HRPD Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT AND THE STATUS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

COMITÉ PERMANENT DU DÉVELOPPEMENT DES RESSOURCES HUMAINES ET DE LA CONDITION DES PERSONNES HANDICAPÉES

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, June 1, 1999

• 1109

[English]

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Dale Johnston (Wetaskiwin, Ref.)): I'd like to call the meeting to order.

There's been some discussion with the witnesses. We have two groups of witnesses appearing before the committee today, and there's been some discussion that perhaps we could hear them as a unit.

• 1110

Perhaps the witnesses would like to come to the table so we could hear them all for the period from now to 12.30. Would the witnesses be agreeable to that, rather than to hear one presentation and then another?

The Clerk of the Committee: They'll still each do their own presentation.

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Dale Johnston): Why don't you all come up to the table?

The Clerk: Mrs. Bennett wanted your attention. She has a motion before we start.

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Dale Johnston): Yes.

Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ): I'm not sure they understand the automatic process of the committee.

The Clerk: They each have five to ten minutes to give their presentation.

Ms. Carolyn Bennett (St. Paul's, Lib.): Mr. Chair, as the chair of the subcommittee on the status of persons with disabilities, we have a request from the parent committee that we would like to be able to meet following your meeting today to consider the draft report. We already had ministers booked for Thursday, and we would like to have a short second meeting this week. We are only authorized to meet once a week.

In getting ready for the report I would like to move that the subcommittee on the status of persons with disabilities sit twice this week, June 1 and June 3, to consider its draft report and to hear ministers.

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Dale Johnston): Would you like to include a time for June 3 in that motion?

Ms. Carolyn Bennett: At 11 a.m. on June 3 and today at 1 p.m., following your meeting.

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Dale Johnston): Okay. Is there any discussion on that motion?

[Translation]

Mr. Paul Crête: I don't want to delay our proceedings. I agree with the motion. However, after we hear from our witnesses, I would like us to decide on how we will present the subcommittees' reports. If I understood correctly, three reports are pending: one on people with disabilities, the second on older workers and the third one on children. Are we going to have a marathon meeting next week to study the reports by the three subcommittees? I agree with the motion, but I think that after this meeting we should discuss the matter or anything else which may have to do with what will happen next week.

[English]

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Dale Johnston): Actually, Mr. Crête, all that will come under the in camera discussion in future business later on.

(Motion agreed to)

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Dale Johnston): I'd like to welcome the witnesses from the syndicat national. Go ahead.

[Translation]

The Clerk: Our witnesses are Élie Cyr, President of the Syndicat national des travailleurs et travailleuses des pâtes et papier de Kénogami Inc., and Mr. Sylvain Parent, President of the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du papier et de la forêt. Mr. Cyr, you may begin with a presentation of five to seven minutes.

Mr. Élie Cyr (President, Syndicat national des travailleurs et travailleuses des pâtes et papier de Kénogami Inc.): Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we would like to begin by thanking Ms. Girard-Bujold, the Member for Jonquière, for inviting us to present our side of the story to the committee regarding the Program for Older Worker Adjustment.

I am the President of the Syndicat national des travailleurs et travailleuses des pâtes et papier de Kénogami Inc., which is affiliated with the CNTU, and which represents approximately 415 employees working at the Abitibi-Consolidated plant in Kénogami.

Until March of 1987, the Kénogami mill had seven paper machines, and our union represented 750 members. Then, in March of 1987, two paper machines closed down; and, in 1999, paper machine number 4 and finally, in December 1997, paper machine number 5 were turned off, and now there are only 415 employees left in our union.

• 1115

In 1998, Abitibi-Consolidated announced an investment program which means that paper machine number 1 and the mechanical pulp mill will close down at the beginning of the year 2001. By then, there will only be 215 workers left in our union.

The loss of those 200 jobs will not be offset by the retirement of workers despite the fact that a preretirement program was negotiated in 1997. There are about 30 workers who, in any case, despite the fact that they are 55 years old or older, and are therefore eligible for the preretirement program, will ultimately not be eligible for it, mainly because they will not have enough seniority to qualify. If, however, they did accept the conditions, their income would be very low and they would not be able to meet their financial or family responsibilities.

When the dismissals will take place in 2001, and taking into account workers aged 55 and more who will quit their jobs with a decent preretirement package, an employee will need at least 17 years seniority at the plant to fill the position of part-time worker from the reserve pool, which, of course, will affect younger workers. So just imagine the atmosphere and climate of uncertainty which our workers are now going through.

Our union tried to do its part and it developed a plan for a wood-processing plant for $21 million. Between June 1998 and August of this year, we have done pre-feasibility, feasibility, market and financing studies with an engineering consulting firm from the area as well as with consultants from the Groupe de consultation pour le maintien d'emploi of the CNTU. This project would create between 75 and 80 good jobs.

However, we have a problem. Indeed, during the 1998 negotiations, we negotiated lay-off packages worth between 10,000 and $25,000, depending on seniority, and we hope to use this money to fund the project, that is, the part of the project which will come back to the workers. However, we were told that that money would be deducted from employment insurance income if the construction of the plant did not happen at the same time as the layoffs at the Kénogami mill.

The Act should be amended so that the lay-off packages can be fully invested in the new project as soon as they are paid out. The proper authorities would be notified.

