EI Reform: Changes will drive down wages for everyone

[mentalfloss]

EI Reform: Changes will drive down wages for everyone

OTTAWA—Far-reaching changes to Employment Insurance (EI) and the Temporary Foreign Worker Program in the federal government’s budget plan will drive down wages for Canadian workers, analysts say.

Full details of the new regime are only dribbling out, but the changes have already raised alarms among opposition Members of Parliament and some economists.

Adding their voice to the chorus of criticism are the labour movement and immigrants rights advocates, who are holding a news conference on Parliament Hill Tuesday to argue the Harper government’s new rules governing foreign workers are misguided.

Also, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty confirmed Monday that the government intends to clamp down on EI recipients who turn down jobs they consider unsuitable for their skills or too low-paying.

Flaherty said the government will expand the threshold for what is considered a suitable job for EI recipients. That means that those who pass up such employment could lose their EI benefits.

“There’ll be a broader definition and people will have to engage more in the workforce,” Flaherty told reporters.

He also indicated that he has little sympathy for EI recipients who are too picky about the jobs they will accept.

“There is no bad job, the only bad job is not having a job,” he said.

The expected changes to EI rules reflect complaints by Conservative cabinet ministers in recent months that Canadians are passing up jobs such as Christmas tree harvesting and leaving employers to bring in foreign workers to do the jobs. But opposition MPs say it’s a waste of peoples’ skills to force them to take positions for which they are over-qualified.

The focus Tuesday will be on the Harper government’s move to allow employers to pay highly-skilled temporary foreign workers up to 15 per cent less than the prevailing local wage.

Human Resources Minister Diane Finley says the lower wages can only be paid to temporary foreign workers if the Canadian business’ other employees accept the same pay. But critics say the government is creating an unwieldy, confusing and unfair system for determining the wages of the increasing army of temporary workers from abroad now coming to Canada.

Critics say the government has not explained the policy change and argue that it will have a negative impact for labour in general.

“It is not yet clear why the government is doing this,” said Hassan Yussuff, secretary-treasurer of the Canadian Labour Congress.

He said paying foreign workers less than the local prevailing wage will push down wages for everyone and could lead to tension among groups of workers.

“Nowhere in our public policy as a national government have we ever advocated that we would bring people from abroad and pay them less,” Yussuff said in an interview.

“We think it’s highly discriminatory based on national origin, which is against the constitution,” he added.

Canada News: EI Reform: Changes will drive down wages for everyone - thestar.com

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

But then on the other hand, it may justify less immigration, which lowers the price for labour for capital. Companies may be forced to train people for jobs rather than lobby the govt for ever more temporary foreign workers.

If I quit my job, I get no EI for 2 months, yet all over Canada, scams are run by corporations where people are laid off every year, get six months of EI and go back to work. I don't get that at all. It would be fair if people who hadn't made an EI claim for 5 years only get a two or three week penalty and 75% of their wages for six months. But no, rural (aboriginals) Canada, and Atlantic (whites) Canada, get this seasonally adjusted scam decade after decade.

 

[Angstrom]

EI is useless as is. They could just get rid of it plane and simple.

 

[Machjo]

Having a two-tier system is a dangerous move though, since it pits two groups of workers subject to different rules.

On the other hand, clamping down on foreign labour is not a good idea eitehr since that would lead to tit for tat, and remember many Canadians work abroad too.

But certainly double a two-tier system is ridiculous.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

Having a two-tier system is a dangerous move though, since it pits two groups of workers subject to different rules.

On the other hand, clamping down on foreign labour is not a good idea eitehr since that would lead to tit for tat, and remember many Canadians work abroad too.

But certainly double a two-tier system is ridiculous.

We have a two or three tier EI system. I met an electrician who is a contractor, and says he cannot get EI at all, yet he pays into it. Is that fair? EI is just another tax that disappears into Ottawa and the Conservatives do nothing to correct this ripoff.

How is Canada "clamping down" on foreign labour? What we do here has very little effect on other countries.

 

[Walter]

If you know your way around you don't gotta pay no EI.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

If you know your way around you don't gotta pay no EI.

How about some inside info?

 

[lone wolf]

Some wages being driven down might not be a bad thing - so long as prices follow them

 

[SLM]

Some wages being driven down might not be a bad thing - so long as prices follow them

Somehow I think that probably won't be happening.

 

[relic]

Some of you goomers live in a pretty narrow world,you've obviously never fished or worked in the woods or done any of thr jobs that somebody has to do,but most people thing are beneath them.You at least know where fish come from,right,before the get to Safeway ?

 

[tay]

A disproportionate drop in employment insurance recipients in Atlantic Canada suggests federal EI restrictions are having a negative impact that will only get worse as seasonal industries lay off staff, critics say.

“Those changes target seasonal workers,” said Erin Weir, an economist with the United Steelworkers Canadian national office. “We’ve already seen in the data that the number of employment insurance recipients has been cut more sharply in the Atlantic provinces than nationally.

“We’re not seeing a decline in unemployment, but we are seeing a decline in employment insurance,” he said from Regina. “And that would seem to reflect federal policies that are kicking people off benefits.”

Weir said the number of jobless workers has been stuck at around 1.4 million for at least the past year.

Yet, Statistics Canada reports that the number of those receiving EI benefits in July was down almost six per cent across Canada from the year before. That compares to a drop of 11 per cent over the same time period for Newfoundland and Labrador, 16 per cent in P.E.I., 12 per cent in Nova Scotia and nine per cent in New Brunswick.

In Ontario, Quebec and Alberta, the decline in EI benefits for each province was about three per cent.
B.C. had a drop of 11.5 per cent, Manitoba 12 per cent and Saskatchewan seven per cent.

