Category Archives: Canada’s Employment Rate

It ain’t easy to spin dismal job numbers

Posted on by

Home

The Conservative government relied on a familiar refrain to try to spin its way out of Friday’s awful jobs report released by Statistics Canada.

First, the facts:
  • Over the past year, “one full-time job was added for every four part-time jobs.”
Second, the analysis from Bay Street:
  • “Scotiabank note calls jobs numbers a shocker, weakest job growth by far since the recession.”
  • “Disappointment across the board,” said Mark Chandler, head of fixed income and currency strategy at RBC Capital Markets.
  • “That full-time employment growth is nearly flat in the past year while part-time job growth is up 2.5 per cent ‘indicates that businesses are not eager to expand payrolls,'” said Arlene Kish, senior principal economist at IHS Global Insight.
Third, a recap of past Conservative spin:

Whenever faced with bad economic news, the Conservatives claim that Canada leads the G-7 in jobs and economic growth since the recession. They make this misleading statement by using selective statistics.

When population growth and purchasing power are taken into account to get the complete picture, Canada falls behind G-7 countries Germany, Japan and the United States. That’s fourth place (out of 7!).

Fouth, the go-to spin:

Watch Industry Minister James Moore try to spin the bad news using the “Yah, but we’re still #1” discredited stat.

No shortage of workers – just a shortage of training

Posted on by

Tue, 11/19/2013 – 10:06
Posted by Andrew Jackson     http://www.broadbentinstitute.ca

Two major recent studies – from Derek Burleton and his colleagues at Toronto-Dominion Bank, and from former senior federal government official Cliff Halliwell published by the Institute for Research on Public Policy – provide excellent overviews of recent developments in the Canadian job market, and an informed framework for thinking about our future skills needs.

This message seems to have finally got through to the Harper government. In a speech to the Vancouver Chamber of Commerce on November 14, Employment and Skills Development Minister Jason Kenney told employers to stop complaining and to stop relying excessively upon temporary workers. Instead, he said, employers should “put more skin in the game” by increasing wages in high-demand occupations and by investing more in the training of Canadians.

The TD and IRPP studies provide balanced overviews of our future skill needs. Neither see generalized shortages as an acute danger, notwithstanding the pending (if increasingly delayed) retirement of the baby boom generation. Indeed, Mr. Halliwell says we should welcome a tighter job market, after years of stagnant real wages for most workers.

Graduates from our postsecondary education system, together with new immigrants, will more or less match job vacancies opening up due to the retirement of highly skilled workers. And employers can be expected to minimize shortages as they emerge by investing in capital and skills so as to raise productivity.

All that said, these studies note that we face some specific skills shortages today in a limited number of occupations and regions, and that some employers may face increasing difficulties finding workers with the right education and skills to fill available jobs in the future.

This can, however, be seen more as an opportunity than a curse, given the significant unemployment and underemployment of today, especially for youth, recent immigrants and aboriginals. The challenge is to invest in skills to increase access to good jobs for Canadians who want to get ahead, and thus to forestall future shortages that might lower our economic potential.

One set of policies that makes sense is to raise the education and skills level of marginalized groups and to ensure that unemployed workers, especially the long-term unemployed, have access to retraining. While Canada has one of the most educated work forces in the world, we have a relatively high proportion of workers with low literacy and numeracy levels, and many recent immigrants need help to upgrade their qualifications.

Programs delivered by the provinces with the support of the federal government address these issues to a degree, although spending is well below the industrial country average. Unfortunately, the federal government proposal to introduce the Canada Jobs Grant will shift some funds away from training the most marginalized workers and toward employer-sponsored training.

Mr. Halliwell argues that our current educational and labour market policies fail the significant proportion of the work force that leaves the educational system with less than a postsecondary qualification and finds relatively low-paying, less-skilled jobs. These workers tend to receive little or no employer training – and are excluded from current government programs.

He suggests that we think about “second chance” programs for this group, to improve their opportunities in the job market later in life and to help fill employer needs for skilled workers.

