"Toronto House Prices" - Steve Nease, Oakville, Ontario, Canada
Showing posts with label Toronto. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Toronto. Show all posts
Monday, November 9, 2015
Thursday, October 15, 2015
Ontario allowing employers to fire workers without cause
Another one of those stories shining a bright light on millions of Ontarians precariously employed & how they are exploited by employers in Ontario. This story is not telling about people working in some far off developing country in Africa or Asia but right here in Canada.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Show up to work one day & get fired for no reason?
Sorry about your luck.
In Ontario, not a single worker is protected from wrongful dismissal under the Employment Standards Act.
Hit with the flu & can’t make it into the office?
Consider sucking it up, because chances are you won’t get paid. You’ll be lucky to keep your job, in fact.
Have to put in extra hours one week to get the job done?
Whatever you do, don’t expect overtime pay. Or even to get paid at all.
Ontario’s outdated employment laws, currently under review, were designed to create basic protections for the majority of the province’s non-unionized workers.
Instead, millions are falling through the gaps created by a dizzying array of loopholes, from the dangerous to the downright bizarre.
Construction workers have no right to take breaks on the job.
Care workers aren’t entitled to time off between shifts.
Vets aren’t entitled to vacation pay.
Janitors have no right to minimum wage.
Cab drivers aren’t entitled to overtime pay.
And dozens of occupations, some that you’ve never even heard of, are exempt from basic rights entirely.
“Keepers of fur-bearing mammals” have no right to minimum wage.
Sod layers have no limits on their daily hours of work.
Shrub growers don’t get a lunch break.
The system is so complicated that the Ministry of Labour has developed a special online tool to help decipher who’s entitled to what.
But as the province reviews its antiquated Employment Standards Act, critics argue that its confusing web of exemptions makes it harder for the so-called precariously employed to defend their rights — & easier for bosses to ignore them.
“When you distil it down to what these exemptions are seeking to achieve, really they are to give employers more control over work & more control over wages,” says Mary Gellatly of Parkdale Community Legal Services.
“It sends the message to employers that they can get away without complying.”
The Act was first introduced in Ontario in 1968 to set basic work standards, especially for non-unionized employees who don’t have a collective agreement to provide extra protections.
But there are at least 45 occupations in Ontario that are exempt from a variety of its fundamental entitlements, many of them low-wage jobs in industries where precarious work is rife.
The Ministry of Labour says many of the exemptions are “long standing” & related to “the nature of the work performed.”
But York University professor Leah Vosko, who is leading research into employment standards protections for the precariously employed, says exemptions have come at least in part from industry pressure, leaving the Act a “complex patchwork that is difficult for workers & even officials to comprehend.”
Even when there are clear violations, speaking out can come at a cost.
Reprisal is illegal under the Act, meaning bosses can’t penalize employees for exercising their workplace rights. But the Act gives workers no protection against wrongful dismissal. Employers do not have to give cause for firing someone.
Unionized employees are generally protected by their collective agreements, & workers can sue employers if they think they have been unfairly terminated.
But most precarious, low-income employees are not unionized, & most do not have the money to take legal action against an employer, says Parkdale’s Gellatly.
“It’s the big reason why many people can’t do anything if they’re in a workplace with substandard conditions, because they can get fired without cause.”
Linda Wang, who worked at a Toronto cosmetics manufacturer for 4 years, was fired less than 2 weeks after she asked her employer for the extra pay she was owed for working a public holiday. She says no reason was given for her termination.
Wang, a mother of two, claims her employer repeatedly bullied her & her colleagues, & that she believes she was dismissed for asking for the wages.
She has filed a reprisal complaint with the Ministry of Labour, but Wang cannot afford to take her employer to court.
“I feel the system is against workers,” she says. “It’s in favour of employers.”
“Whatever job you have you put so much of yourself into it,” adds Gellatly. “The fact that employers can just fire you without a reason is incredibly devastating for folks.”
The Act also contains significant gaps when it comes to sick leave & overtime.
The legislation provides most workers with 10 unpaid days of job-protected emergency leave, which means they can’t be fired for taking a day off due to illness or family crisis.
Critics call this measure subpar by most standards, since it still causes many workers to lose a day’s income for being ill. An estimated 145 countries give employees some form of paid sick leave.
“Unfortunately, we stand out for our inadequacy,” says Brock University professor Kendra Coulter.
But the 10-day protected leave doesn’t apply to almost one in three of the province’s most vulnerable workers. An exemption that excludes employees in workplaces of less than 50 people from that right means 1.6 million workers in Ontario are not even entitled to a single, unpaid, job-protected sick day.
Fast-growing, low-wage sectors such as retail, food services & health care are most likely to be exempt according to a recent report by the Workers’ Action Centre.
While many small businesses voluntarily give their employees paid sick days, the loophole leaves many workers — especially the precariously employed — exposed.
Toronto resident Gordon Butler asked his employer, a small construction company in Markham, for one day off work after he sliced his thumb open on the job. He says his boss told him not to come back.
“I didn’t believe him,” says Butler, 44, who has an 8-month-old child. “I tried to plead with him, & he said ‘No, too bad.’ ”
“The way it’s stacked up right now is there are very few options for people who are in low-wage & precarious work to actually take sick leave when they’re sick,” says Steve Barnes, director of policy at Toronto’s Wellesley Institute, a health-policy think tank.
“They not only have to worry about lost income, but the potential for losing their jobs,” adds Brock’s Coulter. “It’s unkind & unnecessary.”
The stress caused by the province’s meagre sick leave provisions are compounded by exemptions surrounding overtime pay, to which around 1.5 million don’t have full access.
As a rule, employees should get paid time & a half after 44 hours a week on the job, according to the Employment Standards Act.
But in 2014, more than one million people in the province worked overtime, & 59% of them did not get any pay whatsoever for it, Statistics Canada data shows.
This, experts say, is partly because enforcement is poor. But in Ontario, a variety of occupations don’t even have the right to overtime pay, including farmworkers, flower growers, IT workers, fishers & accountants. Managers are also not entitled to overtime.
Vladimir Sanchez Rivera, a 45-year-old seasonal farmworker in the Niagara region, says he has worked 96-hour weeks doing back-breaking labour picking cucumbers & other produce.
“We don’t have access to protections when we are working in agriculture,” he says. “And our employers tell us that.”
Low-wage workers are even more likely to be excluded from full overtime pay coverage, according to the Workers’ Action Centre’s research. Less than one third of low-income employees are fully covered by the Act’s overtime provisions, compared to around 70% of higher earners, because they are more likely to work in jobs that aren’t eligible.
Workplaces can also sign so-called “averaging provisions” with their employees, which allow bosses to average a worker’s overtime over a period of up to 4 weeks.
That means an employee could work 60 hours one week & 50 the next, but not receive any overtime as long as they don’t work more than a total of 176 hours a month.
Critics say the measure means more work for less pay, & paves the way to erratic, unpredictable schedules.
“That’s a huge impact on workers & their families in terms of lost income & having to work extra hours,” says Parkdale’s Gellatly.
“It’s certainly not good for workers, for their families, & it’s not good for creating decent jobs in terms of rebooting our economy,” she adds.
