The Bruce Grey Poverty Task Force and area MPPs issue feedback on provincial poverty reduction strategy

3 October 2013

Joint Media Release

The Bruce Grey Poverty Task Force is calling on the Ontario government to put more resources into rural communities in its updated Ontario Poverty Reduction Strategy.

The Ontario government is reviewing its Ontario Poverty Reduction Strategy and the Poverty Task Force wants to ensure that they receive feedback and ideas from people in Bruce and Grey counties.  The Task Force’s recent submission to the government’s review is a summary of voices from low-income families across both counties.

“We heard similar messages from across the community,” said Francesca Dobbyn, United Way of Grey Bruce, “Issues such as transportation, jobs, health services; and safe, affordable housing along with service gaps as most of the poverty reduction has been focused on children.”

Families responded that they had benefited from the government’s investments in Child Benefit Taxes, Student Nutrition Program, Healthy Smiles dental program, and full-day kindergarten. However, those families with dependents over 18 and middle-aged people, seniors or those almost at retirement age are not eligible for these benefits.

See the full submission report: PTF Ontario Poverty Reduction Strategy Review_Submission_2 Oct 2013

The Poverty Task Force asked area MPPs for comments on the submission:

“This report is a testament to the years of neglect by this government. I and my colleagues will continue to push for rural Ontario’s fair share through our policy proposals that include fresh food for local food banks, lower energy bills, and a fair share of the gas tax for rural residents so we can invest in transportation and ensure our communities are sustainable over the long-term.”
– Lisa Thompson, MPP for Huron-Bruce

“The gas tax is the most persistent anti-rural policy of the last decade. We want immediate action from this government to allocate a fair portion of the gas tax to all rural communities so we can meet our transportation and infrastructure needs. Rural Ontario has an enormous opportunity for growth, and so the sooner this government starts supporting our policies, the sooner we will ignite a comeback for rural communities.”
– Bill Walker, MPP for Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound

The Poverty Task Force, a group of agencies and grassroots groups across Grey and Bruce Counties have joined together to address issues of poverty.

For more information on the Poverty Task Force please contact Francesca Dobbyn at 519 376 1560

For MPP Lisa Thompson please call 519-396-3007 or 416-325-3467

For MPP Bill Walker please call 519-371-2421 or 416-325-6242

 

 

 

 

New critic roles for MPPs Walker, Thompson

Monday, September 30, 2013 10:49:18 EDT AM

Local MPPs Bill Walker and Lisa Thompson have been given new roles in Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak’s shadow cabinet.

Walker, Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound’s PC MPP, is now critic for children and youth services. Thompson, Huron-Bruce’s PC MPP, takes on the critic role for small business, red tape and the Green Energy Act.

Meanwhile, veteran Simcoe-Grey PC MPP Jim Wilson stays on as the official opposition’s house leader.

Hudak, who survived a leadership challenge earlier this month, announced a major shuffle of his shadow cabinet Monday. A provincial election is expected as early as next spring.

Prior to the shuffle, Walker had served as deputy health critic for rural and northern Ontario, while Thompson had been deputy energy critic with a focus on the controversial Green Energy Act.

People rally to save transit terminal

By Denis Langlois, Sun Times, Owen Sound

Monday, September 30, 2013 4:38:24 EDT PM

1297473524991_ORIGINAL

John McLoughlin said he’s been flying an Owen Sound flag outside of his home for 20 years.

He returned it to city hall Monday as a way, he said, of expressing his disappointment with council’s decision to shutter the city’s bus terminal.

The depot on 3rd Ave. E., which the city was to close for good at 6:30 p.m. Monday, is a symbol of the city’s “concern for the less fortunate,” he said, including the poor and people with disabilities who rely on public transit to get around and use the terminal for its washrooms or to seek shelter.

“The appearance, at least, is that no one cares,” he said Monday afternoon during a rally at the terminal. “That’s what annoys me.”

About 100 people attended the “Don’t Kill the Terminal” protest, organized by the United Way of Bruce Grey.

Executive director Francesca Dobbyn said she hopes the event will send a message to council that people are not happy with the decision to close the terminal.

“This place is a resource. It’s a washroom. This building is warm when it’s cold outside and is cool when it’s hot outside,” she told the crowd.

Janice Currie, chairwoman of the city’s accessibility advisory committee, said the terminal houses one of the only two accessible public washrooms in the downtown. The other is at the Owen Sound Farmer’s Market.

It is also a place where people, including those with mental or physical disabilities, can receive assistance with navigating the transit system, she said.

“It’s a safe place and a valued resource,” she said.