One option that Mr. Kenney might consider is to give more employed workers access to Employment Insurance (EI) benefits for training leaves, on the model of apprenticeship training. Apprentices qualify for EI benefits when they are away from their regular job for the classroom part of their program.

EI-supported training leaves would allow workers to take a community college or similar training programs – still at some considerable financial sacrifice to themselves, since benefits only replace up to 55 per cent of normal wages and since tuition costs would have to be paid.

Employers could contribute by making sure that a worker could return to the job from which she or he took a leave and, perhaps, by providing a supplementary income if the training program met the needs of their business.

EI-training leaves would empower individual workers to invest in their skills, and help create a higher-skilled work force for the future. Mr. Kenney might consider this option as an alternative to the proposed Canada Jobs Grant, which has won few supporters to date.

This article originally appeared on the Globe & Mail’s Economy Lab.

Photo: Cristiano Betta. Used under a Creative Commons BY 2.0 licence.

By the Numbers: Youth unemployment and underemployment in Canada, around the world || UFCW Canada – Canada’s Largest Private Sector Union

Posted on by

By the Numbers: Youth unemployment and underemployment in Canada, around the world || UFCW Canada – Canada’s Largest Private Sector Union.

Examining Harper’s record and spotting a fake economic recovery

Posted on by

 

Duncan Cameron

By Duncan Cameron    August 20, 2013   http://rabble.ca

Photo: Liam Richards/University of Saskatchewan/flickr

A new report from Citizens for Public Justice (CPJ) on job creation in Canada arrived just as the Prime Minister said Monday he intends the next election to be about jobs and the economy. As part of a study of poverty, CPJ has published a set of fact sheets on job creation in Canada since the 2008 recession. It looks at regional and generational differences, assesses job quality and measures newly created jobs against new job seekers.

Anyone who believes what Conservative cabinet ministers have been repeating about job creation in Canada should read the CPJ fact sheets.

Carol Goar of the Toronto Star identified the CPJ report as explaining why many Canadians are still experiencing the recession. The Canadian employment rate is down: the number of jobs created (950,000) has not increased as fast as the population (1.8 million). Unemployment is stuck at 1.4 million. When talking about the unemployed, the government does not include discouraged workers, people with part-time jobs looking for full-time work, temporary jobs, or the under-employed. Add them to the total, and the real unemployment rate is one out of ten out of work.

CPJ explain about 500,000 jobs are needed to get Canada back to where it was before the recession. Stronger job growth where resource prices are strong (Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba) and in construction mask weaker job growth in services and manufacturing.

Employment trends are weakest for Aboriginal Canadians. Young Canadians suffer disproportionately from unemployment — about one in five is without work.

Sadly, paid work increasingly means precarious jobs: part-time, low-wage and unstable. Older workers are relying more and more on temporary work.

Policy analysts divide over what to do about a lackluster economy. Some want to leave the market alone, most think governments need to lead in order for it to recover.

Conservatives believe the marketplace works fine, and any problems can be fixed by allowing prices to adjust. Unemployment is explained by the failure of rates of pay to fall, because of minimum wages, unions, employment insurance, welfare and other market imperfections, which need to be eliminated or reduced.

The problem with this view is that rates of pay are falling — policies to reduce wages have been successful, increasing inequality as Stephen Gordon has shown in Maclean’s. For the Harper government, business-funded think-tanks, and other supporters of the market view, this just means wages have not fallen enough. More of the same is just what is needed.

Those unwilling to wait for the economy to correct itself will want to know how it can be improved.

In Canada the standard strategy for an underperforming economy is a currency devaluation, accompanied by fiscal tightening. Exports incomes increase, import increases are cut off, and the private sector leads the recovery.

Floating the Canadian dollar down used to only require lowering Canadian interest rates below U.S. rates. Unfortunately, the U.S. beat Canada to the interest rate bottom, with a “zero bound” rate, introduced to revive American capitalism.