For many of the precariously employed, falling through the gaps ruins lives.
...
Proposed solutions
A recent report by the Workers’ Action Centre makes a number of recommendations to rebuild the basic floor of rights for workers. The proposed reforms include:
• Amending the ESA to include protection from wrongful dismissal
• Eliminating all occupational exemptions to ESA rights
• Repealing overtime exemptions & special rules
• Repealing overtime averaging provisions
• Repealing the emergency leave exemption for workplaces with less than 50 people
• Requiring employers to provide up to 7 days of paid sick leave
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Show up to work one day & get fired for no reason?
Sorry about your luck.
In Ontario, not a single worker is protected from wrongful dismissal under the Employment Standards Act.
Hit with the flu & can’t make it into the office?
Consider sucking it up, because chances are you won’t get paid. You’ll be lucky to keep your job, in fact.
Have to put in extra hours one week to get the job done?
Whatever you do, don’t expect overtime pay. Or even to get paid at all.
Ontario’s outdated employment laws, currently under review, were designed to create basic protections for the majority of the province’s non-unionized workers.
Instead, millions are falling through the gaps created by a dizzying array of loopholes, from the dangerous to the downright bizarre.
Construction workers have no right to take breaks on the job.
Care workers aren’t entitled to time off between shifts.
Vets aren’t entitled to vacation pay.
Janitors have no right to minimum wage.
Cab drivers aren’t entitled to overtime pay.
And dozens of occupations, some that you’ve never even heard of, are exempt from basic rights entirely.
“Keepers of fur-bearing mammals” have no right to minimum wage.
Sod layers have no limits on their daily hours of work.
Shrub growers don’t get a lunch break.
The system is so complicated that the Ministry of Labour has developed a special online tool to help decipher who’s entitled to what.
But as the province reviews its antiquated Employment Standards Act, critics argue that its confusing web of exemptions makes it harder for the so-called precariously employed to defend their rights — & easier for bosses to ignore them.
“When you distil it down to what these exemptions are seeking to achieve, really they are to give employers more control over work & more control over wages,” says Mary Gellatly of Parkdale Community Legal Services.
“It sends the message to employers that they can get away without complying.”
The Act was first introduced in Ontario in 1968 to set basic work standards, especially for non-unionized employees who don’t have a collective agreement to provide extra protections.
But there are at least 45 occupations in Ontario that are exempt from a variety of its fundamental entitlements, many of them low-wage jobs in industries where precarious work is rife.
The Ministry of Labour says many of the exemptions are “long standing” & related to “the nature of the work performed.”
But York University professor Leah Vosko, who is leading research into employment standards protections for the precariously employed, says exemptions have come at least in part from industry pressure, leaving the Act a “complex patchwork that is difficult for workers & even officials to comprehend.”
Even when there are clear violations, speaking out can come at a cost.
Reprisal is illegal under the Act, meaning bosses can’t penalize employees for exercising their workplace rights. But the Act gives workers no protection against wrongful dismissal. Employers do not have to give cause for firing someone.
Unionized employees are generally protected by their collective agreements, & workers can sue employers if they think they have been unfairly terminated.
But most precarious, low-income employees are not unionized, & most do not have the money to take legal action against an employer, says Parkdale’s Gellatly.
“It’s the big reason why many people can’t do anything if they’re in a workplace with substandard conditions, because they can get fired without cause.”
Linda Wang, who worked at a Toronto cosmetics manufacturer for 4 years, was fired less than 2 weeks after she asked her employer for the extra pay she was owed for working a public holiday. She says no reason was given for her termination.
Wang, a mother of two, claims her employer repeatedly bullied her & her colleagues, & that she believes she was dismissed for asking for the wages.
She has filed a reprisal complaint with the Ministry of Labour, but Wang cannot afford to take her employer to court.
“I feel the system is against workers,” she says. “It’s in favour of employers.”
“Whatever job you have you put so much of yourself into it,” adds Gellatly. “The fact that employers can just fire you without a reason is incredibly devastating for folks.”
The Act also contains significant gaps when it comes to sick leave & overtime.
The legislation provides most workers with 10 unpaid days of job-protected emergency leave, which means they can’t be fired for taking a day off due to illness or family crisis.
Critics call this measure subpar by most standards, since it still causes many workers to lose a day’s income for being ill. An estimated 145 countries give employees some form of paid sick leave.
“Unfortunately, we stand out for our inadequacy,” says Brock University professor Kendra Coulter.
But the 10-day protected leave doesn’t apply to almost one in three of the province’s most vulnerable workers. An exemption that excludes employees in workplaces of less than 50 people from that right means 1.6 million workers in Ontario are not even entitled to a single, unpaid, job-protected sick day.
Fast-growing, low-wage sectors such as retail, food services & health care are most likely to be exempt according to a recent report by the Workers’ Action Centre.
While many small businesses voluntarily give their employees paid sick days, the loophole leaves many workers — especially the precariously employed — exposed.
Toronto resident Gordon Butler asked his employer, a small construction company in Markham, for one day off work after he sliced his thumb open on the job. He says his boss told him not to come back.
“I didn’t believe him,” says Butler, 44, who has an 8-month-old child. “I tried to plead with him, & he said ‘No, too bad.’ ”
“The way it’s stacked up right now is there are very few options for people who are in low-wage & precarious work to actually take sick leave when they’re sick,” says Steve Barnes, director of policy at Toronto’s Wellesley Institute, a health-policy think tank.
“They not only have to worry about lost income, but the potential for losing their jobs,” adds Brock’s Coulter. “It’s unkind & unnecessary.”
The stress caused by the province’s meagre sick leave provisions are compounded by exemptions surrounding overtime pay, to which around 1.5 million don’t have full access.
As a rule, employees should get paid time & a half after 44 hours a week on the job, according to the Employment Standards Act.
But in 2014, more than one million people in the province worked overtime, & 59% of them did not get any pay whatsoever for it, Statistics Canada data shows.
This, experts say, is partly because enforcement is poor. But in Ontario, a variety of occupations don’t even have the right to overtime pay, including farmworkers, flower growers, IT workers, fishers & accountants. Managers are also not entitled to overtime.
Vladimir Sanchez Rivera, a 45-year-old seasonal farmworker in the Niagara region, says he has worked 96-hour weeks doing back-breaking labour picking cucumbers & other produce.
“We don’t have access to protections when we are working in agriculture,” he says. “And our employers tell us that.”
Low-wage workers are even more likely to be excluded from full overtime pay coverage, according to the Workers’ Action Centre’s research. Less than one third of low-income employees are fully covered by the Act’s overtime provisions, compared to around 70% of higher earners, because they are more likely to work in jobs that aren’t eligible.
Workplaces can also sign so-called “averaging provisions” with their employees, which allow bosses to average a worker’s overtime over a period of up to 4 weeks.
That means an employee could work 60 hours one week & 50 the next, but not receive any overtime as long as they don’t work more than a total of 176 hours a month.
Critics say the measure means more work for less pay, & paves the way to erratic, unpredictable schedules.
“That’s a huge impact on workers & their families in terms of lost income & having to work extra hours,” says Parkdale’s Gellatly.
“It’s certainly not good for workers, for their families, & it’s not good for creating decent jobs in terms of rebooting our economy,” she adds.