Of course, we believe that our project will come to pass, but it will not solve all the problems arising from this type of huge lay-off. Therefore, the government will have to re-implement the Program for Older Worker Adjustment and the program will have to take into account our specific situation.

In doing so, the 30 workers who are over 55 years old will be eligible for the program, and this would greatly benefit younger workers: they would keep their stable and well paid jobs and keep on contributing to the prosperity of our region and our country. Thank you.

The Chair (Ms. Albina Guarnieri (Mississauga East, Lib.)): Thank you.

I apologize for coming in late. It was smart of you to start without me.

We can now go to questions.

I'm sorry. Mr. Parent, would you also like to make a presentation?

Mr. Sylvain Parent (President, Federation of paper and Forest Workers): Thank you, Madam Chair. Ladies and gentlemen, we want first of all to express our thanks to Ms. Girard-Bujold, MP for Jonquière, for inviting us to present to the committee our views of the program for older worker adjustment.

Since the early 1990s, the forest products industry in Canada and Quebec has experienced major changes that have downsized the pulp and paper mill work force by between 10% and 20%, in both Eastern Canada and Western Canada.

Often those dismissals have been made in single-industry communities where their social impact is considerable. Examples include Clermont, Jonquière, Desbiens in the Lac-Saint-Jean region, Chandler in the Gaspé region, Iroquois Falls in Ontario, and Crabtree in Quebec.

• 1120

The impact of these dismissals was the subject of a Human Resources Development Canada study on labour in Canada's paper industry four or five years ago.

These changes in technology, organization, and cost reduction strategies have eliminated many workers' jobs. This morning you heard the president of the Syndicat national des travailleurs et travailleuses des pâtes et papier de Kénogami describe those dismissals.

In order to limit the effects of the those dismissals, our unions and the employers concerned have: reduced retirement age to 58 with no actuarial penalty, or 55 with actuarial penalty; introduced special income supplement programs, in addition to regular pension plans; developed temporary plant facility improvement projects; introduced employment recovery programs, for example in Kénogami where we set up a coopérative de travail among unionized workers to be affected by downsizing at the Kénogami paper mill; and promoted training by negotiating employer and employee contributions to member re-training programs.

These few examples demonstrate that we have done all our best to address the situation and have acted responsibly. However, this action is not enough, for several reasons.

When there are dismissals of more than 20 or 30 persons, the surplus workers cannot all be absorbed using the means provided by collective agreements, retirement, and early retirement packages, and young, well-trained workers who are starting families are dismissed as a result.

Reasons for the situation are as follows: employees aged 55 and over do not have adequate retirement incomes because they joined the company late and thus have few pensionable years to their credit; before working in the mills, these employees worked in forestry operations, for Stone-Consolidated for instance, where no pension plans existed prior to 1986; employees aged 50 and over cannot afford to retire and have difficulty re-training; small businesses do not have the resources to fund pension plans or early retirement packages; and in some mills, women occupied part-time positions for a number of years or had to interrupt their employment years for maternity reasons and family responsibilities. These are a few points we want to draw to your attention.

To give you some idea of the extent of the situation, at the Kénogami mill some 100 workers—some of them aged over 55 and even 50—have lost their jobs, despite negotiations for early retirement. At the Alma mill, technological changes, which we acknowledge were necessary, were introduced four or five years ago and resulted in the loss of 61 jobs.

We therefore consider that the federal government must become involved. There is a surplus in the Employment Insurance Fund, and changes in the industry are ongoing. The unions have done their part and acted in a responsible manner, as we have indicated. We therefore consider that the Program for Older Worker Adjustment must be instrumental in facilitating early retirement and in maintaining employment for young workers. POWA would be a good use of contributions to the EI fund, which are a payroll expenditure.

The government must consider making it possible, under POWA, to pay benefits equal to the amounts provided for in the legislation, at age 50; in some cases, to pay benefits in addition to amounts available to pension plan participants, at age 55; to provide for retraining, which we do not necessarily oppose, provided it is reasonable and, most importantly, feasible for the individuals affected.

We also want to protect dismissed employees involved in job creation projects like those in Kénogami or at the Spexel company, a security paper mill in Beauharnois that belonged to Domtar prior to 1997, against having their EI eligibility affected because they receive severance pay.

Under these projects, dismissed employees invest their severance pay in these cooperative projects. We consider it unjust and unfair that negotiated severance pay be considered employment income if there is a period not worked between the time of dismissal and the start-up of the new project.

Therefore, a mechanism should be found to exempt severance pay from income if evidence were provided that the severance pay would be invested in any project of this type.

Thank you for your attention. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

The Chair: Thank you.

[English]

We'll have our first round of questions. Mrs. Diane Ablonczy, please.

• 1125

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy (Calgary—Nose Hill, Ref.): Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you to the witnesses.

It must be very difficult in your community to have these changes taking place, particularly when the workforce in your own area just in that one industry reduces by two-thirds. That's fairly tough. You made some suggestions about how that might be approached.

Are you suggesting an amendment to the Employment Insurance Act with respect to older worker adjustment programs? You mentioned that you wanted an amendment there.

[Translation]

Mr. Élie Cyr: Yes.

[English]

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: Has the union's legal counsel had any contact with the department in Ottawa through your member of Parliament about the exact wording of such an amendment? Is there something you could give us to consider?

