Federal government should ensure to the extent possible that CLC standards are aligned with provincial employment standards legislation. Employers who are federally regulated may have business operations in various provinces and need to be in compliance with the legislative requirements of each of these jurisdictions. Consistency of minimum standards will contribute to efficiency, productivity and competitiveness for employers.

Recommendations:

1. The overall objective of Part III of the Canada Labour Code should be to provide a minimum level of protection for workers while ensuring the appropriate level of flexibility for employers so that they are able remain to competitive and viable as a business.
2. Company level agreements, whether individual or collective, should be encouraged by allowing their implementation with a minimum of scrutiny. An agreement could be subject to the requirements of defined minimum standards, as determined by the federal government in consultation with business and labour, and as well as a grievance procedure.
3. The Federal government should ensure to the extent possible that CLC standards are aligned with provincial employment standards legislation.

Looking at Existing Federal Labour Standards: What Works? What Does Not Work?

The Canadian Chamber believes that the cumulative effect of all the provisions contained in Part III of the Canada Labour Code is overly prescriptive. As mentioned, Part III should be amended to provide for more flexibility with regard to the employer/employee relationship. Given the fact that we operate in a knowledge economy with a scarcity of skilled labour, companies have an incentive to implement workplace practices that will ensure that they will be able to attract and retain the most talented employees. Therefore, employers with good workplace practices will be at a competitive advantage over those without such policies.

Specially, the Canadian Chamber recommends that the following provisions within Part III should be addressed:

Division 1, Hours of Work:

• Current provisions used to exempt certain employees from hours of work requirements - especially overtime - are defined narrowly and only apply to those who are managers or have management functions. These criteria do not reflect current types of jobs in which the employees are highly paid, manage their own hours, and work independently, but do not exercise traditional management functions. In addition to new criteria, there should also be established a threshold level of income as the ceiling beyond which one cannot qualify for overtime. As an example, the U.S. Fair Labor Standards Act was recently amended to set the ceiling at $455 per week, or, depending on the type of work, $100,000 per year. A discussion of an appropriate wage threshold should take place in Canada.

Division IV, Vacation:

• Employees should not be able to waive their right to take vacation time. Postponement of vacation should be allowed but within a time constraint (e.g. postponed no more than 12 months beyond the end of the year in which the employee would otherwise have taken the vacation).

Division VIII, Bereavement Leave:

• Recommend changing the general provision to add the words "Up to" three days of unpaid leave immediately following the death of a member of the immediate family.

Division IX, Group Termination of Employment:

• Recommend eliminating the requirement for employers to provide 16 weeks notice to the Minister of Labour if the employer is terminating 50 or more employees within a particular industrial establishment.

The Canadian Chamber was disappointed with the lack of consultation prior to previous amendments to Part III. For example, Bill C-32 - Budget Implementation Act, 2000, brought about a significant change to the Employment Insurance system. Through Bill C-32, parental leave was increased to 35 weeks, leave which can be shared by two parents of a born or adopted child. Further, parental benefits can be added to the 17 week maternity leave, therefore one parent can take up to 52 weeks of leave if they have worked for an employer for at least 6 months and have worked 600 hours in the past year. Subsequently, changes were made to all federal and provincial labour codes to ensure that those who take maternity leave are able to return to their jobs once their maternity leave term is complete. These changes were developed, introduced and passed through legislation with minimal consultation with the private sector, whereas the employers are the most affected by these changes to the Employment Insurance program and federal or provincial labour codes.

The current provisions for maternity and parental leave are not well suited for small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). It should be noted that SMEs account for over 95% of all businesses in Canada and employ 65% of the labour market. As mentioned, employers are obligated, either through provincial or federal labour codes to guarantee the job of the individual(s) who are taking maternity and/or parental leave. This creates significant human resource challenges for companies, especially SMEs, to find the appropriate resources to fill the position over the term of the leave. If the position cannot be filled, then it is typically the responsibility of existing staff to cover the duties of the staff member who is on leave. The results are added stress and fatigue for the remaining employees and a reduction in the overall performance of the company. Further, there is no obligation for the individual that is taking parental or maternity leave to return to the job that has been held for them. At minimum, employers should be afforded the opportunity to ask employees for a written commitment that they will return to their job once their maternity/parental leave is completed. This will assist employers in their human resource planning. In many cases it can take months to replace an employee.