For many of the precariously employed, falling through the gaps ruins lives.
...
Proposed solutions
A recent report by the Workers’ Action Centre makes a number of recommendations to rebuild the basic floor of rights for workers. The proposed reforms include:
• Amending the ESA to include protection from wrongful dismissal
• Eliminating all occupational exemptions to ESA rights
• Repealing overtime exemptions & special rules
• Repealing overtime averaging provisions
• Repealing the emergency leave exemption for workplaces with less than 50 people
• Requiring employers to provide up to 7 days of paid sick leave
Sunday, September 20, 2015
'Wild West' scheduling holds millions of Ontario workers hostage
News stories like these are not so obvious to a majority of people in Canada & pretty much none abroad. The public thinks that since I am doing great in a permanent, full time position, everyone else must be in the same boat. We don't realize how the proverbial graph of labour conditions in US & Canada has consistently being going down for the past decade.
Employment is rising fast in retail industry in Canada. Search jobs in any one of the hundreds of job search websites & apps & you will definitely come across some retail sector jobs, regardless of what position you are searching for. However, most retailers are operating in a cut-throat market, & hence, try to be efficient by cutting down on their labour costs.
That happens despite some of the owners of the retail sectors becoming filthy rich & continuously becoming rich, for example, Walton family of Wal-Mart, Sobey family of Sobeys, Weston family of Loblaws etc.
These retailers try to find any loophole which can benefit them. For example, the article mentions that retailers hire new part-time staff, when the sales in store increases, instead of offering those extra hours to their existing staff. It doesn't provide any reason, but the reason retailers do that is because if existing part-timers are offered those extra hours & their hours get past the minimum threshold at which retailers are obliged to give those part-timers medical & dental benefits, then it will cost those retailers even more. So, retailers hire new staff, & this way keeping the hours of all part-timers below the minimum threshold of benefits.
People, who don't know what retailers do, very easily say that take a job at a store. They don't realize how hard life would become once you get in that cycle. As the article mentions, you won't even have the time to take a second job to cover your expenses, since erratic scheduling will demand your full schedule to be opened. You might be required to work at the store at any time.
But then, can we blame the retailers for this?
After all, as I said above, they are operating in a cut-throat environment & they need to cut costs wherever they can. Labour costs are a big chunk of total operating expenses. A majority of consumers demand lowest prices possible. They can easily do comparison shopping through websites, flyers, apps etc. & look for the cheapest price possible for the same product. There is no such thing as customer loyalty.
Most consumers, of course, are looking for lowest prices because they themselves are living on meagre wages. They don't have extra cash lying around to splurge on even organic & healthy food (which is generally more expensive than regular, non-organic food), forget then that they will spend extra on general products.
To keep prices so low, for example, like Wal-Mart, stores need to cut costs as much as they can. Of course, that means using technology as much as they can, for example, use of self-checking kiosks. Technology, though, take away jobs even from those part-timers. So technology makes more people unemployed.
Root of the problem lies at the mentality of owners that accumulation of wealth at the top is good. Owners think it is their entitled birth-right to accumulate as much wealth as they can. Rich elites, in general, are looking forward to keep hoarding money in their bank accounts. They cut costs brutally in their businesses; whatever industry they are in. Their workers are paid meagre wages. Those workers then spend their salaries very carefully. The rich owners also try to avoid, as much as they legally can, to pay for benefits; vacations, health, pensions etc. Workers then are required to buy those benefits & save for their pensions themselves ... from their already meagre wages.
Government, on the other hand, keep cutting social services & health benefits. I remember a decade ago that eye tests in Ontario were free for all every 2 years. Now, they are free only for diabetics, children & seniors. Adults have to pay for their eyes to be checked. Governments are cutting social services & health benefits because they don't have enough money in their public coffers (at least that's what the government says). They don't have enough money because rich business & political elites find ingenious ways to dodge taxes.
So, the rich business elites try to save big in their business operations through cutting wages, hiring more part-timers, cutting benefits etc. & then also save money by not paying their fair share of the taxes, which will, at least, help provide social services for those same poor workers whose wages & benefits they are cutting. So, the rich business elites have both their hands & the head in the money pot.
And we thought that this would be done by some unscrupulous, corrupt, unethical businessmen in the developing world !!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...
In Ontario, employers don’t have to provide workers with their schedule in advance.
There are no penalties for cancelling an employee’s shift even an hour before it’s due to start.
There is no obligation to guarantee part-time workers a certain number of hours.
There is no law preventing more part-time workers from being hired before offering existing employees more hours.
There is nothing that saves part-time workers from being paid less than full-time workers — even when they do the same job.
Many low-wage workers desperately need to take on second jobs but can’t, because employers expect full-time availability from their part-time employees.
Experts call erratic work scheduling the “Wild West” of employment standards, a practice that causes havoc in the lives of millions of Ontario workers but is almost completely ignored by provincial law.
The result in many industries is a “brutal combination” of unpredictable schedules, insufficient hours & poor wages, says Deena Ladd, who heads the Workers’ Action Centre, a Toronto-based labour rights advocacy group.
Now, Ontario’s so-called “precariously employed” are demanding change on these issues, as Premier Kathleen Wynne’s government embarks on a review of employment & labour laws that is expected to conclude in August 2016.
“It’s just incomprehensible that we’re asking people in our province today to try to manage their lives under these kinds of conditions,” says Kendra Coulter, a professor of labour studies at Brock University.
So-called flexible schedules are often welcomed by employees who want greater control over their work-life balance. But for the growing number of people in low-wage part-time positions, “flexibility” provides little in the way of control or balance.
41% of work in Ontario is now done outside a full-time, permanent relationship with a single employer.
...
Expecting full-time availability from part-time employees, the action centre’s Ladd says, makes it difficult for many low-wage workers to take on much-needed second jobs.
...
Ontario’s Employment Standards Act, last reviewed in 2000, is almost completely silent on the subject of scheduling, containing just one provision to protect workers.
The “three hour rule” forces bosses to give their employees 3 hours of pay if they arrive at work only to have their shifts abruptly shortened or cancelled. The rule does not apply to workers who are regularly scheduled to work less than 3 hours, which labour activists say is increasingly common.
Beyond that, employers have no responsibility to provide workers with a predictable schedule.
...
Erratic scheduling is most common in booming sectors such as retail, where jobs tend to be low-wage & non-unionized.
In Toronto alone, the number of people employed in retail has grown by 34% over the past 15 years, to more than 300,000 in 2014 from just under 227,000 in 1999.
Angelo DiCaro, Unifor’s lead researcher on the retail sector ..., says negotiating scheduling rights for union members is tough since there are no province-wide standards.
Flexible scheduling is popular with employers because it allows companies to spend less on payroll when sales slow down. Managers are often evaluated based on their success.
“It’s a pure efficiency argument from the retailers’ viewpoint,” explains Joseph Milner, a professor at Rotman School of Management. “The more flexible you can get your resources — your human resources, in this case — the more you would expect to get efficiencies.”
In addition to keeping wages low, hiring a large pool of part-time employees who work limited hours minimizes employers’ obligation to pay benefits such as medical & dental. Even in unionized settings, workers must often work a certain number of hours to be eligible for such entitlements.