[Translation]

Mr. Élie Cyr: We have not spoken with the department regarding an amendment to the Act. You cannot apply the Act in real life and it would have to be amended, but we can't tell you how it should be amended.

Mr. Sylvain Parent: Nevertheless, our brief makes several suggestions regarding employees who are in a very tough situation.

A little earlier, I spoke of a study carried out by the Department of Human Resources Development Canada. This study, which was done in 1994, indicates that over 20,000 workers in the paper and forestry industries will be affected by the year 2000. Restructuring, technological change, mergers and all the cost reduction programs, albeit necessary, have had a huge impact.

We have to find solutions and make suggestions to help workers earn a decent wage.

Another extremely important factor is young people in the labour market. How can we integrate young people into the labour market? Unfortunately, with everything going on in the industry today, young people are excluded from the labour market. We are trying to help keep young people in the labour market. This is extremely important for us, because these people are tomorrow's workers.

Another factor is age. We know that workers in this sector are fairly old. I'm not saying that they are older workers, but the average age of a worker in the paper industry is over 45. There's going to be massive change in a few years with all the available retirement programs, including in the major sectors of newspaper, fine paper, tissue paper and printing paper. We will have to watch the situation closely, because we are, even now, in a bind; we have to deal with efficiency and corporate productivity in the face of global competition.

For us, this exercise is part of a whole. It's important and we want to make you aware of our efforts and the situation we are now going through.

[English]

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: I have a question with respect to what you just said about preparing for the changes that have taken place and that are still going to take place. What entities or what organizations do you see needing to work together to assist workers to prepare for these changes? Clearly, it would be the municipality, it would be the provincial labour department, it would be the human resources department of the federal government. What players would you like to see come together to work on the issues you have just raised today with us?

[Translation]

Mr. Sylvain Parent: You mentioned other groups which might join us. A little earlier, I was referring to the Department of Human Resources Development Canada, which did a study on the sector. Various departments are aware of our problems, including the Human Resources Development and Industry departments. Unions want to be part of the solution because they are very aware of what is happening; union members are experiencing this situation everyday.

• 1130

We even believe that corporations should be involved in the discussions, because they are also aware of the problems. The industry must also prepare future generations of workers. All these stakeholders must sit down at the same table to discuss the issues and find solutions which will see us through the future.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Crête.

Mr. Paul Crête: I would like to begin by greeting you on behalf of Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold who, unfortunately, had to be in the House this morning. She had to make a speech in her capacity as environment critic during your testimony before the committee. This was purely coincidental. She will try to make it here before the end of our meeting.

I would also like to discuss whether amendments have been proposed to the Employment Insurance Act. We are open to amendments to the Employment Insurance Act. I believe interesting general suggestions have already been made in this regard.

In your presentations, you gave very concrete examples of what older workers are going through. In the past, the federal government had implemented a program called POWA. It was trying to find a creative solution to a problem. However, POWA was suspended on March 31, 1995, for reasons which I cannot accept. It was said the program was too expensive and there were other reasons as well.

You have proposed two types of solutions, and I would like you to tell us a little more about them. To help workers deal with these situations you have described, you said the Act should be amended so they could have access to EI funds. Can you tell us a little more about this? And you also said that a long-term solution involved all the stakeholders sitting down at the same table.

I have a two-pronged question for you. Doesn't your first solution involve pure political will? Shouldn't the government say that it is concerned with older workers, that it is an important issue in our society of rapid technological change, and that it is willing to do something to address the issue?

I would also like you to expand on corporate responsibility, of responsibility on the part of employers. Corporations make huge productivity gains when they adopt new technologies. In your opinion, are corporations doing enough right now? Could they be doing more or does the answer lie elsewhere?

Mr. Élie Cyr: That's a long question, and I will answer it in segments. Let's begin with the older workers at the Kénogami plant. In the past, many jobs were cut, and the plant has rehired forest workers over the last few years. This means that the people who will lose their jobs are between 40 and 55 years old. It's very hard for these people to find themselves on the job market again; it probably will not be easy for them to work in other sectors.

Mr. Paul Crête: In your view, does this have to do with age or is it really a question of basic training and the ability to adapt? We are always being told that there are programs in place to help retrain these people. Is this a realistic solution, is this what we should be looking at, or can these workers really not be retrained?

Mr. Élie Cyr: I don't think it's realistic to think that these workers will be able to retrain given their age, when you know what kind of training is offered. It's easier when you're younger. Young people are much better educated than people between the ages of 45 and 55. It's easy for young people to find a new job. The others have to take tests. When they were hired by Abitibi-Consolidated, it was for their muscles and not for their brains. If these workers had to take tests or upgrade their education, it would take far too long; they are after all fairly old.

It's hard to believe that these people will find a job again. The company is responsible because when it hired these workers, it trained them as well. Several of the workers who could have taken the preretirement package at the age of 55 could ultimately not do so because they had not contributed to the pension plan long enough. We're stuck with these people because they cannot quit. If the older workers could leave at 55 years of age, it would help others stay with Abitibi-Consolidated which, under our collective agreement, would be obligated to train them. This would be to our benefit.

