“Is Work Working?” aims to identify the gaps in our laws and policies that leave some workers unprotected, exposed and vulnerable — outside the “umbrella.”

People experience vulnerability in many ways: through inadequate pay, unhealthy or dangerous working conditions, insufficient hours, exploitative atmospheres, lack of benefits, the inability to effect change, powerlessness and marginalization. In this paper, the Law Commission begins with a study of different types of vulnerability at work and then discusses how ideas about labour regulation have changed. New conceptual approaches are warranted when, as here, a model of regulation is undermined by the reality of working relationships.

The choice of subject emerged from consultations with the public and the Advisory Council of the Law Commission. At issue is the way in which labour law concepts may be outdated and failing to respond to the changing nature of employment relationships. Canadians expressed their concern about the ways in which the inadequacies of our labour laws and policies may have precipitated further vulnerability in the Canadian population.

Work arrangements today are characterized by a greater degree of flexibility and, increasingly, they do not fit the norm of 9 to 5 full-time, long-term employment with the same employer. Advantages to the new arrangements are emerging. However, the idea that flexible labour arrangements are good for everyone must be tempered with the recognition that the costs of such unbridled flexibility are often transferred to individual workers. Ultimately, the Law Commission is interested in looking for new ways of understanding the employment relationship that would respond better to the needs of all Canadians who work.

We have benefited from a fruitful partnership with Canadian Policy Research Networks, which contributed its comments and expertise and those of its wide network of academics, practitioners and concerned citizens. We are very thankful to President Judith Maxwell and to Ron Saunders, the Director of the Work Network, whose insights and advice were invaluable.

Our researchers in residence, professors Michael Smith and Leah Vosko provided the essential research to move this project forward. Their insights were extremely important to the pursuit of a better understanding of employment relationships in the 21st century.

Other researchers and policy experts also contributed to the Law Commission’s project: Judy Fudge, Eric Tucker, Christine Bruckert, Colette Parent, Pascale Robitaille, Guylaine Vallée, Richard Chaykowski, Gay Stinson and Kerry Rittich.

The illustration on our cover was an entry in the Roderick A. Macdonald Contest to encourage Canadian students to discuss law reform. It represents admirably the many themes of this discussion paper.

The Law Commission of Canada is an independent agency with a large mandate to engage Canadians in the renewal of the law. Thanks to the very dedicated staff of the Law Commission, we are able to fulfill this mandate. The commissioners are grateful for the work performed by all members of the staff at the Law Commission of Canada in producing this discussion paper. In particular, we would like to thank Karen Jensen, Senior Research Officer, the primary author of this paper.

The Law Commission hopes this report generates a thorough examination of how we manage work relationships in our society. The goal is to stimulate innovative thinking about diminishing vulnerability in the workplace. Your feedback will help inform future research and consultations, and assist in the preparation of our final report.

We invite you to reflect on how vulnerability is experienced in the workplace, on the diagnostic posed in this discussion paper and the many ways in which law reform could contribute to enhancing productive, respectful and fair work relationships. We look forward to your comments and reflections.