Historically low rates do prevail at the Bank of Canada. This is supposed to encourage recovery, though without bringing a currency devaluation, it is hard to see how it is going to happen.

Former Bank of Canada Deputy Governor William White called low interest rates having one foot on the accelerator. With the Harper government curbing spending, White observed, Canada has the other foot on the brake.

This contradictory policy needs to be fixed. The obvious choice is for the government to take the foot off the brake and spend borrowed money for needed public investments in urban transit, retrofitting buildings to reduce energy use, recreation, culture, the arts, advanced education, child care, and straight job creation.

The Harper government is ideologically opposed to government spending, but expect it to consider taking its foot off the brake by lowering taxes. Another reduction in the GST would inject new money into the economy, for instance. And it would also be an excuse to reduce direct spending (and reduce wages) further down the road.

The Official Opposition have their work cut out for them just to expose the poor Canadian economic record, let alone engage Conservatives in a rational debate based on economic evidence.

Stephen Harper does not expect Canadians to discover that job performance has been poor and that the economy is not improving, while the standard of living for most Canadians is declining. He has announced plans to prorogue Parliament, cutting the fall session short. This will limit the time for parliamentary debate and the subjects raised by the opposition.

If the economy is going to be the ballot question in the next election, as Stephen Harper suggests, Citizens for Public Justice have afforded parliamentarians and all Canadians with what is needed to examine his government’s record.

Duncan Cameron is the president of rabble.ca and writes a weekly column on politics and current affairs.

Photo: Liam Richards/University of Saskatchewan/flickr

Austerity chokes the down-and-out, as Harper and Flaherty look the other way

Posted on by

By Nick Fillmore  August 16, 2013  http://rabble.ca

Austerity chokes the down-and-out, as Harper and Flaherty look the other way

The exceedingly aggressive austerity cuts carried out by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty over the past seven years have come home to roost as millions of Canadians, depressed and without hope, are succumbing to its worst consequences.

Program cuts and tax reductions for corporations and the wealthy have had a huge, disproportionate impact on the poor, working poor, underemployed, and those with health problems including mental illness.

The massive austerity program translates into less income, decreased services, and reduced health care for many of Canada’s most vulnerable people. It appears that more than 3.5-million Canadians — mainly the poor, the unemployed/underemployed and the under-privileged — are struggling.

The attacks on the vulnerable began soon after the Conservatives came to power in 2006. They launched cuts that were a broadside attack on the government’s ability to finance many of its activities, including these much-needed employment and social support programs.

Ignoring the needs of Canadians living in desperate conditions, Harper and Flaherty initiated the extremely aggressive austerity program because of their determination to reduce the deficit and cut the size of the federal government. Their decisions were based on their own neo-liberal economic beliefs, not what Canadians needed or wanted.

There are numerous examples of needless, brutal cuts. Claiming it was concerned that some people don’t have enough incentive to work, Harper-Flaherty toughened up the Employment Insurance rules. They took millions of dollars away from mostly seasonal workers, leaving them vulnerable.

Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC), the government department that provides the most hands-on support for the poor, is being cut more than any other department. It will lose 5,700 positions — one-quarter of its workforce by 2016. The largest cut in absolute terms is to the Citizen-Centered Services Program, which helps Canadians access government services by phone and online.

Harper also cut funding to the National Aboriginal Health Organization (NAHO) and to a number of Aboriginal women’s health organizations — crucial programs on suicide prevention, women’s health, and diabetes. They also cut the Women’s Health Contribution Program, which funds six women’s health organizations across the country.

The austerity cutting is based on Harper and Flaherty’s near-fanatical determination to cut the deficit and reduce the size of government. The two unwaveringly believe in neo-liberal economics, which enriches corporations and the wealthy at the expense of the rest of us. We have two people running our country who don’t really believe in government!

Unfortunately, the problems of the less fortunate are not acknowledged in the PMO or Department of Finance. It is much more important that interest rates remain low for the benefit of corporations and the one per cent. A Google search for any Harper or Flaherty comments that express any concern or interest in the problems of the poor comes up empty.