The federal Conservative government says EI changes it implemented in January are a “modest and reasonable” effort to ensure the system is fair and flexible.

Those adjustments do not change eligibility requirements such as the number of insured hours to qualify, says an emailed response from Employment and Social Development Canada. Rather, they clarify long-standing job search requirements for all recipients — including repeat claimants, it says.

“Claimants are only expected to look for work within their communities, no greater than one hour’s commute away. Moreover, personal circumstances are taken into account, such as the availability of public transportation and access to child care.”
Weir says the statistics speak for themselves.

“I do think we’re seeing the consequences of federal cutbacks to EI,” he said.

Lana Payne, Atlantic director of the new Canadian amalgamated union Unifor, said the big question is the extent to which Ottawa will enforce its clarified job search rules this winter.

She says she believes there is an ulterior motive for the push to get seasonal workers off benefits and into often poorly paid, service-sector vacancies.

“These kinds of changes were really about trying to cater to low-wage dependent employers,” she said. “They kind of missed the whole point that perhaps what we need to be doing to attract people to jobs in other communities means that we have to increase the wages to get them there.”

Payne calls it a wrong-headed attempt to get tough on the unemployed.

“I’d rather they get tough on unemployment, quite frankly.”


EI crackdown already felt across Canada | Metro

 

[mentalfloss]

Well it looks like all the yelling and screaming at Harper by the opposition was for good reason.

I'm not sure if Captain Capitalism realizes that high unemployment is bad for the economy.

 

[captain morgan]

We have high unemployment?

What's wrong with making the rules tougher for people that make a career out of collecting EI?

 

[mentalfloss]

We have high unemployment?

What's wrong with making the rules tougher for people that make a career out of collecting EI?

Nothing.

But we're actually dropping benefits for people who legitimately need them and the unemployment rate is still high. It's a double whammy of egg on the face of the party that prides itself on supporting the economy.

 

[taxslave]

Nothing.

But we're actually dropping benefits for people who legitimately need them and the unemployment rate is still high. It's a double whammy of egg on the face of the party that prides itself on supporting the economy.

The unemployment rate is only high in the cities. Positions go begging for workers in the north. But kids have to get out of the basement to go there and (gasp) will actually be expected to work for their paycheque.

 

[mentalfloss]

The unemployment rate is only high in the cities. Positions go begging for workers in the north. But kids have to get out of the basement to go there and (gasp) will actually be expected to work for their paycheque.

rofl

It's the seasonal workers that are getting screwed.

You know, like the people that are forced to fish only one time of the year and need to work at Walmart or collect EI the rest of the year?

 

[PoliticalNick]

The unemployment rate is only high in the cities. Positions go begging for workers in the north. But kids have to get out of the basement to go there and (gasp) will actually be expected to work for their paycheque.

Even at that some cities are begging for people to fill positions. You may have to put up with prairie winters but Calgary, Edmonton, Regina & Saskatoon are short workers and are willing to pay decent wages for any job if you just go to work. Once you get out of the cities into the oil patch their is even more opportunity. There are plenty of kids fresh out of high school with NO experience making 40-50k plus bonuses to learn a job. Bottom line is there is plenty of work to be had at really good wages if you want to go get it. If you're happy to sit on EI in Vancouver or Toronto we probably don't want you here anyway.

rofl

It's the seasonal workers that are getting screwed.

You know, like the people that are forced to fish only one time of the year and need to work at Walmart or collect EI the rest of the year?

So go work at wal-mart! WTF is the issue? My job is seasonal, I work from Sept to April but I make $100,000 in that period and don't collect EI even though I could. I just don't need it and if it was an issue I could make more doing something else for the summer.

 

[petros]

Even at that some cities are begging for people to fill positions. You may have to put up with prairie winters but Calgary, Edmonton, Regina & Saskatoon are short workers and are willing to pay decent wages for any job if you just go to work. Once you get out of the cities into the oil patch their is even more opportunity. There are plenty of kids fresh out of high school with NO experience making 40-50k plus bonuses to learn a job. Bottom line is there is plenty of work to be had at really good wages if you want to go get it. If you're happy to sit on EI in Vancouver or Toronto we probably don't want you here anyway.



So go work at wal-mart! WTF is the issue? My job is seasonal, I work from Sept to April but I make $100,000 in that period and don't collect EI even though I could. I just don't need it and if it was an issue I could make more doing something else for the summer.

You need $5K in your pocket before even considering to move to AB or SK to take a job,

If the Feds had any class, they'd lump sum someone's EI so they could make the big leap across the country.

They have zero problems making somebody attended a Fed funded resume writing club for 6 weeks but won't help them get to where there is work.

 

[Sal]

You need $5K in your pocket before even considering to move to AB or SK to take a job,

If the Feds had any class, they'd lump sum someone's EI so they could make the big leap across the country.

They have zero problems making somebody attended a Fed funded resume writing club for 6 weeks but won't help them get to where there is work.

correct part of my former job was helping them to write those resumes...

 

[skookumchuck]

You need $5K in your pocket before even considering to move to AB or SK to take a job,

If the Feds had any class, they'd lump sum someone's EI so they could make the big leap across the country.

They have zero problems making somebody attended a Fed funded resume writing club for 6 weeks but won't help them get to where there is work.

How does that change the fact that i needed 500 bucks in my pocket 50+ years back to change jobs across the country? Nothing is new about any of this chit, particularly the fact that one needs to work or whine, it is an old choice. Lump the EI, then worry about the idiots that you should never have helped, uh huh.