Evaluation of Federal Labour Standards (Phase II) - December 1998

Evaluation of Federal Labour Standards (Phase II)

View Whole Report

• Introduction
• Program Description
• Evaluation Focus
• Evaluation Methodology
• Key Findings

This brief provides a summary of key findings from the second phase of an evaluation of the Canada Labour Code, Part III (federal labour standards). This study was designed, managed, and funded by Evaluation and Data Development, Strategic Policy, Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC).

The Code, through Part III, provides a regulatory framework for conditions of work (e.g., hours of work, treatment of overtime, holidays, etc.). The Code applies in the federally regulated industrial sectors in Canada.

These are generally those which are important to the national infrastructure, such as: interprovincial and international trucking, shipping and air transportation; communications; banking (federal banks); and selected other industrial sectors of importance to the Government of Canada, such as grain elevators, First Nations and others. Part III defines conditions of work for over 700,000 Canadians in these sectors.

Other parts of the Code regulate Labour Relations (Part I), and Occupational Safety and Health (Part II), through the Labour Branch of the Department, with field implementation by Labour Affairs Officers (LAOs) located across Canada.

This evaluation is part of a continuing investigation of Part III of the Code, and its workings in relation to public policy goals, legislation and broader human resources concerns of the federal government. Phase I of the evaluation focused on compliance with Part III of the Code among federally regulated employers.

Phase II's overall purpose was to gather information to identify considerations for the Labour Program, with a view to keeping Part III of the Code in tune with social change and the changing nature of work. It focused on assessing the implications for Part III of a variety of factors in the changing world of work (CWW) and non-standard work (NSW), such as part-time work, contract work, telework, shift work, etc.

This report also examines other sub-topics, including:

• federal labour standards as they affect First Nations in Canada;
• issues in Part II (occupational safety and health) and its possible linkup to Part III as well as the potential need for a broader evaluation of Part II; and
• issues in education, information and compliance.

The examination of issues related to the CWW and NSW was based on:

• a broad-based review of the literature;
• a supplementary review of available international documents;
• interviews with various key stakeholders and experts in Canada (about 55) and abroad (about 10); and
• two major exploratory surveys of employers (over 440 in the federal sector and over 130 in provincially regulated sectors) and workers (over 465 federal sector, over 140 provincial sector).

The sub-topics were studied primarily by means of the selected key informant interviews, and were supported by relevant information gathered for other aspects of the evaluation.

CWW and NSW Issues

The literature review reaffirmed that NSW is a rapidly growing phenomenon. The literature points to widespread unmet demands for training in Canada's workplaces as well as an expansion of long hours of work and a substantial amount of unpaid overtime. As well, it suggests that NSW has generally negative impacts on the quality of working life and worker security, and that it is likely to be detrimental to life-long learning goals. There seems to be a strong view in the literature that the public policy framework governing the self-employed should provide for the same benefits as those usually accorded to full-time workers. The literature also suggests that many interests of employers and employees (and unions) are mutual, and should converge on common goals such as the development of family-friendly workplace policies.

Overall, key informants interviewed were virtually all of the view that the expansion of NSW was the foremost challenge for labour standards today, and that because of the CWW, enforcement of labour standards is more difficult than in the past. Employers generally view labour standards as more of a burden than a benefit in an environment requiring adapting flexibility to the CWW and competitive pressures. The current environment appears to have made unions uncertain about how to best secure wage and benefit gains for their members or how to arrest the trend towards the contracting out of work and downsizing of staff. Yet certain common concerns and shared priorities can be found among employers and union stakeholders, most evidently in regard to such areas as life-long learning and family life.

Many of these concerns were echoed in the international literature review, and particularly in interviews with international contacts. The most important of these appears to be that pushing labour standards in the direction of stronger familyfriendly policies and related initiatives is "on the table" and highly desirable in most of the countries that were contacted for this study.

The surveys of workers and employers suggest that:

• CWW is a substantial factor in federally regulated sectors, with long hours of work being the one most significant aspect;
• CWW phenomena were found to be increasing in federally regulated sectors; and
• CWW phenomena were found in various ways to affect both the federally and provincially regulated employment sectors, pointing to common concerns.

Important negative effects of CWW were noted, particularly by workers, in such areas as:

• reduced quality of work;
• reduced learning opportunities;
• higher levels of insecurity and harassment; and
• reduced quality of family life.

While a number of CWW factors were noted as impacting on these important aspects of work and life, long working hours and other work-schedule issues were noted by workers as the most important of the negative factors.

Key potential changes desired in Canada's workplaces were noted by employers and workers. Types of changes noted as desirable by both employers and workers (albeit generally more so by workers) included:

• providing workers with the right to take time off in lieu of overtime (as a mechanism to aid the reduction of chronic overtime);
• better access to flextime;
• encouraging employers to provide skills training;
• more assistance for child care;
• improved health and safety in the workplace;
• assurance that employee benefits can be transferred to a new job or self-employment; and
• paid educational leave.

Other Issues

Findings of the First Nations component of the evaluation pointed towards a need for more training for LAOs in matters of cultural sensitivity and understanding of First Nations generally. Other culturally significant directions, which First Nations representatives noted would be worth pursuing, were alternative dispute resolution techniques as well as greater flexibility in the code for First Nations. First Nations representatives also expressed interest in discussing the development of alternative delivery methods — where they would assume increased delivery responsibilities, mainly because of the relevance to self-government.

Concerning Occupational Safety and Health (OSH), generally a variety of evidence suggests that an enforcement-oriented link-up between the Part II and the Part III data sets might be a useful method for identifying non-compliant employers in each program, depending on the specific company's industrial sector. This link-up is seen as potentially introducing efficiencies, and also as facilitating a more effective enforcement role.

Regarding education, enforcement and compliance, the evaluation brought forward some key issues related to compliance as seen by federal officials and others. Key points made by various federal representatives dealt with a wide range of client attitudes which influence compliance, from lack of awareness to deliberate non-compliance, when compliance was a problem. In all cases, however, an education and information approach was considered the most effective strategy, with strong enforcement or prosecution as a last resort. These officials also reported that there is a belief that interdepartmental experiences with compliance are worth sharing, and that it is important to endeavour to remove inconsistencies within departments and to create a consistent compliance framework within the federal government.