EI Rule Change: 'Suitable Employment' Redefined; Flaherty Says No Such Thing As Bad Job

CP  |  By Posted: Updated: 05/15/2012 12:18 pm

OTTAWA - The Harper Conservatives are signalling they are preparing to get tough with unemployed Canadians who refuse jobs they consider below them or too far away.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said Monday new rule changes to define "suitable employment" and "reasonable" efforts at finding work have yet to come down, but as far as he's concerned people should be prepared to take pretty well any available job.

"There is no bad job, the only bad job is not having a job," he told reporters. "I drove a taxi, I refereed hockey. You do what you have to do to make a living."

Opposition critics leaped on the minister, accusing him of "insulting" Canadians who through no fault of their own find themselves out of work.

The economy has created 750,000 jobs since the recession, but the unemployment rate, last measured at 7.3 per cent, remains more than a full point higher than before the 2008-09 economic downturn. That means because of population growth, there are more unemployed Canadians today than four years ago, and more who have simply given up and left the labour force.

However, some business groups have complained they are experiencing labour shortages in some parts of the country, particularly Alberta and Saskatchewan, where the jobless rate is about two percentage points below the national average.

Flaherty agreed with that assessment and added that in future years, the issue will be one of worker shortages, not unemployment.

The economy's challenge in the future will be finding ways to encourage more handicapped Canadians, seniors, aboriginal people and the young to work, he said.

"We are going to have significant labour shortages in this country," he said.

"That means we are going to have to encourage more persons with disabilities to work, more seniors to work, more aboriginal people to work, including young people. We need to get rid of disincentives in the employment insurance system to people joining the work force."

The minister's statement came in a news conference in which he pressed the case for early passage of a massive omnibus bill the opposition has labelled a "Trojan horse" because it bundles together a wide array of issues, from environmental reviews to EI, immigration, old age pensions and public service cutbacks.

Flaherty made clear that the definition of what constitutes "suitable employment" under the Employment Insurance Act will be decided by Human Resources Minister Diane Finley.

But NDP critic Peggy Nash said Canadians should be concerned about what appears to be a hard line taken from the finance minister.

"If you are a computer software developer, will you be working at Tim Hortons? If you are an unemployed teacher or nurse, will you be working in the agricultural sector picking fruit?," she asked.

"(That) is a colossal waste of skills ... talent and training."

Nash pointed out that EI is not a government funded program, but an insurance policy paid for by employers and workers.

Liberal critic Marc Garneau, a former astronaut, called Flaherty's comments "insulting," and a threat to cut off Canadians currently collecting employment benefits if they won't accept work in "another sector (or) another town."

Along with changes to EI, the budget bill also proposes a change to the temporary foreign worker program to single out jobs that Canadians could fill.

Related on HuffPost:

FOLLOW CANADA POLITICS

Filed by Brodie Fenlon  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 176
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
contest d
12:18 PM on 05/17/2012
First help big companies get really big with government handouts: tax breaks, grants, R&D money, etc. and encourage a belief (which is possible when personhood is bestowed on a corporation) that whatever and where ever they build with public revenue is intrinsically theirs.

Government buys into rhetoric of suppressing wages for the sake of competition: if the $1/hr. min. wage in 1960 tracked inflation, it'd be $14 today; put another way: only 40x difference in worker/CEO wage in 1970s vs. 400x difference today.

In addition, ignore/support multi-nationals as they turn the N. American workforce into a temporary workforce, stripped of as many benefits as possible "to remain competitive"... of the "750,000 jobs created since the recession ended" how many of those were effectively temporary?

Provide more incentives for multi-nationals to set up shop in developing countries via free trade deals and structural reforms (coerced of course), allowing us "to remain competitive" against "foreign companies" who "unfairly" use cheap/slave/child labour and benefit from non-existent environmental and labour laws.

Mid-sized companies who might have actually cared about their workers follow suit and/or merge or are forced out of the market.

Also ignore/support financial industry that accelerates predatory behaviour of deregulated markets.