Mary Gellatly of Parkdale Community Legal Services argues this “shifts what’s traditionally been the cost of doing business onto workers, especially low-wage precarious workers who can least afford it.”
“The reality is that at this point (scheduling) is a ‘Wild West’ when it comes to employment standards,” adds Brock University’s Coulter, who calls the reforms proposed by the Workers’ Action Centre “thoughtful, comprehensive & achievable.”
She also points out that not all employers take advantage of loose rules.
Costco Canada, for example, guarantees its full-time staff 40 hours a week, & its part-timers 25 hours. Schedules are posted at least 1 week in advance, & both full-time & part-time employees are entitled to health benefits.
The upshot, says Ross Hunt, the company’s vice-president of human resources, is one of the lowest employee turnover rates in the industry — 12%, compared with the retail average of about 21%.
“It gives (workers) a better quality of life. And if they’re stable & they stay with us, it’s great for us, too,” he told the Star in an interview.
But the political push for province-wide standards has so far lagged. In the US, the proposed federal Schedules that Work Act sets out much stronger protections, including mandatory two-week scheduling notice for many low-wage sectors.
The Act will face tough passage through the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, but that hasn’t stopped San Francisco from enacting game-changing municipal legislation with similar provisions, including providing retail workers with two weeks’ notice of their schedules.
“I think we’re way behind many jurisdictions in the US where they’re trying to put a halt to the unfettered growth of just-in-time scheduling,” says Parkdale’s Gellatly.
But campaigners say the Ontario government’s current review of the Employment Standards Act is a golden opportunity to fix what the action centre’s Ladd calls a “massive, gaping hole” in the province’s laws.
Proposed solutions
A recent report by the Workers’ Action Centre on precarious work in Ontario recommends reforming the Employment Standards Act to:
• Require two weeks’ advance posting of work schedules
• Give employees the right to one hour’s pay if their schedule is changed with less than a week’s notice, & 4 hours’ pay if less than 24 hours’ notice
• Mandate minimum three-hour shifts for all workers
• Require employers to give existing part-time & casual employees preference for available hours before hiring additional workers
• Give workers protection from reprisal when requesting schedule changes
• Mandate equal pay for equal work, regardless of part-time or full-time status
BY THE NUMBERS
40%: Pay difference per hour between part-time & full-time workers in Ontario
$11: Median wage for a Toronto grocery store worker in 2014
60%: Grocery store workers in Toronto who are not unionized
88%: Retail workers in Toronto who are not unionized
87%: Retail workers in Ontario who are not unionized
Employment is rising fast in retail industry in Canada. Search jobs in any one of the hundreds of job search websites & apps & you will definitely come across some retail sector jobs, regardless of what position you are searching for. However, most retailers are operating in a cut-throat market, & hence, try to be efficient by cutting down on their labour costs.
That happens despite some of the owners of the retail sectors becoming filthy rich & continuously becoming rich, for example, Walton family of Wal-Mart, Sobey family of Sobeys, Weston family of Loblaws etc.
These retailers try to find any loophole which can benefit them. For example, the article mentions that retailers hire new part-time staff, when the sales in store increases, instead of offering those extra hours to their existing staff. It doesn't provide any reason, but the reason retailers do that is because if existing part-timers are offered those extra hours & their hours get past the minimum threshold at which retailers are obliged to give those part-timers medical & dental benefits, then it will cost those retailers even more. So, retailers hire new staff, & this way keeping the hours of all part-timers below the minimum threshold of benefits.
People, who don't know what retailers do, very easily say that take a job at a store. They don't realize how hard life would become once you get in that cycle. As the article mentions, you won't even have the time to take a second job to cover your expenses, since erratic scheduling will demand your full schedule to be opened. You might be required to work at the store at any time.
But then, can we blame the retailers for this?
After all, as I said above, they are operating in a cut-throat environment & they need to cut costs wherever they can. Labour costs are a big chunk of total operating expenses. A majority of consumers demand lowest prices possible. They can easily do comparison shopping through websites, flyers, apps etc. & look for the cheapest price possible for the same product. There is no such thing as customer loyalty.
Most consumers, of course, are looking for lowest prices because they themselves are living on meagre wages. They don't have extra cash lying around to splurge on even organic & healthy food (which is generally more expensive than regular, non-organic food), forget then that they will spend extra on general products.
To keep prices so low, for example, like Wal-Mart, stores need to cut costs as much as they can. Of course, that means using technology as much as they can, for example, use of self-checking kiosks. Technology, though, take away jobs even from those part-timers. So technology makes more people unemployed.
Root of the problem lies at the mentality of owners that accumulation of wealth at the top is good. Owners think it is their entitled birth-right to accumulate as much wealth as they can. Rich elites, in general, are looking forward to keep hoarding money in their bank accounts. They cut costs brutally in their businesses; whatever industry they are in. Their workers are paid meagre wages. Those workers then spend their salaries very carefully. The rich owners also try to avoid, as much as they legally can, to pay for benefits; vacations, health, pensions etc. Workers then are required to buy those benefits & save for their pensions themselves ... from their already meagre wages.
Government, on the other hand, keep cutting social services & health benefits. I remember a decade ago that eye tests in Ontario were free for all every 2 years. Now, they are free only for diabetics, children & seniors. Adults have to pay for their eyes to be checked. Governments are cutting social services & health benefits because they don't have enough money in their public coffers (at least that's what the government says). They don't have enough money because rich business & political elites find ingenious ways to dodge taxes.
So, the rich business elites try to save big in their business operations through cutting wages, hiring more part-timers, cutting benefits etc. & then also save money by not paying their fair share of the taxes, which will, at least, help provide social services for those same poor workers whose wages & benefits they are cutting. So, the rich business elites have both their hands & the head in the money pot.
And we thought that this would be done by some unscrupulous, corrupt, unethical businessmen in the developing world !!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...
In Ontario, employers don’t have to provide workers with their schedule in advance.
There are no penalties for cancelling an employee’s shift even an hour before it’s due to start.
There is no obligation to guarantee part-time workers a certain number of hours.
There is no law preventing more part-time workers from being hired before offering existing employees more hours.
There is nothing that saves part-time workers from being paid less than full-time workers — even when they do the same job.
Many low-wage workers desperately need to take on second jobs but can’t, because employers expect full-time availability from their part-time employees.
Experts call erratic work scheduling the “Wild West” of employment standards, a practice that causes havoc in the lives of millions of Ontario workers but is almost completely ignored by provincial law.
The result in many industries is a “brutal combination” of unpredictable schedules, insufficient hours & poor wages, says Deena Ladd, who heads the Workers’ Action Centre, a Toronto-based labour rights advocacy group.
Now, Ontario’s so-called “precariously employed” are demanding change on these issues, as Premier Kathleen Wynne’s government embarks on a review of employment & labour laws that is expected to conclude in August 2016.
“It’s just incomprehensible that we’re asking people in our province today to try to manage their lives under these kinds of conditions,” says Kendra Coulter, a professor of labour studies at Brock University.
So-called flexible schedules are often welcomed by employees who want greater control over their work-life balance. But for the growing number of people in low-wage part-time positions, “flexibility” provides little in the way of control or balance.