City council decided in June to close the terminal as a way to reduce the ballooning cost of the transit system. The move is expected to save the city about $90,000 a year. It was also seen as a way to move from a four-route system to one with three routes, which, according to city staff, will cut the system’s cost by another $130,000 to $150,000 a year.

Even though the building will be locked, the terminal property will continue to be used as a transfer point and bus stop until this spring when the new three-route model is implemented.

City council has been told that it would cost about $9,600 a month to keep the terminal open and staffed by one city employee from Oct. 1 to March 31. It would cost about $4,500 a month to keep it open without a staff person there, but neither city staff nor Owen Sound police are not recommending that option.

Coun. Peter Lemon said he will try to bring back up for discussion Oct. 7 a staff report that includes those cost estimates in hopes council will vote to reverse its decision to close the terminal. Council voted 5-4 Sept. 23 to only “note and file” the report.

Supporters of the terminal are also being encouraged to attend that council meeting.

Dobbyn has said she would like the depot to remain open at least over winter to provide time for a “community conversation” about what to do after it closes.

Kim Bolyea, who carried a sign at the rally that read “Honk to keep bus station open,” said she uses public transit almost everyday and the central terminal is vital.

“You don’t want to be stuck out in the cold waiting for another bus,” she said.

John Christie, a former city councillor who worked as a bus driver from 1985 to 2003, said the terminal is also important to drivers who must adhere to a tight schedule.

“Now it’s like they’re going to take away their chance to, in three or four minutes, use the facilities or have a coffee,” he said.

Don Campbell, a musician from Toronto, said he was shocked to learn the Owen Sound terminal is going to close. He arrived there Monday afternoon on a Greyhound bus so he could play a gig at The River Cafe.

He said he might change his mind about coming here if there is no terminal at the end of his bus route.

“If this isn’t here, what am I supposed to do? Stand outside in the rain with my guitar and luggage in the rain,” he said during the protest.

About 300,000 passengers each year use Owen Sound Transit, according to city hall. The cost of the system was expected to reach $1.2 million this year, about $500,000 more than was budgeted. A main chunk of the increase was attributed to the cost to repair the city’s current fleet of buses.

Changes approved by council, including contracting First Student Canada to both operate the system and use its buses and moving to a three-route system, are expected to reduce the annual cost of the system to $648,000. Council also voted to hike bus fares by 10% in 2013, 2014 and 2015 and end Saturday service 90 minutes earlier.

Merit Canada’s low-wage, low-skills plan for the Canadian construction industry

Mon, 09/30/2013 – 11:17
Posted by Josh Mandryk, The Broadbent Blog

apprentice-welder.jpg

Having successfully lobbied the Conservative government to repeal the federal Fair Wages and Hours of Labour Act, Merit Canada now wants the Conservative government to enact what is ostensibly a “low-wage policy”. It’s an effort that threatens to drive down labour standards for all workers, erode wages, and imperil the long-term health of the construction industry.

The Repeal of the Fair Wages Act

The Conservative government repealed the Fair Wages and Hours of Labour Act with a single line in their 425-page omnibus budget Bill C-38. The Fair Wages Act set the minimum wages contractors with federal government construction contracts had to pay their workers. By setting a floor for employee compensation, the Act helped prevent destructive competition based on undercutting workers’ wages, which can occur given the low-bid nature of construction procurement. At the same time, by taking wages out of competition in construction procurement, it promoted positive forms of competition based on enhanced productivity and improved project management, rather than simply cheap labour.

The government’s decision to repeal the act was made without consultation with industry stakeholders or relevant study into the impact of the change, and appears to have been motivated solely by the lobbying efforts of the anti-union contractors’ organization, Merit Canada. According to records from the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying, then-Minister of Labour Lisa Raitt was being lobbied by Merit Canada on the Fair Wages and Hours of Labour Act as early as February 2011. Just days after the decision to scrap the Act was made public, Merit Canada Chairman Curtis Monsebroten boasted of his organization’s “remarkable success” in lobbying federal Conservative politicians since opening its national office in 2011.

From a Fair Wage Policy to a Low-Wage Policy

Unsatisfied with simply weakening labour standards through the repeal of the federal fair wage policy (FWP), Merit Canada is now lobbying the Conservatives to introduce a “low-wage policy”. Specifically, Merit Canada is pushing the government to introduce an “open tendering clause” in its transfers which would prohibit municipalities, provinces, and territories from introducing labour standards such as FWPs into their procurement practices, or from entering into Project Labour Agreements with building trades unions to ensure large, complex construction projects have access to a skilled labour supply to do the job right and on time. It would also deny federal funds to public bodies which are bound to collective agreements with construction unions (and can thus only subcontract to union signatory contractors) until and unless they decertify their unions. This would starve many municipalities, school boards, and other public bodies of much-needed federal assistance.