Enter Jim Flaherty: Canadians are lazy, entitled, and too proud, they should be happy with whatever jobs are left over from 4 decades of government sponsored outsourcing.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NorthernLite
The future belongs to the people of reason
12:14 PM on 05/17/2012
So when you are defeated in the next election Mr. Minister, maybe you try nice job here in B.C. picking daffodils.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
supertim
11:39 AM on 05/17/2012
what the little leprachaun o'finance did not mention is that the policing of the new policies will be left up to the hapless civil servants who are neither qualified, nor capable of admninistering the new rules & regs, and in fact, i had the misfortune of being hired on as a contract worker for what was then known as HRDC to help clear up the backlog of EI applications, and it was the worst year of my life, i had never met such unhappy, unskilled, and downright racist group of people as the white civil servants i worked with at the main Kitchener, ON office
04:32 AM on 05/17/2012
As usual, the cons are proposing changes to an existing program which are shortsighted, all-encompassing, and meanspirited. That being said, I personally can attest to what I consider EI abuses, where people I knew took seasonal jobs (mostly outdoor work, firefighting, etc.), with the intention of collecting EI all winter and not working, or working now and then and getting paid under the table. These were all young, healthy guys, who could easily have gotten decent jobs in town in winter if they'd wanted them. There were lumber mills, some mines, stores, and so on always looking for help. So I won't shed any tears over guys like that if they get shut out from collecting EI all winter if other jobs are available. But obviously that's only one of many many scenarios which play out all over Canada, and for the cons to think that all unemployed people are just bums unwilling to work is stupid and simpleminded beyond belief. The problems for the unemployed nowadays are far more complex, but I guess the cons' tiny brains just can't process that reality.
03:41 PM on 05/16/2012
So - if all employment insurance is lumped into one group and now the gov't is telling people to move for a job, take anything they can or just stop filing - are we also going to examine the real costs of taking money from the unemployment insurance fund to use for maternity leave and retraining? I mean, if you are trying to lessen the people on unemployment insurance, than everything should be out in the open. Maybe we shouldn't be paying for maternity leave or retraining ...what other programs is the gov't taking from those funds and what effort is being made to streamline those?
10:50 AM on 05/17/2012
Maternity leave is already streamlined. Parents have to work a certain amount of hours to qualify and pay is based on hours worked up to 55 percent of pay or approx 1600 per month, whichever is more. Furthermore moms can't cheat the system like some of those on ei. You either had a baby or you didn't.
11:27 AM on 05/16/2012
The government should address the fact that most jobs these days are contract based. Target the employers for cutting people loose all the time instead of fostering a long term relationship within a company.
If everyone is expected to apply to (and presumably would get hired by) Tim Hortons, then who would qualify for EI? Wouldn't every single person be declined? What are we paying into then?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aesops
Appearances often are deceiving
12:21 PM on 05/16/2012
You'd be paying for Flaherty's and all the rest's generous public pensions.
12:06 AM on 05/16/2012
This law is just another way of lessening the options of the majority of us who rely on a pay check as opposed to other income, such as stocks. What the Conservatives are saying if your job has unresolvable safety practices, a manager who won't listen to your sexual harassment complaints or makes you work unpaid overtime regularly you still feel pressure to work there because to quit will cause you and your family sever financial hardship. The same pressures are in place when being forced to take a job that has involves managers that don't care about safety, work life balance or bullying. If anyone thinks that the laws or practices that are alleged to enforce workers' protection most of the time see life from rose coloured glasses. Many times workers have to put up with these abuses for a long time because they don't have the means to hire a lawyer or go with less income while the bureaucratic process unfolds.
photo
freeSpeakr
I stand on the shoulders of giants
09:27 AM on 05/16/2012
The actions of the Harper CPC to elevate the corporate interest above the citizens' interest mirror the actions of the Crown in France c.1750-1789. Let them eat … this!
photo
Another Pesky Canadian
Talk - action = 0
10:05 PM on 05/15/2012
Re: "There is no bad job, the only bad job is not having a job," he told reporters. "I drove a taxi, I refereed hockey. You do what you have to do to make a living."

Which, 30 or 40 years ago or so, when Flatulerty may have held these jobs; may have paid enough to survive at the time.

Times have changed...the cost of living has eroded the earning power of a Canadian dollar.

When I was a kid in the 50's; my father supported a wife and 3 children on a High school teacher's salary, and was able to purchase land and build a house for his family IN VANCOUVER.

Today, that is almost IMPOSSIBLE even with 2 people earning good salaries.

Harper must go.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marg Wood
Peace
06:17 PM on 05/16/2012
My father was a tailor always had work but not very well paid work. My Mother was a custom dress maker and any thing that could be sown or crafted she did my fathers shirts and my brothers strides (remember those) all our clothes. Getting a home was their priority they bought it when I was seven and my dad bought his first car in 1952. My father also supported his family. It would be imposable today. My father always said my mother earned more then he did by making everything even sheets and towels. Martha Stewart was in no way as talented as my mother.
photo
Another Pesky Canadian
Talk - action = 0
06:38 PM on 05/16/2012
Times have changed, for sure.