41% of work in Ontario is now done outside a full-time, permanent relationship with a single employer.
...
Expecting full-time availability from part-time employees, the action centre’s Ladd says, makes it difficult for many low-wage workers to take on much-needed second jobs.
...
Ontario’s Employment Standards Act, last reviewed in 2000, is almost completely silent on the subject of scheduling, containing just one provision to protect workers.
The “three hour rule” forces bosses to give their employees 3 hours of pay if they arrive at work only to have their shifts abruptly shortened or cancelled. The rule does not apply to workers who are regularly scheduled to work less than 3 hours, which labour activists say is increasingly common.
Beyond that, employers have no responsibility to provide workers with a predictable schedule.
...
Erratic scheduling is most common in booming sectors such as retail, where jobs tend to be low-wage & non-unionized.
In Toronto alone, the number of people employed in retail has grown by 34% over the past 15 years, to more than 300,000 in 2014 from just under 227,000 in 1999.
Angelo DiCaro, Unifor’s lead researcher on the retail sector ..., says negotiating scheduling rights for union members is tough since there are no province-wide standards.
Flexible scheduling is popular with employers because it allows companies to spend less on payroll when sales slow down. Managers are often evaluated based on their success.
“It’s a pure efficiency argument from the retailers’ viewpoint,” explains Joseph Milner, a professor at Rotman School of Management. “The more flexible you can get your resources — your human resources, in this case — the more you would expect to get efficiencies.”
In addition to keeping wages low, hiring a large pool of part-time employees who work limited hours minimizes employers’ obligation to pay benefits such as medical & dental. Even in unionized settings, workers must often work a certain number of hours to be eligible for such entitlements.
Mary Gellatly of Parkdale Community Legal Services argues this “shifts what’s traditionally been the cost of doing business onto workers, especially low-wage precarious workers who can least afford it.”
“The reality is that at this point (scheduling) is a ‘Wild West’ when it comes to employment standards,” adds Brock University’s Coulter, who calls the reforms proposed by the Workers’ Action Centre “thoughtful, comprehensive & achievable.”
She also points out that not all employers take advantage of loose rules.
Costco Canada, for example, guarantees its full-time staff 40 hours a week, & its part-timers 25 hours. Schedules are posted at least 1 week in advance, & both full-time & part-time employees are entitled to health benefits.
The upshot, says Ross Hunt, the company’s vice-president of human resources, is one of the lowest employee turnover rates in the industry — 12%, compared with the retail average of about 21%.
“It gives (workers) a better quality of life. And if they’re stable & they stay with us, it’s great for us, too,” he told the Star in an interview.
But the political push for province-wide standards has so far lagged. In the US, the proposed federal Schedules that Work Act sets out much stronger protections, including mandatory two-week scheduling notice for many low-wage sectors.
The Act will face tough passage through the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, but that hasn’t stopped San Francisco from enacting game-changing municipal legislation with similar provisions, including providing retail workers with two weeks’ notice of their schedules.
“I think we’re way behind many jurisdictions in the US where they’re trying to put a halt to the unfettered growth of just-in-time scheduling,” says Parkdale’s Gellatly.
But campaigners say the Ontario government’s current review of the Employment Standards Act is a golden opportunity to fix what the action centre’s Ladd calls a “massive, gaping hole” in the province’s laws.
Proposed solutions
A recent report by the Workers’ Action Centre on precarious work in Ontario recommends reforming the Employment Standards Act to:
• Require two weeks’ advance posting of work schedules
• Give employees the right to one hour’s pay if their schedule is changed with less than a week’s notice, & 4 hours’ pay if less than 24 hours’ notice
• Mandate minimum three-hour shifts for all workers
• Require employers to give existing part-time & casual employees preference for available hours before hiring additional workers
• Give workers protection from reprisal when requesting schedule changes
• Mandate equal pay for equal work, regardless of part-time or full-time status
BY THE NUMBERS
40%: Pay difference per hour between part-time & full-time workers in Ontario
$11: Median wage for a Toronto grocery store worker in 2014
60%: Grocery store workers in Toronto who are not unionized
88%: Retail workers in Toronto who are not unionized
87%: Retail workers in Ontario who are not unionized
Monday, September 7, 2015
'Precarious employment' still rising in Toronto & Hamilton
Since, I've written some blog posts on employment situation in Toronto, I won't write a long post again, except, highlighting a few stats from this article.
- precarious employment includes people in temp & contract work, along with those with uncertain work schedules, irregular earnings, inconsistent hours of work or jobs without benefits, & also includes some self-employed people as precarious, only if they have irregular, unpredictable work
- almost half (44%) of adults in Toronto & Hamilton are in precarious employment
- once someone is in precarious employment, chances are high that they are going to be in trapped in it
- workers in precarious employment are almost twice as likely to report worse mental health than those in secure positions
- visible minorities are far more likely to be working in unstable jobs
- “Not only has work become less secure for racialized workers, but also the pay has actually decreased for them,” said Wayne Lewchuk, McMaster professor of labour studies & economics
- precarious employment has grown almost twice as fast as standard employment since 1997
- more men are landing in precarious employment, while white women are the only ones who are getting more secure employment & less precarious employment
- In Toronto, only 45.7% of respondents are now holding permanent full-time jobs with benefits
- 47% of Canadian firms in a recent Deloitte poll said they plan to increase the use of “contingent, outsourced, contract or part-time” workers in the next 3 to 5 years
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Precarious employment is becoming more prevalent in Canada’s largest city, a shift that is putting financial strain & emotional stress on households.
44% of adults in the Greater Toronto & Hamilton Area work in jobs that have some degree of insecurity, a study ... says. That share, which includes people working through temp agencies, freelancers & contract workers, is greater than the last time the survey was conducted in 2011, when it was 41%.
The new study is based on a survey of 4,193 people & produced by United Way Toronto & McMaster University.
The changing nature of work carries a broad impact. For many workers, unstable employment means less access to training & opportunities to get ahead, fewer benefits, more trouble managing finances & more anxiety. The effect spills into family & home life too, making it difficult to pay for school trips & plan any activities ... .
The study also looked at whether people are able to climb out of insecure employment. “One of the biggest ‘ah has’ for us was that no, in fact – if you are in precarious employment, there’s a very good chance you’re going to become trapped in it,” said Susan McIsaac, president & CEO of United Way Toronto. This is the case not just for those in low-income work, but “for many people in the middle class, this was a huge challenge in being able to maintain their middle-class status.”
Its definition includes people in temp & contract work, along with those with uncertain work schedules, irregular earnings, inconsistent hours of work or jobs without benefits. It counts some self-employed people as precarious, only if they have irregular, unpredictable work.
That’s the case for Anna Withrow. She has been largely self-employed since 2001, as a communications & marketing consultant, & says erratic earnings have wreaked havoc with her life.
“Cash flow has been the biggest crippling thing,” said Ms. Withrow, 45, who lives in Toronto. Her income has ranged from $24,000 to about $77,000, with no income at all in some months, & she has worked anywhere between 40 & 100 hours per week.
The impact has been both financial – a run-up in debts, making it difficult to pay the mortgage & finish renovations – & physical too, leading to acute stress, a less nutritious diet & weight gain. “If the right position came along, I would take it tomorrow.”