Recommendations:

4. The provisions in the legislation, Division 1, Hours of Work, should be broadened to exclude types of jobs in which the employees are highly paid, manage their own hours, and work independently, but do not exercise traditional management functions. In addition to new criteria, there should also be established a threshold level of income as the ceiling beyond which one cannot qualify for overtime. For example, the U.S. Fair Labor Standards Act was recently amended to set the ceiling at $455 per week, or, depending on the type of work, $100,000 per year. A discussion of an appropriate wage threshold should take place in Canada.
5. Employees should not be able to waive their right to take vacation time. Postponement of vacation should be allowed but within a time constraint (e.g. postponed no more than 12 months beyond the end of the year in which the employee would otherwise have taken the vacation).
6. With regard to Bereavement Leave, change the general provision to add the words "Up to" three days of unpaid leave immediately following the death of a member of the immediate family.
7. With regard to Group Termination of Employment, eliminate the requirement for employers to provide 16 weeks notice to the Minister of Labour if the employer is terminating 50 or more employees within a particular industrial establishment.
8. Employers should be afforded the opportunity to ask employees for a written commitment that they will return to their job once their maternity/parental leave is completed.

New Forms of Employment Relationships

The provisions contained in the Canada Labour Code are designed to protect workers who are directly employed by a single employer or multiple employers (federally regulated). There are a growing number of individuals who have decided that they do not wish to work for a single employer and have chosen to become self employed. Many self employed people are highly skilled and specialized individuals that typically sell their services on a contractual basis. They also have the ability to work on projects that are self satisfying or that will advance their careers. The level of choice and flexibility adds to the quality of life for those who choose to be self employed. For employers, including the federal government, utilizing specialized self employed workers helps them use specialized skills on as needed basis, thus increasing their flexibility in terms of human resource requirements. For example, the federal government extensively uses self employed Information Technology (IT) workers to design, develop, implement and management various IT projects. This has ensured that the federal government has sourced the most qualified professionals for the required project and has reduced the human resource costs to the federal government. For the IT workers, they are able to apply and develop their skills on projects that are of interest to them. In the opinion of the Canadian Chamber, the provisions contained in Part III of the Canada Labour Code should not be extended to cover those who have chosen to be self employed.

The federal minimum wage is set at the minimum wage of the province where the employee is usually employed. In terms of determining the minimum wage, it is the opinion of the Canadian Chamber that the current provisions, as stated in sections 178 through 181 of Part III of the Canada Labour Code, are acceptable.

High minimum wages reduce employment opportunities for young and unskilled workers. In addition, high minimum wages restrict the ability of employers and employees to negotiate mutually beneficial contracts. In particular, minimum-wage legislation restricts the ability of low-skilled workers and new entrants to negotiate for employment they might otherwise accept.³

There are a number of empirical studies that have documented the negative effects of high and increasing minimum wages, such as reduction in youth employment. It is estimated that a 10% increase in the minimum wage results in a 2.5% decline in employment. Further, increases in the minimum wages have other adverse economic impacts. When minimum wage levels rise, employers are not left with the resources to offer benefits such as on the job training. In addition, high minimum wage rates are associated with higher school dropout rates, as the increase in the minimum wage induces teenage workers to leave school in search for employment.⁴ It is the responsibility of the federal government to put in place policies that allow companies to afford and offer on the job training and to encourage the continued education of all people, especially youth. An increase in minimum wages may assist a small group of people in the short term; however, there will be a greater negative impact in terms of higher unemployment rates, a reduction in on the job training and higher school dropout rates.

Recommendations:

9. The provisions contained in Part III of the Canada Labour Code should not be extended to cover the self employed.
10. The federal government should maintain the current provisions, as stated in sections 178 through 181 of the Canada Labour Code, in terms of determining the minimum wage.