It becomes hard to make valid comparisons between time periods when so many things have changed so much. In the 70's I always felt that I could knock on a few doors and choose from the many jobs that were available to me, even as a high school graduate.

These days; with lots more education and decades of experience in my field; I most often don't even get the courtesy of an e-mail in return.
compro01
Conservatism : Policy-based evidence making
08:04 PM on 05/15/2012
So, Flaherty drove a taxi. I wish he would go back to doing that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pjlowry
06:41 PM on 05/15/2012
These kind of anti-worker, anti-middle class laws are going to play right into the hands of the opposition who have a history of fighting for workers and the middle class. Are the PCs actually trying to tank their own numbers cause if they want to stop the NDP popularity numbers from continiously climbing, this is not the way to do it...
04:26 PM on 05/15/2012
As usual, the word "finesse" cannot be applied to the Harper gov't. The message is blunt. But at risk of defending the right who cannot represent me (as seen via the ridiculous, short sighted ideological omnibus bill), Flaherty isn't altogether wrong.
The UI system (its abuses and all) is an incredibly important social service. But the NDP example of a software developer taking a job at Tim Hortons is a straw man argument. I work in IT, and there is a huge turn around in all the facets: Development, QA, DBA, Project Managmenet, Analysis, etc. And even if that doesn't pan out, and the job at Timmy's is unavoidable, nothing precludes someone from continuing to look for more suitable employment while being gainfully employed.
08:14 PM on 05/15/2012
Some people cannot look for a job and hold a job at the same time. I guess such people should just accept their lot as Social Darwinian roadkill and blow their brains out.
11:11 AM on 05/16/2012
Again with the straw man. Why not exactly? With the endless number of online job sites, anyone can take 30 minutes a day and fire off at least 5 CVs. Linkedin has been a great source for me personally (And no, I don't work for them).
You get points for "Social Darwinian Roadkill" though. I'm stealing that one. But by no means am I suggesting we let people fall to the wayside. I'm positing that waiting for the gov't to fix your jobless situation lacks personal accountability and responsibility. Use UI as a bridge. But its a far cry from a safety net. I have more respect for the software developer who winds up working at Tim Hortons in an effort to make ends meet and maintain their autonomy, than an overly entitled ex-employee who blames government for a lack of available jobs in their field.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cwebster
predominantly exasperated
04:19 PM on 05/15/2012
Dear Conservative party:

Stop taking us down the road to Fascism.

Thank you.
photo
Another Pesky Canadian
Talk - action = 0
09:43 PM on 05/15/2012
You are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too polite. Fanned anyway.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cwebster
predominantly exasperated
10:13 PM on 05/15/2012
Thank you
Fanned back:)
photo
freeSpeakr
I stand on the shoulders of giants
09:29 AM on 05/16/2012
too late.
"Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism as it represents the merger of state and corporate power." Benny Mussolini
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cwebster
predominantly exasperated
09:59 AM on 05/16/2012
I still have a spark of hope. We are definitely becoming a corporate plutocracy, following the US. A harsher society, with no compassion. Not a cheerful prospect.
02:43 PM on 05/15/2012
As usual another recycled (failed) US republican idea. You force people to work at distant low paying jobs where the transportation cost and travel time is so high as to make the job pointless then if they refuse to do it you cut off their benefits.

Of course it is great for employers since they will now have a captive labor force that are required to work no matter how low the pay is and its perfectly consistent with the Harper government's view that the lower and middle classes are livestock.
02:33 PM on 05/15/2012
I say he should take a job as meat taster of dead cattle! That would be justice.
02:31 PM on 05/15/2012
If Canadians can be made to fill jobs that would otherwise go to temporary foreign workers, why can't Canadian businesses be forced to hire Canadians instead of giving the jobs to foreign workers offshore? Con policies only favour their business friends.
photo
freeSpeakr
I stand on the shoulders of giants
09:30 AM on 05/16/2012
Excellent point. Workers need to realize that their social strength requires solidarity.
10:16 AM on 05/16/2012
Voters like my elderly mother have been conned (pun intended) into supporting regressive policies and legislation that are eroding all the gains that workers fought for during her lifetime.I fear that we forget too easily.