• 1135

When a company wants to modernize its plants, it offers severance packages, but people who lose their jobs are often left to their own devices and many have trouble finding a new job which pays well.

Mr. Sylvain Parent: If you don't mind, I would like to speak to that. First, we are in an extremely critical situation. A little earlier, I talked about the forestry industry. Globalization, cost reduction programs, technological change and mergers have resulted in massive job losses. That's something you can't forget.

Despite the fact that there were preretirement and retirement programs in place in these big corporations, when the second wave of restructuring and mergers happened, we were faced with an extremely difficult situation because our workers had not yet reached the age of retirement. So we were stuck with a group of people between 50 and 55 years of age who were not eligible for the retirement program. You can retire at 55, but there are actuarial deductions until you are 58 years old.

We gave you a very specific example, that of the Kénogami mill, where workers between the ages of 45 and 50 will be jobless tomorrow. These people will soon be hard up and that's unfortunate. These people have given their brains, as well as their muscles, as Élie said, to the company for almost 30 years and all they get today is hard times. This is very unfortunate in view of what is happening today.

You talked about corporate responsibility. It's very important that a company flourish, that it develops economically and that it generates a lot of profits to stay competitive. Through negotiation, we were able to get interesting retirement and pre- retirement packages, but we have to ask ourselves how long this will last and when it should stop. Will the company say that it will put an end to these programs at a certain point? I would be surprised if that was the case; however, the company must always say that the show must go on.

So now we must turn to political parties and governments to legislate. At a certain point, workers have to be protected from industry. Obviously, you need courage and political will to achieve this, but workers are the ones who help grow the economy of our province and of our country. We therefore owe them our support.

There's another extremely thorny and difficult issue, and that's small businesses where employees end up without a pension plan or preretirement package. These people end up in an impasse, with nothing, with no program, because quite often they may not be informed of existing programs. For many, that means employment insurance and then welfare. It's a very sad end to the career of these people who worked for many years.

We suggest that POWA be reinstated for people between 50 and 55 years of age and that for those between 55 and 58, there be a mechanism to enable people who do receive some pension benefit to make up for the difference between the two.

It was mentioned that there's a great deal of integration going on in order to save jobs. Cooperatives are being created with different groups. Our workers invest in the cooperatives, but the problem is that before the start-up of the new plant, quite a lot of time goes by and during that time people receive lay-off benefits which are taxed. We're asking you not to tax those people because they invest in the economy and in the creation of a new business. Such changes would promote small businesses within industry, whether it be pulp and paper or any other.

• 1140

We believe that POWA plays a very significant role in the workplace.

The Chair: Thank you.

[English]

Ms. Davies.

Ms. Libby Davies (Vancouver East, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair.

First of all, I would like to thank you for coming today. I'm from the west coast, where we also have very large pulp and paper industries. From my own experience in my own community and in working with unions, I know about the devastation and the massive changes that take place and the impact this has on workers. So I appreciate your coming here today to tell us about what's happening in your community.

I agree with you that when a major restructuring takes place and there are massive lay-offs, the impact on a community, particularly a small community, can be very devastating, not just for the individual, for the family, but also for the whole economy of that community. I agree with you that there is a corporate responsibility that somehow has to be built in so that we can't just say that while we were profitable or while the plant was working we used your labour, and then it's goodbye, and that's the end of it.

I just wondered whether you had any examples or experiences where you have been able to construct alternative programs. For example, in B.C. the fishermen's union had to fight a lot to get federal funds, but they were very successful. They were able to develop some retraining programs that used the skills people had learned from the industry.

One of the issues for all the workers is mobility, right? If you've been rooted in a community for 20, 30, or 40 years, it's very difficult to just pick up and go to some job that may exist somewhere else.

Those people also have incredible experience in their industry. For example, the fishermen were able to explore environmental issues like stream enhancement or tourism development.

I wondered whether or not your unions have had any experience in dealing with that, where the union itself has been able to become involved in some retraining or community development opportunities as a result of industry changes.

[Translation]

Mr. Sylvain Parent: I already referred to the Alma plant in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean which was restructured a few years ago. At that time, some 120 people were supposed to be laid off. The company was willing to establish a mechanism so that the layoffs could be done gradually over a period of six years, thus enabling a larger number of employees to be entitled to a pension.

At the same time, a training program was implemented in order to help the workers affected by the layoff to retrain and learn a new trade. But to achieve that, there has to be willingness on the part of both parties, an even political will. The mechanism we developed in Alma enabled workers to take turns being absent from their workplace for a period of six months in order to get training. During those six months, younger workers could remain on the job.

What results were obtained? The negative repercussions in terms of job losses were minimized. But as I indicated, it was a question of will. In the absence of will, the obstacles to be surmounted are enormous. Unfortunately, this exercise is not repeated often enough throughout the industry. I've described unique cases in which we were involved.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Coderre.

Mr. Denis Coderre (Bourassa, Lib.): Good morning to both of you. We can talk about arms, but we can also talk about hearts. Mr. Cyr, I believe that above all else, you are people with a heart.

Since I was born in the Joliette region, I'm somewhat familiar with the village of Crabtree. As a matter of fact, I'm sure that that's where we met. I will continue in the same vein as Paul. We are here first and foremost to try to come up with solutions. It's important to take into account the needs of older workers. I'm always looking for answers and that's why I will ask you a few questions.