Balancing Work and Personal/Family Responsibilities

Balancing work and personal responsibilities is a challenge for both employees and employers. Employers have recognized that by reducing work-life conflicts, individuals can enjoy a healthier lifestyle while improving productivity at work. Dr. David Hillenbrand, recently retired President and Chief Executive Officer of Bayer Inc. stated "Our employees are more productive because they feel that they're in an organization that values the complexity of their entire life and tries to do something about making it a little easier for them to balance all the conflicting demands".⁵ Many companies, such as Bayer, have implemented work-life balance programs. Typically, programs that help achieve better work-life balance include child care, emergency elder care, compressed work weeks, flex time, telework, maternity/parental leave, sick leave, personal leave, voluntary part-time work, gradual retirement, job sharing, and health and wellness programs.

The federal government has recognized the importance of work-life balance; Human Resource Skills Development Canada has developed a website, www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/gateways/topics/wnc-gxr.shtml, that provides information that helps organizations design and implement support programs and policies which facilitate work-life balance.

Companies require flexibility, not government legislation and regulation, in order to design and implement successful work-life balance programs that meet the needs of both the company and the employee. The process that led to the development and implementation of the maternity, parental, and compassionate care leave programs was done in isolation of Canadian business. The federal government, in collaboration with labour interest groups, developed the terms and conditions for employers for these programs. In the future, the Canadian Chamber recommends that the federal government consult with business, when developing programs that impact their employees, so that the federal government has an understanding of how government programs impact the operations of business.

Recommendation:

11. The federal government must consult with business, when developing work-life balance programs that impact their employees, so that the federal government has an understanding of how government programs impact the operations of business.

Workplace Productivity

Labour productivity growth will be the fundamental determinant of future improvements of living standards in Canada because increases in both the employment/population ratio and average hours worked are expected to be limited. Productivity growth provides the resources to finance investments in education, health, the environment, infrastructure, and social programs, all crucial for improving quality of life of Canadians. From this perspective, current productivity developments are troubling, and if they continue, Canada's future prosperity is threatened, both in absolute terms and relative to other countries.⁶ In 2003, Canadian productivity (output per worker) was almost 23% below that of the United States. This gap was large enough to entirely explain why the Canadian standard of living was 20% below that of the American standard. This translated into an annual income gap of C$9,242 per capita (based on 2002 purchasing power parity).⁷ Without action, Canada's situation is likely to worsen, not improve, especially due to changing demographics.

The Toronto Dominion (TD) Forum on Canada's Standard of Living concluded "productivity in Canada will have to grow by 1.1% a year faster than in the United States, in order to close the income gap in 15 years. Based on its performance over the past 20 years, the United States is likely to have a productivity increase of at least 2% per year. If that is the case, Canada needs to average a productivity growth rate of 3.1% over the next 15 years". This is formidable task; productivity growth in Canada has averaged over 3.1% in only two years since 1976. Canadian productivity growth has slowed to a rate of just 0.1% in 2004.⁸

The flexibility of labour laws is crucial in providing an environment that encourages productive economic activity. Empirical evidence from around the world indicates that jurisdictions with flexible labour markets enjoy higher rates of job creation, greater benefits from technological change, and faster rates of economic growth (OECD, 1994). Further, rigid labour relation laws increase unemployment and reduce participation rates of young and older workers.⁹

The federal government has been critical of Canadian business investments in employee training. The Conference Board of Canada survey results from their "Training and Development Outlook Survey", conducted in year the 2000, included measuring the percentage of Canadian employees receiving employer sponsored job related training. The Conference Board of Canada used the American Society for Training and Development (ASTD) definition for employee training in their Survey. The ASTD definition for employee sponsored job related training is as follows: "Training is the transfer of work related skills, knowledge and information that is planned in advance, with a structured format and defined curriculum". The findings from the Development Outlook Survey showed that almost 72 % of employees in Canada received some form of formal training.

In order to develop public policies that will increase the level of employee training provided by Canadian companies there needs to be an understanding of the barriers that employers face providing training to their employees. Evidence from a national survey of workplace training indicates that the incidence of workplace training tends to be lowest in small firms and rises with firm size.¹⁰ Given the make up of the Canadian economy, over 95% of the companies in Canada, which represent 65% of total employment, are considered small to medium sized enterprises (SME) (50 employees or less)¹¹.