Two moves early on by Harper and Flaherty eliminated the ability of the Conservatives to fund the kind of generous, liberal-minded government Canadians have been used to. First, a two-per-cent cut in the Goods and Service Tax income in Flaherty’s first two budgets cost the government a staggering $10-billion to $12-billion annually in revenues that had been used to help support government services.

In addition, Flaherty has cut $60-billion in corporate taxes since the Conservatives took power in 2006 – needlessly reducing the country’s corporate tax rate to the lowest among G8 countries.

The austerity program and other government cuts have had disastrous consequences for millions of Canadians. There are staggering disparities in life expectancy based on the amount of education a person receives and their amount of education. On average, people living in rich neighbourhoods live an average of 86.3 years, while those living in a poor neighborhood live only 65.5 years — a difference of 21 years.

There is more hunger across the country than ever before. In March, 2012, 882,188 people received food from a food bank in Canada — an increase of 2.4 per cent over 2011 and 31 per cent higher than in 2008, when austerity was being launched.

Children are not spared from the suffering. According to UNICEF’s most recent report, Canada is 21st out of 29 top countries for relative child poverty, and 27th for the percentage that were overweight.

Between the years 2007 and 2011, Statistics Canada reported a 20 per cent rise in people who said their mental health was deteriorating. Mental illness is already the number one cause for disability claims in the workplace. According to the Mental Health Commission of Canada, awards for mental injury at work have dramatically increased in recent years because of pressure placed on workers to produce more during the austerity period.

It’s also likely been an increase in suicides in Canada due to the distress suffered by individuals as a result of the austerity program. Two international researchers, David Stuckler and Sanjay Basu, have documented substantial increases in suicide in several European countries and the United States as a result of austerity cuts. Suicides in Canada increased from 3,512 in 2005 to 3,890 in 2009, which takes in the early part of the austerity period. However, Statistics Canada is three years behind in posting its deaths statistics, so no information is available covering a large period of austerity. But, assuming that Canada is experiencing roughly the same fallout as are Europe and the U.S., it is safe to predict a sizeable increase in suicides here.

Throughout the Conservatives’ seven years in office, independent economists argued that the austerity program was not achieving its stated goal of preparing the country for an economic recovery, but Flaherty refused to budge.

Then in April, the world was shocked when the austerity experiment, which was had destroyed the lives of millions in Europe, was totally discredited. Thomas Herndon, a young University of Massachusetts Amherst graduate student in economics, discovered that an influential paper endorsing austerity practices as a way of rebuilding beleaguered economies was incorrect because of spreadsheet coding errors and selective data.

Amazingly, Flaherty continued with the austerity experiment. “What I worry about is those that suggest that austerity should be abandoned,” he noted. “I think that’s the road to ruin quite frankly.”

So more cuts that will affect the poor the most are on the way. Harper and Flaherty will chop another $11.8 billion from government spending by 2014-15; job losses in both the public and private sectors will be 90,000 by 2014-15; and there will be 1.4 million unemployed workers in the country in 2015.

If Harper and Flaherty really wanted to balance the budget and look after people at the margins, they could work harder to collect the $29 billion the government is owned by the rich and corporations in unpaid taxes.

They also could try harder to find the $3.1-billion that was given to the anti-terrorism program but now cannot be accounted for.

The Council of Canadians says if Harper and Flaherty really wanted to both gradually reduce the deficit and look after the needs of the poor, they could continue to stimulate job growth through needed infrastructure projects (water, transit, green energy, roads, etc.), and reverse corporate tax cuts. Not by suffocating those at the very bottom of the pyramid.

Nick Fillmore is a freelance journalist who worked in many areas with the CBC over nearly 30 years. He is a former member of THIS magazine’s editorial board and was publisher of The 4th Estate, an independent weekly in Nova Scotia, during the 1970s. Fillmore was also a founder of the Canadian Association of Journalists. To see other articles, visit his blog.