Workers in precarious jobs are almost twice as likely to report worse mental health than those in secure positions, the survey shows. Nearly half of them say they often don’t know their work schedules at least a week in advance. Scheduling uncertainty makes it hard to find child care.
Visible minorities are far more likely to be working in unstable jobs.
“Not only has work become less secure for racialized workers, but also the pay has actually decreased for them,” said Wayne Lewchuk, McMaster professor of labour studies and economics.
The study comes as the provincial government is reviewing its employment & labour laws, noting that non-standard work has grown almost twice as fast as standard employment since 1997.
By gender, a growing share of men are landing in precarious employment, he noted, likely a result of fewer factory jobs, while white women “are the only group in the study who saw an increase in secure employment & a decrease in precarious employment.”
The longer-term trend points to more insecure employment, said Prof. Lewchuk. “Each time there’s a recovery, the level of security is a little bit lower than the previous boom. I think this is because the competitive pressures are greater – firms are looking to cut costs … technology has changed, & there’s an infrastructure where they can go to temp agencies, & get not just unskilled workers, but they can get CEOs now.”
The results show almost six in 10 workers hold some form of secure employment — with 48% in permanent, full-time jobs that pay some benefits, & 8% permanent, part-time employees. This share has slightly fallen. Meanwhile, the portion of people in the least secure type of work, dubbed “precarious,” grew to 28.5% last year from 25.9% 3 years earlier.
In the city of Toronto, less than half, or 45.7%, of respondents are now holding permanent full-time jobs with benefits.
A debate has emerged over precarious employment – how it’s defined & what the long-term trends are. One analysis, by Toronto-Dominion Bank in March, found precarious employment levels in Canada are higher than before the recession, though they’re currently declining. It said this type of work often tracks business cycles, & that precarious employment will remain “elevated” over the next 2 years.
A 2013 paper by the Institute for Competitiveness & Prosperity found a growing number of workers in Toronto are employed in temporary, part-time, low-paying positions in routine-service industries.
Almost half, or 47%, of Canadian firms in a recent Deloitte poll said they plan to increase the use of “contingent, outsourced, contract or part-time” workers in the next 3 to 5 years, a strategy the consulting firm says helps give firms the ability to scale up or down as business needs fluctuate.
In a global report ..., the Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development said workers on temp contracts in Canada have “particularly low annual earnings” & that the annual median earnings of the self employed are also “considerably lower” compared with salaried workers.
...
The paper recommends a range of measures, including the need for ensuring all workers have access to skills & work training, to developing – & sharing – the business case for secure employment. At the federal level, it called for better labour market information & for updating employment insurance rules to better fit with today’s jobs market.
- precarious employment includes people in temp & contract work, along with those with uncertain work schedules, irregular earnings, inconsistent hours of work or jobs without benefits, & also includes some self-employed people as precarious, only if they have irregular, unpredictable work
- almost half (44%) of adults in Toronto & Hamilton are in precarious employment
- once someone is in precarious employment, chances are high that they are going to be in trapped in it
- workers in precarious employment are almost twice as likely to report worse mental health than those in secure positions
- visible minorities are far more likely to be working in unstable jobs
- “Not only has work become less secure for racialized workers, but also the pay has actually decreased for them,” said Wayne Lewchuk, McMaster professor of labour studies & economics
- precarious employment has grown almost twice as fast as standard employment since 1997
- more men are landing in precarious employment, while white women are the only ones who are getting more secure employment & less precarious employment
- In Toronto, only 45.7% of respondents are now holding permanent full-time jobs with benefits
- 47% of Canadian firms in a recent Deloitte poll said they plan to increase the use of “contingent, outsourced, contract or part-time” workers in the next 3 to 5 years
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Precarious employment is becoming more prevalent in Canada’s largest city, a shift that is putting financial strain & emotional stress on households.
44% of adults in the Greater Toronto & Hamilton Area work in jobs that have some degree of insecurity, a study ... says. That share, which includes people working through temp agencies, freelancers & contract workers, is greater than the last time the survey was conducted in 2011, when it was 41%.
The new study is based on a survey of 4,193 people & produced by United Way Toronto & McMaster University.
The changing nature of work carries a broad impact. For many workers, unstable employment means less access to training & opportunities to get ahead, fewer benefits, more trouble managing finances & more anxiety. The effect spills into family & home life too, making it difficult to pay for school trips & plan any activities ... .
The study also looked at whether people are able to climb out of insecure employment. “One of the biggest ‘ah has’ for us was that no, in fact – if you are in precarious employment, there’s a very good chance you’re going to become trapped in it,” said Susan McIsaac, president & CEO of United Way Toronto. This is the case not just for those in low-income work, but “for many people in the middle class, this was a huge challenge in being able to maintain their middle-class status.”
Its definition includes people in temp & contract work, along with those with uncertain work schedules, irregular earnings, inconsistent hours of work or jobs without benefits. It counts some self-employed people as precarious, only if they have irregular, unpredictable work.
That’s the case for Anna Withrow. She has been largely self-employed since 2001, as a communications & marketing consultant, & says erratic earnings have wreaked havoc with her life.
“Cash flow has been the biggest crippling thing,” said Ms. Withrow, 45, who lives in Toronto. Her income has ranged from $24,000 to about $77,000, with no income at all in some months, & she has worked anywhere between 40 & 100 hours per week.
The impact has been both financial – a run-up in debts, making it difficult to pay the mortgage & finish renovations – & physical too, leading to acute stress, a less nutritious diet & weight gain. “If the right position came along, I would take it tomorrow.”
Workers in precarious jobs are almost twice as likely to report worse mental health than those in secure positions, the survey shows. Nearly half of them say they often don’t know their work schedules at least a week in advance. Scheduling uncertainty makes it hard to find child care.
Visible minorities are far more likely to be working in unstable jobs.
“Not only has work become less secure for racialized workers, but also the pay has actually decreased for them,” said Wayne Lewchuk, McMaster professor of labour studies and economics.
The study comes as the provincial government is reviewing its employment & labour laws, noting that non-standard work has grown almost twice as fast as standard employment since 1997.
By gender, a growing share of men are landing in precarious employment, he noted, likely a result of fewer factory jobs, while white women “are the only group in the study who saw an increase in secure employment & a decrease in precarious employment.”
The longer-term trend points to more insecure employment, said Prof. Lewchuk. “Each time there’s a recovery, the level of security is a little bit lower than the previous boom. I think this is because the competitive pressures are greater – firms are looking to cut costs … technology has changed, & there’s an infrastructure where they can go to temp agencies, & get not just unskilled workers, but they can get CEOs now.”
The results show almost six in 10 workers hold some form of secure employment — with 48% in permanent, full-time jobs that pay some benefits, & 8% permanent, part-time employees. This share has slightly fallen. Meanwhile, the portion of people in the least secure type of work, dubbed “precarious,” grew to 28.5% last year from 25.9% 3 years earlier.
In the city of Toronto, less than half, or 45.7%, of respondents are now holding permanent full-time jobs with benefits.