The following are some typical challenges that Canadian businesses face, especially SMEs, in providing employee training.

It has been argued that employers resist providing employee training because they fear that their employees may leave or be "poached" by another company after their training in completed. In turn the employer will not be able to recoup their training investment. This deprives the employers who had invested in training of the gains from that investment.¹²

The supply side of the training market has expanded considerably with the emergence of training providers from both the commercial and non-commercial sectors. This has taken place due in part to increased demand for training services and to new technological opportunities, such as, Computer Based Training (CBT) programs. However, while the development of the training industry has created new options for both companies and employees, there are information failures (lack of information) which hold back the ability of potential users to exploit the opportunities in the training market. The lack of information ranges from difficulties in identifying potential suppliers, to evaluating courses that best suit the training requirements of the employees, and the quality of the companies providing the training. Information gaps can cause reluctance on the part of some employers to take full advantage of the training market.¹³

The federal government has responded in terms of assisting employers in finding information on how best to conduct employee training. In 2004, the federal government provided funding for a new entity, the Canadian Council of Learning (CCL). The CCL is a national, independent, non-profit corporation with a mandate to promote and support research to improve all aspects of learning across the country. The CCL's key responsibilities are as follows:

• Informing Canadians of best practices in learning.
• Working with a wide range of partners to promote a Canada-wide learning culture.
• Encouraging and facilitating the exchange of knowledge and information among those involved in delivering learning.¹⁴

In addition, the CCL is creating a Work and Learning Knowledge Centre, which will increase the quantity, quality and effectiveness of work-related learning in Canada. This will be accomplished through collaboration and information exchange of employee training programs and best practices, with Canadian business, associations, academia, and learning institutions. The Canadian Chamber is supportive of the Canadian Council on Learning and anticipates that the Work and Learning Knowledge Centre will provide useful information for Canadian businesses.

The federal government should not legislate mandatory employee training. Forcing companies to provide training to employees will lead to an inefficient allocation of resources. Companies should not be required to provide training for the sake of training. Employers will make the required investments that are in the best interests of their company. If training is required, then companies will make the investment and train their employees. As stated, over 70% of Canadian companies provide training for their employees.

Recommendation:

12. The federal government should not legislate mandatory employee training.

Diversity and Changing Demographics in the Labour Market

A diverse labour market improves the competitiveness of the Canadian economy and is a means of providing a higher standard of living for more Canadians. The federal government has stated that Canada is recognized as a world leader in employment equity. The current employment equity program has corporate and societal support and has become a cornerstone of our national structure.¹⁵ The Canadian Chamber believes that all Canadians must have an equal opportunity to apply their skills and knowledge in any profession that they may choose. Some experts have estimated that underemployment of women, aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities costs nearly 5% of Canada's Gross Domestic Product (GDP).¹⁶ In the opinion of the Canadian Chamber, increased participation of these groups of people is essential to improve the competitiveness of the Canadian economy and to improve their quality of life.

Canada currently has in place the Employment Equity Act. The purpose of the Employment Equity Act is to achieve equality in the workplace for the four designated groups; those being, women, aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities. As required through the Employment Equity Act, employers must address and correct disadvantages in employment that are experienced by those groups. But the program is not limited to the removal of employment barriers; it is also means taking special measures to encourage greater fairness and adjusting the workplace to accommodate workers who have been disadvantaged in the past.¹⁷

Employers currently have the following obligation in implementing employment equity:

• to survey the participation of designated group members in their workforce: their representation levels, occupational groups and salary distribution, and their share of hiring, promotions and terminations;
• to carry out an analysis of any under-representation of the four designated groups;
• to review their employment systems, policies and practices in order to identify and remove employment barriers; and
• to prepare a plan outlining how they propose to remove barriers and introduce positive policies and practices. The plan must also include a timetable complete with short and long-term numerical goals.

All federally regulated employers must submit an annual employment equity report to the federal Labour Program.¹⁸

The Canadian Human Rights Commission administers both the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Employment Equity Act, and ensures that the principles of equal opportunity and non-discrimination are followed in all areas of federal jurisdiction.