• 1145

If I follow your reasoning, Mr. Parent, it is my understanding that you're recommending that a program similar to POWA be established for workers between 50 and 55 years of age. But POWA was not all that successful in certain regions, notably in the rag trade, if you'll allow me that expression. Things were somewhat difficult in that sector. Some regions could benefit from POWA, whereas others were excluded from it.

Mr. Sylvain Parent: I did indeed refer to access procedures. Everyone was being crossed off and poverty was being maintained.

Mr. Denis Coderre: There you are. You were saying that workers between 55 and 65 would probably receive some sort of benefit after that. I have a few reservations about that. Mr. Cyr, you said that these employers were not necessarily recyclable. I feel that you're putting forth a rather sad prospect. This way, you would probably have a much easier task than the government. I think we have to talk about jobs rather than say that workers who have reached 50 are finished, that's it, that's all, that they be offered an initial program and then we should consider paying them some new benefit. You seem to me somewhat pessimistic in that regard. Do you believe that that's what older workers want? Could one program solve everything?

We mustn't forget the reality that the costs are assumed by all taxpayers. You'd be quite right to answer that they have paid taxes all their lives and it's now normal that we give them back a little bit of their contributions.

You talked about clear political will. We've established the Youth Employment Strategy for the young, which is working quite well. Such programs are all good incentives. Wouldn't we solve the problem if we put more emphasis on a policy targeting the regions? Too often, we tend to think only of the major centres. We need to better define the regions and the kinds of jobs that should be available there. We must find incentives that could benefit workers who value the dignity of work. I will ask other questions later.

Mr. Élie Cyr: When we alluded to older workers, we were talking about workers who had reached age 55 and who had been offered retirement, but who refused. These workers are now 57, 58, 59 or 60 years old.

I'm 45 and after I was hired, the plant where I worked hired workers between 35 and 50. These workers who have less seniority than I do are the first to lose their jobs even though they're older. Those who did not accept the retirement offers that were presented to them when they were 55 will not be in any better position to retire in 2001 and I don't know how we could help them take that step. Their pension will not provide them with a decent standard of living. We probably have to make up the difference until they're eligible for their old age pension when they reach age 65. By retiring, these older workers will leave openings for other plant workers whose employability outside the plant is very precarious.

Mr. Denis Coderre: You're proposing that we pay them a guaranteed income during this transition period.

Mr. Élie Cyr: That's right. Their departure would allow other plant workers to take over, and the government would not have to take on lifelong responsibility for them.

I'm in no position to propose a perfect solution. In fact, no one has such a solution. But we could improve some things in order to allow those workers to end their lives with some dignity at least.

Mr. Denis Coderre: So essentially, nothing can be done to help them except to pay them a certain amount of money?

Mr. Élie Cyr: Our union has developed a proposal and we're currently seeking funding in order to achieve our goal. We believe we can place 80 of the 160 workers in our plant. Some workers will be in a position to leave, but that won't be the case for others.

The members of your committee have a better overall view of the country; ours is limited to the Kénogami mill. We are striving to place our workers and we've created a labour force committee for that purpose.

When a new company opened its doors in the Saguenay, 5,000 people applied for the 50 jobs available. Among the candidates who applied, there were highly qualified workers who had just finished their studies. Their skills were far superior to those of our workers. Not only is it difficult for these workers to go back to school, but going back to work is hard also.

• 1150

I have four children and if I could only find a job paying $7 or $8 an hour, it really wouldn't be worth it for me to work. It's too bad that that's the way things are. I would probably work anyway because I have my pride, but it would be very difficult for me to support my children.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Mr. Parent, has a program like this been quantified?

Mr. Sylvain Parent: I would like to add a few points to what Élie said earlier. We're not proposing that workers be given a free pass. We don't want them to think that because they've been laid off, they're now entitled to some pension from the government.

Mr. Denis Coderre: No, but we could refer to a guaranteed minimal income in that case. What amount would be necessary?

Mr. Sylvain Parent: We want to point out that before we have recourse to this kind of measure, workers should avail themselves of the many other opportunities that exist, including programs for retirement, pre-retirement, training and CAMO-qualité.

We've also given the example of co-operatives and denounced the fact that the layoff benefits that workers invest in them are taxable. That does not promote the integration of workers in the labour force.

We must point out two facts: the first that the pulp and paper and forest industry operates plants in single-industry regions. You are familiar with the village of Crabtree. If the Scott paper plant closed its doors tomorrow morning, that municipality of 3,000 people—

Mr. Denis Coderre: The region would be clobbered.

Mr. Sylvain Parent: There you are. If I closed the door of the Clermont plant, which is also in a single-industry region, the same thing would happen. The entire pulp and paper and forest industry operates in single-industry regions. If we say we want to take into account the specific nature of each region, we will be encountering some difficulty because each of them has different needs. We use all the means at our disposal. We've listed them and presented suggestions about solutions that we would like to implement.

I'm certain that you will be in a position to confirm the existence of the next reality that I will describe. I've been working in this field for almost 20 years. Despite all possible good will and all the training programs designed to reintegrate older workers into the labour force, I can tell you, Mr. Coderre, that very few workers between 45 and 55 find a new job in our field. As Élie mentioned, when these workers started to work in this industry, the employer was hiring muscle, whereas today, it wants skills, skills and more skills, to meet the challenges of globalization.