A debate has emerged over precarious employment – how it’s defined & what the long-term trends are. One analysis, by Toronto-Dominion Bank in March, found precarious employment levels in Canada are higher than before the recession, though they’re currently declining. It said this type of work often tracks business cycles, & that precarious employment will remain “elevated” over the next 2 years.
A 2013 paper by the Institute for Competitiveness & Prosperity found a growing number of workers in Toronto are employed in temporary, part-time, low-paying positions in routine-service industries.
Almost half, or 47%, of Canadian firms in a recent Deloitte poll said they plan to increase the use of “contingent, outsourced, contract or part-time” workers in the next 3 to 5 years, a strategy the consulting firm says helps give firms the ability to scale up or down as business needs fluctuate.
In a global report ..., the Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development said workers on temp contracts in Canada have “particularly low annual earnings” & that the annual median earnings of the self employed are also “considerably lower” compared with salaried workers.
...
The paper recommends a range of measures, including the need for ensuring all workers have access to skills & work training, to developing – & sharing – the business case for secure employment. At the federal level, it called for better labour market information & for updating employment insurance rules to better fit with today’s jobs market.
Wednesday, August 12, 2015
Half of Toronto-area workers have fallen into 'precarious employment'
Although, this is a good informative piece & confirms my thinking that job situation in Canada keeps going downhill, I still come across people who work in career offices (employment agencies, government human resources centers, & university career offices) who think completely different, i.e. that there's nothing wrong with labour market of Canada & everything is on the up.
Those people have usually one suggestion: networking. Do networking.
I'm dumbfounded with that suggestion because I understand that networking is very important to have access to that hidden job market but then are all these millions of job seekers in Toronto & all over Canada are socially inept people that they aren't / can't network?
I can accept that perhaps, I am not the greatest person to make friends with people & network easily. But I can't accept that all these millions of people are similar to me on the social gauge. So, if they are not like me & most of them must be much more social than me, then why are they having problems landing a secure, permanent, good-paying job?
Part of my answer goes back to my previous blog post (of Robocops coming to Dubai by 2017) that with the help of automation & robotics, the bar of secure & permanent jobs in every category & profession is constantly rising. Although, the piece says that trends of changes in labour market cannot be predicted & can come suddenly, I say that they are actually predictable & can be seen from miles afar. For instance, hotel staff jobs will be going away within the next 10-20 years, thanks to the introduction of robot staff at Henn na hotel in Japan. Or the jobs of taxi drivers, truck drivers & chauffeurs are already in jeopardy, thanks to self-driving trucks, cars, & even Uber.
Although, the piece talks about politicians & institution leaders getting their heads together & make better policies in the areas of labour relations, employment, pay structures etc., I'd say that that's a useless suggestion.
We know politicians are controlled by rich business elites. Rich business elites didn't become rich by giving away money to poor through better pay structure, providing training & development, & hiring humans, instead of not automating their jobs. A business person will always look for efficiency & cost-cutting measures, & automating a job achieves both objectives.
Networking is useless if there are no influential people in your network to pull you in the upper echelons of a business or an organization. Because if you are a young individual & not at the top of the organization, & if there's no scope of you climbing higher quickly, even if you starts at the bottom of the organizational hierarchy, then your permanent job is already at jeopardy. You may get hired on contract or temporary basis later on in life, but not permanent. At that point in your life, you won't have time to go back to school to re-educate yourself & re-orient your ship of life.
Is this labour market situation unique to Canada where more & more people are falling into precarious employment? Sort of. Because, Canadian industries are mostly focused on fossil fuels & minerals extractions. Governments cannot do much since companies do come in Canada with the help of tax subsidies but then as soon as they realize their tax advantages, they go back to a low-cost area. Governments cannot intervene heavily since that would amount to dictatorship & governments' undue influences. That would go against the free market mantra of the West.
This labour market situation of more people falling into precarious employment is same in US & Europe. Germany & France engineered the European Union to increase their own employment & labour market situation. But, it was at the detriment of other countries which could not export & had to import German & French products, which in the end, put a huge dent in their labour markets. After all, somebody's GDP must decrease so someone else's increases.
Root of the problem of these labour market problems is that Western governments always acted reactionary, instead of proactively, to where the world was moving. North American countries didn't market technical professions (those jobs are plentiful now with good salary prospects, but not enough job seekers) or they pushed for dismemberment of unions, even though, they are the ones to push for higher wages. North American countries didn't, & still aren't, pushing for green technologies, which can help hire more people in secure, permanent jobs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In just a few short decades Canada’s labour market has changed dramatically. The widely held belief that employment leads to economic security & social well-being has become out-of-step with an increasing number of people in today’s work force.
Research ... by McMaster University & United Way Toronto provides new insights into just how much the labour market in Southern Ontario has changed. Barely half of people working in the Greater Toronto & Hamilton areas have permanent, full-time jobs that provide benefits & stability. Everyone else is working in situations that are part-time, vulnerable or insecure in some way. This includes a growing number of temporary, contract & on-call positions. Jobs without benefits. Jobs with uncertain futures. This significant rise in precarious employment is a serious threat – not only to the collective prosperity of the region, but also to the social fabric of communities.
Beneath this finding is another surprise: precarious employment is hurting everyone. It’s found across all demographic groups, in every sector & across income levels that were previously immune. Having a middle-class income can now come with increased employment insecurity.
It is now common for many workers to piece together year-round, full-time hours by working multiple jobs. In addition, working conditions are more uncertain, as existing labour laws have not kept up with changing realities. Union membership is on the decline. Doors to opportunity are limited as opportunities for job training & development decline.
While we know that being precariously employed is worst when you’re living in low income, our research confirms this increasingly is an issue that affects people at every income level. Moreover, uncertainty about work is a major barrier for anyone planning for the future. People find it more difficult to chart a clear & stable path in their careers & are consequently delaying significant life plans, such as whether to start a family, because they feel insecure about their futures. Among parents, making plans, scheduling activities & spending time together as a family becomes much more difficult. The stress & pressure of being precariously employed is also more likely to lead to feelings of self doubt & anxiety.
Just as important, our study also found that job insecurity is about more than just poverty. Its impacts are far-reaching, affecting all parts of our lives, redefining how we contribute to our economy, give back to our community & interact with our families. Precarious work can make it more difficult to make ongoing volunteer commitments & donate to charities. Across all income levels, insecurity makes it less likely that people will have vital social networks, such as friends to talk to.
Trends that have caused nearly half of our work force to engage in insecure employment show no signs of slowing down. Among study respondents, even those who describe their current employment as permanent are aware that change can come suddenly & unexpectedly.
The question now is: How should we respond to this shifting climate? While the global nature of our economy can sometimes make it feel like change is beyond our control, policy paralysis is not an option. We have a variety of tools within our reach to effectively limit the spread of insecure employment & mitigate its negative effects.
The way forward is to confront these trends, assess how current labour market regulations & income security policies are supporting people in precarious employment, & explore options for making them more responsive. It’s time for a conversation that brings together the private sector, labour organizations, community groups & all levels of government in a discussion about how together we can mitigate the negative effects of precarious employment.
Raising incomes is an obvious & critical area of focus, but it is not enough. The reality that workers in precarious employment tend to exit & re-enter the labour market much more often than those in permanent employment requires a renewed look at basic employment standards & protections as well as revamped income security programs.