The mandate of the Commission includes:

• helping parties to resolve complaints of discrimination in employment and in provision of services based on the grounds enumerated in the Act;
• investigating complaints of discrimination, including complaints alleging inequities in pay between men and women who are performing work of equal value;
• investigating complaints of discrimination, including complaints alleging inequities in pay between men and women who are performing work of equal value;
• auditing and, when necessary, taking action to ensure employers' compliance with the Employment Equity Act, which applies to the federal public service, as well as federal Crown corporations and federally regulated companies employing 100 or more people;
• investigating complaints of discrimination, including complaints alleging inequities in pay between men and women who are performing work of equal value; monitoring programs, policies and legislation affecting designated groups to ensure that their human rights are protected; and
• investigating complaints of discrimination, including complaints alleging inequities in pay between men and women who are performing work of equal value; developing and conducting information programs to promote public understanding of the Acts and of the role and activities of the Commission.

Federally regulated businesses have invested significant resources in personnel and reporting systems to ensure their compliance with Employment Equity Act. Further, the Canadian Human Rights Commission provides an opportunity for employees to file complaints under these two Acts. In the opinion of the Canadian Chamber, both the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Employment Equity Act meet the needs of all employees in terms of protecting their rights as individuals. As such, there is no need for Part III of the Canada Labour Code to be amended to meet the needs of women or to promote the pursuit of gender equality in the workplace, as asked in the Review of the Part III of the Canada Labour Code. Overlapping legislation and regulation leads to confusion and undermines the intentions of the individual pieces of legislation.

The Canadian population is aging and according to recent demographic projections, the population of Canada will continue to age over the next 25 years. A marked increase in the number of older people, combined with the continuing fall in fertility rates and continued increase in longevity, will bring about a rapid aging of the general population.¹⁹

Statistics Canada has projected the population distribution over the next twenty five year period. In 1956 almost half of the Canadian population was under the age of 25. Today, the 25 year old and under segment of the population accounts for approximately one third of the population. Based on projections, by 2026, the proportion of people under the age of 25 will only account for 25% of the population. In contrast, in 1956 the portion of the population over the retirement age of 65 was less than 10%; by 2026 that percentage is expected to double to 20%. Based on Statistics Canada projections, by 2026 the average age of the Canadian population will be almost 44 years of age.

An aging population transcends into an aging workforce. As the labour force ages, employers will face a growing challenge to replace skills and experience of the retiring workforce. Furthermore, workers over the age of 45 traditionally have had a lower rate of participation than the younger segment of the population. As the population ages, it will accelerate the increase in the number of people leaving the labour force. Employers will be faced with new challenges during this transition period including:

• The effectiveness of transferring knowledge from older to younger employees;
• The loss of knowledge and its subsequent effect on innovation and productivity; and
• The general risk of the shortage of skilled labour following the retirement of the growing number of older workers.

Workers approaching retirement are generally the most experienced employees and are highly productive. Businesses are developing strategies to phase in retirement for those employees who wish to do so. For example, employers are offering flexible work schedules, including job-sharing, flex-time, and reduced work weeks.

Research conducted by the federal government showed that few labour market adjustment programs specifically targeted to older workers exist. Further, with the exception of Sweden and the U.S., programs designed to assist older individuals tend to focus on the provision of income support. Older individuals seeking employment services are generally required to access non-targeted programming, in which the participation of the older segment of the working population has consistently been fairly limited.²⁰ Given the growing importance of older workers as a source of labour, the federal government should consider developing an older worker re-employment strategy that will assist older workers in achieving employment.

Recommendations:

13. Do not amend Part III of the Canada Labour Code to meet the needs of women or to promote the pursuit of gender equality in the workplace, as asked in the consultation document of the Review of the Part III of the Canada Labour Code. The Employment Equity Act ensures gender equality in the workplace and the Canadian Human Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on sex. Overlapping legislation and regulation leads to confusion and undermines the intentions of the individual pieces of legislation.
14. Given the growing importance of older workers as a source of labour, the federal government should consider developing an older worker re-employment strategy that will assist older workers in achieving employment.