Even if workers between 50 and 55 who have lost their jobs knock on the neighbour's door to apply for another job, they may be treated politely, but after that formality, they will still end up without a job. That's today's reality. I can't give you percentages, but the reality is harsh in our day. This is true in all the regions.

Mr. Denis Coderre: We're not disputing the fact that there is a generation that will have much more difficulty adapting to the new reality, and that's why we must adopt a policy which will include short- and long- term measures. We can agree on that.

Mr. Sylvain Parent: Yes.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Mr. Parent, it is also important that the government administer public finances in a responsible manner. Has the Federation of Paper and Forest Workers calculated how much these demands represent?

Mr. Sylvain Parent: I'm sure you'll understand that the first calculation exercise that we did was aimed at evaluating how much it would cost to allow our workers to leave their workplace while maintaining decent incomes that will allow them to live without suffering from poverty. Our first concern, Mr. Coderre, as I told you earlier, is the welfare of our members.

If you're asking me more specifically if, as a union, we evaluated the costs for all workers, I would answer that I'm sure you can count on the services of accountants who can make these calculations.

• 1155

Mr. Denis Coderre: If you don't have it, it doesn't matter. You don't have them?

Mr. Sylvain Parent: No.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Incidentally, please say hello to your new president. You had elections recently. I often hear the term "concerted effort". That's music to my ears coming from the CSN (CNTU).

Mr. Sylvain Parent: Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Vellacott.

[English]

Mr. Maurice Vellacott (Wanuskewin, Ref.): Right. I need to get up to speed in terms of the example Mr. Cyr cites, under paragraph 6, where it says that $10,000 to $25,000—and I take it that was per person—was negotiated for this project. The workers shared the project. So that was $10,000 to $25,000 of severance that went into this project, then. Okay.

So did these workers invest the totality of their severance into this project? Is that correct?

[Translation]

Mr. Élie Cyr: Severance pay packages range from $10,000 to $25,000 per worker, but as of yet, no worker has been laid off. When the lay-off happens, workers will invest their severance pay in the industry that we want to create. If Abitibi Consolidated doesn't have good timing and our workers receive employment insurance, the severance pay we will have negotiated will be deducted from the employment insurance benefits. Thus, the workers won't have any money to invest in the project.

[English]

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: Right. So I guess they haven't received this severance. It comes only when the job is completed, of course. It's just something you've negotiated for the present, and it's going to be there for them when they're completed or terminated. Is that correct? It's just a future promise.

[Translation]

Mr. Élie Cyr: That's a commitment by the employer.

[English]

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: Yes, so the co-op program is guaranteed to proceed then. Or is it still up in the air whether that will proceed or not?

[Translation]

Mr. Élie Cyr: At this point, we are at the stage of financing the cooperative. We met with REXFOR, which invests in cooperatives for job creation. We have guaranteed our supplier raw material and we found a salesman who will have 52 sales outlets in the United States.

What we need to do next is have all these people sit down together. We will be having a meeting in the coming weeks regarding the financing of the project. The CSN fund is investing in our project, as are REXFOR and the SDJ. However, we have to examine the workers' share and each individual's place in all this.

Mr. Sylvain Parent: I'd like to add something. Mr. Coderre stated that he was surprised that the CSN was engaging in concerted effort. The CNTU is very innovative. The co-operative is a union project, and that must be pointed out. It's something very interesting. More and more, union organizations are the ones setting up projects that will maintain jobs. This is a social responsibility that we share with corporations and governments.

Mr. Paul Crête: The Fonds de solidarité and—

Mr. Sylvain Parent: That's right, and the Fonds d'action.

[English]

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: Another thing I need to follow up in the question, then, is whether this $10,000 to $25,000, or whatever that would be per worker, which will be their severance invested in this project, counts as shares for them in this new project. Do they have some percentage of ownership, or is it simply that their money is dumped into it and that's the end of it? Do they have that as a “share”, or as a percentage of this new company—stocks?

[Translation]

Mr. Élie Cyr: It's a co-operative of worker shareholders. It becomes a part of the industry, and the workers will draw benefits from the industry.

Mr. Paul Crête: The problem is that it's withheld as salary.

Mr. Élie Cyr: Yes, it's withheld as salary. How can I explain that?

• 1200

Mr. Paul Crête: The problem is that these amounts are considered a gain and that has a negative impact on employment insurance benefits. Under existing procedures, there has been a negative response to the initiative that was taken.

[English]

Mr. Maurice Vellacott: I guess my last question would be if in fact this goes ahead and it goes very well, they obviously, in terms of the dividends they get on that... I mean, they would have their annual monthly salary, whatever they're paid, plus these dividends. Hopefully, if this thing goes well they would get good dividends, and we don't have a problem with that being taxed, and so on. So it's more if this endeavour fails or is on shaky ground that we say this severance pay shouldn't be counted against them.

[Translation]

Mr. Élie Cyr: The problem is the fact that when a worker receives layoff benefits from the employer and has to apply for employment insurance benefits, the Department of Human Resources Development considers the layoff benefit to be a gain. For example, if the worker receives $10,000, the department can establish that that's equivalent to a salary of $1,000 a week for 10 weeks, which would mean that the worker could no longer invest these $10,000 in the co-operative. That's the problem. If the business gets off the ground and is profitable, the workers will receive a decent wage which will enable them to live and they will be able to continue working. But they have to be able to invest their severance package so that the company can start up.