Flipping the Historical Rationales for Fair Wage Policies on their Head

FWPs mandate minimum wages and benefits that must be paid to workers on government contracts for services. FWPs establish a floor for employee compensation in order to prevent the undercutting of wages and benefits in industries where government contracts are awarded on a low-bid basis. FWPs emerged from concerns with setting a level playing field for employers bidding for government work and preventing labour abuses by employers who ultimately secured government contracts. They also emerged out of a desire for government to act as a model employer, as well as to prevent governments from using their significant market share and purchasing power to undercut local labour conditions.  FWPs allow governments to positively impact market conditions through their role as a major consumer of construction and other services. They are a illustrative example of how governments can use their tendering policy to achieve broader policy objectives, including economic fairness for workers.

Merit Canada’s proposed low-wage policy would do precisely what fair wage policies were first introduced to prevent. As they would have it, the Government of Canada would use its market power and economic leverage over municipalities, provinces, and territories to drive down labour standards for all workers. This would have serious negative consequences for the long-term health of the Canadian construction industry.

The Destructive Impact of a Low-Wage Policy

In addition to concerns about economic fairness and the autonomy of other orders of government to shape their own procurement policy, a low-wage policy would seriously undermine apprenticeships and skills training in the construction industry at precisely the time when public policy ought to be encouraging the next generation to take up careers in the skilled trades. According to a recent estimate by the Construction Sector Council, Canada will need 250,000 new construction workers by 2021. In order to reach this goal, public policy must focus on attracting and retaining a new generation of Canadians to high-skilled and well-paying careers in the trades. Far from this, a low-wage policy will only exacerbate labour shortages and reliance on the temporary foreign worker program.

i. The Link Between Fair Wage Policies and Apprenticeships

FWPs are strongly associated with improved apprenticeship outcomes. Numerous studies provide strong evidence here. For instance:

  • A comparative study of apprenticeship outcomes in 35 states between 1989 and 1995 found that FWPs were associated with higher registration rates and higher completion rates. The study found completion rates during this period in non-FWP states were only 28 percent, while in FWP states they were 52 percent, and that they increased with the strength of the FWP. At the end of the period, 32 percent of apprentices in non-FWP states were still training, whereas only 7 percent of apprentices in FWP states were still training.
  • Another study found that when controlling for the economic cycle, unemployment rates and regional differences in the availability of construction training fell by 40 percent in the nine states which repealed their FWPs, compared to those which retained their policies.
  • In a comparison of Missouri with four other states in the Great Plains Region between the 1973-1979 period and the 1987-1990 period, another study found that apprenticeships in the four non-FWP states declined by 51 percent over the two periods, whereas apprenticeship programs increased 26.9 percent in Missouri during the two periods.

 

ii. The Link Between Construction Unions and Apprenticeships

A low-wage policy would also weaken the apprenticeship system by undermining construction unions and the market share of their signatory contractors. Construction unions have an enormously positive impact on apprenticeships and skills training. A recent study commissioned by the Ontario Construction Secretariat found that apprentices in the unionized construction sector — indentured to jointly administered training trusts — had a 30% higher completion rate than apprentices indentured to individual employers in the non-union sector. This is likely due to the tremendous investments made by construction unions and their signatory contractors in skills training, coupled with the market failures in the provision of training which arise in the non-union construction industry.

By forcing the repeal of FWPs and undermining construction unions, a low-wage policy would weaken apprenticeships and skills training. This is not a path down which the Government of Canada should lead the construction industry.

The High-Skills Path for the Canadian Construction Industry

The Conservative government has indicated its intentions to boost apprenticeships in the skilled trades, including through recently announced plans to support the use of apprentices on federal construction projects. These are laudable goals, but, unfortunately, the repeal of the Fair Wages Act and a potential low-wage policy are at odds with this strategy. The repeal of the Fair Wages Act puts responsible contractors who invest in their workers at a competitive disadvantage, and a low-wage policy would ratchet down wages and benefits, and, through its impact on unionization and provincial/territorial and municipal FWPs, reduce those jurisdictions’ use of apprentices on government construction projects.

A smart strategy for boosting apprenticeships in the skilled trades would involve federal construction spending to support the apprenticeship system by enacting a modern fair wage policy tied to the use of apprentices. More importantly, this kind of plan simply cannot involve a low-wage policy that would reduce labour standards and weaken the apprenticeship system at other levels of government.

If governments at all levels want to attract and retain the next generation of journeypersons and apprentices, they must begin by supporting these goals with their own procurement policies.

This means rejecting a low-wage policy, enacting policies which support the use of apprentices in public construction, and ensuring that the women and men who build Canada receive their fair share of the fruits of their labour.