Modernizing and Clarifying the Code's Enforcement and Administrative Provisions

Many members of the Canadian Chamber have expressed concerns that there is a bias on the part of the inspectors appointed by the Department of Labour in exploring complaints, filed under Part III of the Canada Labour Code, by employees. In the opinion of some employers, through their experience, once an employee files a complaint, the approach taken by the inspectors reflects a 'guilty until proven innocent' mentality. The federal government must remain unbiased when investigating complaints; this will ensure a fair process for both employers and employees and will produce the best decisions and subsequent outcomes. Aside from this particular concern, it is the opinion of the Canadian Chamber that the current enforcement methods are adequate.

The federal government should write the laws that pertain to Part III of the Canada Labour Code in plain English. This will help employers better understand the legislative measures that they must comply with. Further, the federal government should make available information seminars intended to assist employers to better understand the Canada Human Rights Act, Employment Equity Act, and the Canada Labour Code. In addition, it has been suggested by Canadian Chamber members that the federal government provide telephone help-lines where employers can ask questions of experts regarding their rights and obligations under Part III of the Canada Labour Code.

With regard to employers' offences under the Canada Human Rights Act, Employment Equity Act, and the Canada Labour Code, first time offenders should be afforded the opportunity to take the necessary steps required to resolve the dispute and to ensure that the situation does not happen in the future before government fines or penalties are levied.

Recommendations:

15. The federal government must remain unbiased when investigating complaints under Part III of the Canada Labour Code; this will ensure a fair process for both employers and employees and will produce the best decisions and subsequent outcomes.
16. Federal government should provide telephone help-lines where employers can ask questions of experts regarding their rights and obligations under Part III of the Canada Labour Code.

Summary of Recommendations to the Federal Government for Developing a Labour Code for a Competitive Economy

1. The overall objective of Part III of the Canada Labour Code should be to provide a minimum level of protection for workers while ensuring the appropriate level of flexibility for employers so that they are able remain to competitive and viable as a business.
2. Company level agreements, whether individual or collective, should be encouraged by allowing their implementation with a minimum of scrutiny. An agreement could be subject to the requirements of defined minimum standards, as determined by the federal government in consultation with business and labour, and as well as a grievance procedure.
3. The Federal government should ensure to the extent possible that CLC standards are aligned with provincial employment standards legislation.
4. The provisions in the legislation, Division 1, Hours of Work, should be broadened to exclude types of jobs in which the employees are highly paid, manage their own hours, and work independently, but do not exercise traditional management functions. In addition to new criteria, there should also be established a threshold level of income as the ceiling beyond which one cannot qualify for overtime. For example, the U.S. Fair Labor Standards Act was recently amended to set the ceiling at $455 per week, or, depending on the type of work, $100,000 per year. A discussion of an appropriate wage threshold should take place in Canada.
5. Employees should not be able to waive their right to take vacation time. Postponement of vacation should be allowed but within a time constraint (e.g. postponed no more than 12 months beyond the end of the year in which the employee would otherwise have taken the vacation).
6. With regard to Bereavement Leave, change the general provision to add the words "Up to" three days of unpaid leave immediately following the death of a member of the immediate family.
7. With regard to Group Termination of Employment, eliminate the requirement for employers to provide 16 weeks notice to the Minister of Labour if the employer is terminating 50 or more employees within a particular industrial establishment.
8. Employers should be afforded the opportunity to ask employees for a written commitment that they will return to their job once their maternity/parental leave is completed.
9. The provisions contained in Part III of the Canada Labour Code should not be extended to cover the self employed.
10. The federal government should maintain the current provisions, as stated in sections 178 through 181 of the Canada Labour Code, in terms of determining the minimum wage.
11. The federal government must consult with business, when developing work-life balance programs that impact their employees, so that the federal government has an understanding of how government programs impact the operations of business.
12. The federal government should not legislate mandatory employee training.
13. Do not amend Part III of the Canada Labour Code to meet the needs of women or to promote the pursuit of gender equality in the workplace, as asked in the consultation document of the Review of the Part III of the Canada Labour Code. The Employment Equity Act ensures gender equality in the workplace and the Canadian Human Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on sex. Overlapping legislation and regulation leads to confusion and undermines the intentions of the individual pieces of legislation.
14. Given the growing importance of older workers as a source of labour, the federal government should consider developing an older worker.
15. The federal government must remain unbiased when investigating complaints under Part III of the Canada Labour Code; this will ensure a fair process for both employers and employees and will produce the best decisions and subsequent outcomes.
16. Federal government should provide telephone help-lines where employers can ask questions of experts regarding their rights and obligations under Part III of the Canada Labour Code.