[English]

The Chairman: Thank you.

[Translation]

Ms. Girard-Bujold.

Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold (Jonquière, BQ): Good morning, Mr. Cyr and Mr. Parent. I'm very pleased you responded favourably to my request and were able to come today.

Despite what Mr. Coderre said, for decades now, the people in the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean region have been trying not to be dependent on government. Our people have always been innovative and done everything they could to take charge of their own situation. However, beyond all that, Mr. Coderre, there are problems facing older people at the moment. Everyone here, including Mr. Crête, has had a hand in having this committee look at the issue finally.

Mr. Parent and Mr. Cyr came to shed some light on the reality of the situation facing workers in the 45 to 50 age group. Even though these people are told to retrain, they have to compete with younger people in a market where there are no jobs and no mobility. These factors combined mean that there is no hope left for these people.

I don't think there are any cooperatives in the Reform MP's province, because he doesn't seem to understand what they are. The government must listen to the demands of the Kénogami union and realize that it is time to help these workers so that they can get the full benefit of their severance pay. The government is penalizing them when they apply for employment insurance benefits by reducing the amounts to which they should be entitled. A few years ago, people were entitled to employment insurance benefits for 52 weeks, but since then the eligibility criteria have been changed and the amounts as well. People now receive benefits for only 12 to 14 weeks, which is very little.

The efforts made by the workers at the Kénogami plant are just a small example of what can be done to deal with the problems facing these people. Mr. Parent cannot give you figures, Mr. Coderre. That is up to you, to the government. They came to describe the everyday reality of the situation. Governments are very far away, and are not aware of this reality. It is all very well to make fine-sounding speeches, but these are the workers who have to deal with this situation everyday.

Mr. Denis Coderre: You are quite right: you have a premier in your riding, and the situation you described is very real.

Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold: You can say whatever you like, Mr. Coderre, but this problem was created by all levels of government, by their lack of commitment and by their failure to introduce proactive measures to help older workers. Quebec is not the only place where workers are experiencing situations similar to those faced by the employees of the Kénogami plant and Mr. Cyr. As Mr. Parent mentioned, these factors are located in single-industry regions. The problem exists throughout the country—in all the other provinces.

• 1205

I think that time has come to act. Mr. Parent and Mr. Cyr, I don't know whether you can deliver a message to government to wake them up, particularly this government, that it must stop its fine talk and get on with doing something, and it could be up to you to do something yourselves.

Ms. Raymonde Folco (Laval West, Lib.): I thought it was precisely the opposition's job to suggest alternatives.

Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold: Ms. Folco...

Ms. Raymonde Folco: I'm listening, Ms. Girard-Bujold.

The Chair: You have the floor. We will hear from our witnesses.

Mr. Élie Cyr: The only thing I can say is that last week, we met with the 200 employees who are losing their jobs. Some of their spouses were present as well. I can tell you that this is not easy for some workers. They wonder what they will do next. They don't know where they will go, where they will live.

When Abitibi-Consolidated was still Abitibi-Price, there was a work allocation program aimed at providing jobs to the greatest number of people possible. Since the merger took place in Abitibi- Consolidated, there is no longer any arrangement of this type. It involved reducing the working time so that we could keep more people and other related measures for the same purpose. We see these families at meetings and it isn't easy for them.

Everyone is following this project we've undertaken and asking questions about it. We went to Europe not so long ago to see an equipment manufacturer.

Everyone has questions about what is taking place. A meeting is coming up and we wonder who is going to enter this plant. Two hundred people are losing their jobs and we can only hire 80 of them.

Just try telling someone that he won't be taken on in the plant. I think that I'll resign this fall so I don't have to answer these questions; it really isn't easy to tell someone that he won't be taken on when we know he has a wife and children.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Basically I can understand why Ms. Girard- Bujold wants to score points—

Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold: Mr. Coderre—

Mr. Denis Coderre: A point of order, Madam Chair.

The Chair: A point of order? I hope it won't be a debate because Ms. Girard-Bujold still has five minutes left. Go ahead.

Mr. Denis Coderre: I'm entitled to make a point of order.

I simply wanted you to tell your employees that the political parties do not always have a monopoly on the truth. Our role in the government is also to ensure that there's some concern for improving people's quality of life. I take the message you are sending personally.

We toured Quebec and we were able to see that there were other problems. There are plants shutting down in the regions and I suggested a number of solutions, in particular the development of a regional policy. I've taken good note of your comments.

The Chair: I thank you for your comments but that was not a point of order. It was a comment. Ms. Girard-Bujold, you have five minutes left.

Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold: Madam Chair, I'd like to tell Mr. Coderre that I am not trying to make political hay out of this. Mr. Coderre, you are quite mistaken about me. I have always been very close to the people in my constituency, even when I wasn't in politics, and I've always done what I could so their voices could be heard at higher levels.

Ms. Folco, we opposition members of Parliament invite people here so that you can find out about reality and let you know that they do have ideas about how to advance the calls of workers. You have the proof here, Ms. Folco.