More attention also needs to be given to how we can best support human capital development so that our work force remains innovative & competitive. Training & education models with a life-long learning focus can help workers build the skills to continuously improve their employment prospects.
Family supports, such as early learning & child care, accessible recreation & settlement programs, & affordable housing are also keys to maintaining healthy households & building a stronger sense of community.
What we need today is a renewed public policy framework that will be supportive of those in precarious employment & responsive to the challenges associated with this shifting labour market. Given this reality, it’s crucial that we all work together, governments, employers, labour & other stakeholders, to identify common ground & advance a shared agenda for real & sustainable progress.
Susan McIsaac is president & CEO of United Way Toronto, Charlotte Yates, is dean at the faculty of social sciences at McMaster University.
Those people have usually one suggestion: networking. Do networking.
I'm dumbfounded with that suggestion because I understand that networking is very important to have access to that hidden job market but then are all these millions of job seekers in Toronto & all over Canada are socially inept people that they aren't / can't network?
I can accept that perhaps, I am not the greatest person to make friends with people & network easily. But I can't accept that all these millions of people are similar to me on the social gauge. So, if they are not like me & most of them must be much more social than me, then why are they having problems landing a secure, permanent, good-paying job?
Part of my answer goes back to my previous blog post (of Robocops coming to Dubai by 2017) that with the help of automation & robotics, the bar of secure & permanent jobs in every category & profession is constantly rising. Although, the piece says that trends of changes in labour market cannot be predicted & can come suddenly, I say that they are actually predictable & can be seen from miles afar. For instance, hotel staff jobs will be going away within the next 10-20 years, thanks to the introduction of robot staff at Henn na hotel in Japan. Or the jobs of taxi drivers, truck drivers & chauffeurs are already in jeopardy, thanks to self-driving trucks, cars, & even Uber.
Although, the piece talks about politicians & institution leaders getting their heads together & make better policies in the areas of labour relations, employment, pay structures etc., I'd say that that's a useless suggestion.
We know politicians are controlled by rich business elites. Rich business elites didn't become rich by giving away money to poor through better pay structure, providing training & development, & hiring humans, instead of not automating their jobs. A business person will always look for efficiency & cost-cutting measures, & automating a job achieves both objectives.
Networking is useless if there are no influential people in your network to pull you in the upper echelons of a business or an organization. Because if you are a young individual & not at the top of the organization, & if there's no scope of you climbing higher quickly, even if you starts at the bottom of the organizational hierarchy, then your permanent job is already at jeopardy. You may get hired on contract or temporary basis later on in life, but not permanent. At that point in your life, you won't have time to go back to school to re-educate yourself & re-orient your ship of life.
Is this labour market situation unique to Canada where more & more people are falling into precarious employment? Sort of. Because, Canadian industries are mostly focused on fossil fuels & minerals extractions. Governments cannot do much since companies do come in Canada with the help of tax subsidies but then as soon as they realize their tax advantages, they go back to a low-cost area. Governments cannot intervene heavily since that would amount to dictatorship & governments' undue influences. That would go against the free market mantra of the West.
This labour market situation of more people falling into precarious employment is same in US & Europe. Germany & France engineered the European Union to increase their own employment & labour market situation. But, it was at the detriment of other countries which could not export & had to import German & French products, which in the end, put a huge dent in their labour markets. After all, somebody's GDP must decrease so someone else's increases.
Root of the problem of these labour market problems is that Western governments always acted reactionary, instead of proactively, to where the world was moving. North American countries didn't market technical professions (those jobs are plentiful now with good salary prospects, but not enough job seekers) or they pushed for dismemberment of unions, even though, they are the ones to push for higher wages. North American countries didn't, & still aren't, pushing for green technologies, which can help hire more people in secure, permanent jobs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Research ... by McMaster University & United Way Toronto provides new insights into just how much the labour market in Southern Ontario has changed. Barely half of people working in the Greater Toronto & Hamilton areas have permanent, full-time jobs that provide benefits & stability. Everyone else is working in situations that are part-time, vulnerable or insecure in some way. This includes a growing number of temporary, contract & on-call positions. Jobs without benefits. Jobs with uncertain futures. This significant rise in precarious employment is a serious threat – not only to the collective prosperity of the region, but also to the social fabric of communities.
Beneath this finding is another surprise: precarious employment is hurting everyone. It’s found across all demographic groups, in every sector & across income levels that were previously immune. Having a middle-class income can now come with increased employment insecurity.
It is now common for many workers to piece together year-round, full-time hours by working multiple jobs. In addition, working conditions are more uncertain, as existing labour laws have not kept up with changing realities. Union membership is on the decline. Doors to opportunity are limited as opportunities for job training & development decline.
While we know that being precariously employed is worst when you’re living in low income, our research confirms this increasingly is an issue that affects people at every income level. Moreover, uncertainty about work is a major barrier for anyone planning for the future. People find it more difficult to chart a clear & stable path in their careers & are consequently delaying significant life plans, such as whether to start a family, because they feel insecure about their futures. Among parents, making plans, scheduling activities & spending time together as a family becomes much more difficult. The stress & pressure of being precariously employed is also more likely to lead to feelings of self doubt & anxiety.
Just as important, our study also found that job insecurity is about more than just poverty. Its impacts are far-reaching, affecting all parts of our lives, redefining how we contribute to our economy, give back to our community & interact with our families. Precarious work can make it more difficult to make ongoing volunteer commitments & donate to charities. Across all income levels, insecurity makes it less likely that people will have vital social networks, such as friends to talk to.
Trends that have caused nearly half of our work force to engage in insecure employment show no signs of slowing down. Among study respondents, even those who describe their current employment as permanent are aware that change can come suddenly & unexpectedly.
The question now is: How should we respond to this shifting climate? While the global nature of our economy can sometimes make it feel like change is beyond our control, policy paralysis is not an option. We have a variety of tools within our reach to effectively limit the spread of insecure employment & mitigate its negative effects.
The way forward is to confront these trends, assess how current labour market regulations & income security policies are supporting people in precarious employment, & explore options for making them more responsive. It’s time for a conversation that brings together the private sector, labour organizations, community groups & all levels of government in a discussion about how together we can mitigate the negative effects of precarious employment.
Raising incomes is an obvious & critical area of focus, but it is not enough. The reality that workers in precarious employment tend to exit & re-enter the labour market much more often than those in permanent employment requires a renewed look at basic employment standards & protections as well as revamped income security programs.
More attention also needs to be given to how we can best support human capital development so that our work force remains innovative & competitive. Training & education models with a life-long learning focus can help workers build the skills to continuously improve their employment prospects.
Family supports, such as early learning & child care, accessible recreation & settlement programs, & affordable housing are also keys to maintaining healthy households & building a stronger sense of community.
What we need today is a renewed public policy framework that will be supportive of those in precarious employment & responsive to the challenges associated with this shifting labour market. Given this reality, it’s crucial that we all work together, governments, employers, labour & other stakeholders, to identify common ground & advance a shared agenda for real & sustainable progress.
Susan McIsaac is president & CEO of United Way Toronto, Charlotte Yates, is dean at the faculty of social sciences at McMaster University.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)