References

Advisory Council on Science and Technology, "Barriers and Incentives to Training", 1999

The Canadian Council on Learning, http://www.ccl-cca.ca/english/about/whoweare.asp

Canadian Policy Research Networks, "Barriers to Employer-Sponsored Training in Canada", 1998

The Fraser Institute, Fraser Forum, "Measuring Labour Markets in Canada and the United States: 2004 Edition", September 2004

Government of Canada, "Annual Report: Employment Equity Act", 2004

Human Resources Skills Development Canada "Lessons Learned: A Review of Older Worker Adjustment Programs Technical Report #1 Prepared for Evaluation and Data Development Strategic Policy Human Resources Development Canada" July 1997

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) "Jobs Study, recommendations 4, 5 and 6 of OECD Jobs Study", OECD Ministerial Council, 1994.

Someshar Rao, Industry Canada, Andrew Sharpe and Jeremy Smith, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, "An Analysis of Labour Productivity Growth Slowdown in Canada Since 2000", Spring 2005

Statistics Canada/Strategis, Small Business Quarterly, September 2001.

Sylvain Schetagne, "Building Bridges Across Generation in the Workplace", Canadian Council on Social Development, 2001

TD Bank Financial Group, TD Economic Topic Paper, "Who's to Blame for Canada's Productivity Woes?" June 15, 2005.

Endnotes

¹ 6.8% is the unemployment rate in July 2005 as reported by Statistics Canada.

² OECD Jobs Study, recommendations 4, 5 and 6 of OECD Jobs Study, 1994 OECD Ministerial Council

³ The Fraser Institute, Fraser Forum, "Measuring Labour Markets in Canada and the United States: 2004 Edition", September 2004

⁴ Ibid

⁵ Dr. David Hillenbrand, /www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/lp/spila/wlb/ell/13david_hillenbrand.shtml

⁶ Someshar Rao, Industry Canada, Andrew Sharpe and Jeremy Smith, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, "An Analysis of Labour Productivity Growth Slowdown in Canada Since 2000", Spring 2005

⁷ OCED measurements using 2002 prices and purchasing power parity

⁸ TD Bank Financial Group, TD Economic Topic Paper, "Who's to Blame for Canada's Productivity Woes?" June 15, 2005.

⁹ Fraser Forum, "Measuring Labour Markets n Canada and the United States: 2004 Edition", September 2004

¹⁰ Canadian Policy Research Networks, "Barriers to Employer-Sponsored Training in Canada", 1998

¹¹ Statistics Canada/Strategis, "Small Business Quarterly", September 2001. Advisory Council on Science and Technology, "Barriers and Incentives to Training", 1999

¹² Advisory Council on Science and Technology, "Barriers and Incentives to Training", 1999

¹³ Canadian Policy Research Networks, "Barriers to Employer-Sponsored Training in Canada", 1998

¹⁴ The Canadian Council on Learning, http://www.ccl-cca.ca/english/about/whoweare.asp

¹⁵ Government of Canada, "Annual Report: Employment Equity Act", 2004

¹⁶ Ibid

¹⁷ Ibid

¹⁸ Ibid

¹⁹ Sylvain Schetagne, "Building Bridges Across Generations in the Workplace", Canadian Council on Social Development, 2001

²⁰ Human Resources Skills Development Canada "Lessons Learned: A Review of Older Worker Adjustment Programs Technical Report #1 Prepared for Evaluation and Data Development Strategic Policy Human Resources Development Canada" July 1997