Ms. Raymonde Folco: Ms. Girard-Bujold...

The Chair: Order! Ms. Girard-Bujold.

Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold: I'm sorry, Madam Chair. I'm not in the habit of doing that sort of thing but I had no other choice.

The Chair: We have the possibility of hearing the opinion of our witnesses. You have five minutes left. If you have any questions, we can find out what the view of our witnesses is.

Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold: In our area, there was a shared work experiment in the Alcan plant in Jonquière. It lasted for three years.

People would work 40 hours and be paid for 38 hours, keeping the remaining two in reserve. The federal and provincial governments as well as Alcan took part in this program. In this way it was possible to create 150 permanent jobs that were accepted as part of the new agreement concluded with Alcan. Would this not strike you as a good initiative? In this way it was possible to keep the older workers and hire some new ones.

The Chair: Mr. Parent.

• 1210

Mr. Sylvain Parent: I'd like to close with a message.

Today, we live in a society where things go very fast. We live in an economy undergoing continuous change. All the elements are set up and are developing very rapidly. Unfortunately, there are often people from different levels of society who are held hostage because of the context or decisions that are made.

I'm talking about our youth. We encourage our youth to pursue their studies, we try to prevent them from dropping out and we'd like them to have easy access to the labour market but, at the same time, we're saying something far different. The situations and contexts are contradictory. As I was explaining before, all the changes happening in all the industries are decreasing the number of employees in many businesses. That is true in our field of activity among others.

The effect is detrimental to our industry. We're not giving our seniors the wherewithal for them to have an interesting and decent income. We have to avoid poverty for those people. At the same time, we need the tools that will allow our youth to go work in different businesses and put their qualifications to use. Those two groups have to be able to meet and we have to find an approach that will respond to their needs.

There's another aspect I wanted to look at. We have union responsibilities. We try to do our best to protect jobs and job creation, but we also have our limits and that must be recognized. Sometimes we face employers who aren't necessarily sensitive to the same things we are.

I also believe that governments have a social responsibility and must legislate, especially concerning overtime. Employees must be offered the possibility of sharing working hours and work shorter weeks.

In some businesses, we've managed to get this accepted and keep jobs because we were able to negotiate it, but we must recognize that not all businesses will allow us to take that route.

Governments must give us the tools we need to respond to all the needs. We believe those measures, overall, would allow our youth to take their place and also allow older workers who have given 20 or 30 years of their working life to a business and participated in its economic development to take their place in society.

I'll wrap it up by saying that words are one thing, but that acts are extremely important. We'd ask you to act on this as soon as possible. Thank you.

The Chair: I have a question for you.

You spoke about the government's obligations. As a union representative, do you feel an obligation to prepare older workers, even when they leave your industry? If you have the resources to prepare older workers, do you think that might be a new approach, preparing older workers?

Mr. Sylvain Parent: Maybe we'd have to define what resources we could have.

The Chair: If the government were to make the resources available for the unions to train people, would you look at the possibility of preparing them?

Mr. Sylvain Parent: I think so, yes.

The Chair: Yes?

Mr. Sylvain Parent: Yes.

The Chair: I know this is a new idea and that maybe you haven't thought about this yet. You've told us that we had to take new approaches.

• 1215

We always try to help the older people at the end of the day, when they're desperate and really stuck. I think that if we're to take a new approach, we'd have to start at the beginning and not at the end.

You spoke about the government's obligations, but I'm wondering if this is a responsibility we could share with the unions in partnership with the government.

Mr. Sylvain Parent: We're open to any new suggestions.

The Chair: Fine. Thank you.

Ms. Davies.

[English]

Ms. Libby Davies: Thank you.

I wanted to follow up on that point “monsieur” Parent made.

You were talking about how the marketplace and the economy are changing so much and that workers get left, well, nowhere. They're the last on the agenda. It seems to me in this study we're doing of older workers particularly, one of the real foundations or concrete things we've got to speak out on is the need for economic security. I mean, workers go through this cycle of work. They may devote 20 or 30 years to a particular company and all of a sudden, boom, it's gone. So whether we talk about severance pay, retraining, early retirement, or using the EI, as limited as it is, the issue we've got to get at for workers is maintaining economic security, because that's where people really hurt. If you don't have a sense of security about what your life is going to be, even in the short term, to be able to focus on retraining or developing new skills is very, very hard. And it gets harder as you get older.

I just wonder, when we talk about different roles... I agree, there's a role for the government, for unions, and the employer. It seems to me that too often we end up with a situation where individual unions have to take on individual employers and try to claw out whatever they can, because there is no basis to say economic security is what we want to maintain for people. There has to be a role for the government, the unions, and the employer in that.

I just wonder if you agree with that kind of approach. We are looking at the issue here of how to respond to the very dire circumstances of older workers. I think it gets tougher and tougher. You know, it's really hard, if you're in your late forties or fifties and you're suddenly faced with the prospect of your job of twenty or thirty years just evaporating.

[Translation]

Mr. Élie Cyr: We are in total agreement.

[English]

The Chairman: There's agreement, Madame Davies.

Are there any further questions?

[Translation]

I'd like to thank you. Your comments have really made us think.

[English]

We're going to suspend for two minutes and then we'll go in camera. Thank you.

[Editor's Note: Proceedings continue in camera]