HUMA Committee Report

The pursuit of fairness in workplaces in the federal jurisdiction garnered impetus following the release of the report of the Royal Commission on Equality in Employment in November 1984. The Royal Commission’s recommendations led to the Employment Equity Act in 1986, which covered federally regulated employers with 100 or more employees. In the same year, employment equity provisions were extended to federal contractors who employed 100 or more workers and received federal government goods and services contracts worth $200,000 or more. Six years later, a legislated mandate for employment equity was given to the federal public service. In conjunction with the second parliamentary review of the original Employment Equity Act, the Standing Committee on Human Rights and the Status of Disabled Persons also reviewed Bill C-64 (An Act respecting employment equity) between November 1994 and June 1995. This legislative proposal, which underlies the current Employment Equity Act, received Royal Assent in December 1995 and came into force in October of the following year. The Employment Equity Act of 1996 extended coverage to federal departments and agencies and provided a mandate to the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) to verify and monitor employer compliance, and where needed, to provide for the establishment of an Employment Equity Tribunal to enforce a CHRC direction. Although not directly covered under the law, the reporting requirements of federal contractors are supposed to be equivalent to employers covered under the Act. Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) is currently responsible for monitoring employment equity compliance among federal contractors.

1. Gains in Workplace Representation

Since the inception of the Employment Equity Act in 1986, workplace representation (i.e. share of employment) among the four groups designated under the Act — Aboriginal people, persons with disabilities, visible minorities and women — has undeniably improved. This fact was widely recognized by an overwhelming majority of our witnesses. And, while most acknowledged that the Act did not require major revisions, many expressed the view that the rate of progress in some areas — especially with respect to persons with disabilities and Aboriginal people — has been too slow and, as evidenced below, markedly uneven.

During the period 1987 to 2000, the most recent year for which data¹ are available, the proportion of women employed in federally regulated private sector workplaces (including some Crown corporations) covered under the Employment Equity Act increased from 40.9% in 1987 to 43.8% in 2000. In terms of the latter period, women’s share of employment was highest (71.4%) in the banking sector and lowest (22.9%) in transportation industries. Compared to the federally regulated private sector, the relative level of female employment in the federal public service registered a larger increase during this period, rising from 42.3% of total public service employment in 1987 to 52.1% in 2000. Moreover, women’s share of executive positions in federal departments and agencies has been rising steadily and reached 30% in 2000. However, we must recognize that there is room for improving women’s representation in executive positions. Despite the employment gains made by women covered under the Act, some witnesses identified a continuing need to assess the problems facing women who experience a multiple disadvantage in the workplace.

One weakness in the Employment Equity Act ... is the way it defines equity groups as visible minorities, women, aboriginal persons, and persons with disabilities. The failure to recognize that gender cuts across all equity groups suppresses recognition of the multiple disadvantages women from first nations communities, racialized groups, and disability groups face. (Ms. Rita Warner, Chair, Cape Breton Region, Nova Scotia Advisory Council on the Status of Women)²

In 1987, Aboriginal people accounted for 0.7% of employment among federally regulated private sector employers covered under the Act. By 2000, their share of total employment in this sector more than doubled to 1.5%. Growth of a similar magnitude also occurred in federal departments and agencies covered under the Act; Aboriginal peoples’ share of employment increased from 1.8% in 1987 to 3.6% in 2000. The Department of Indian and Northern Affairs is by far the largest employer of Aboriginal people in the federal public service and accounts for almost 20% of all Aboriginal workers employed in federal departments and agencies.

I’m proud to say that in the banking industry we are achieving results. Although there is certainly more work to be done, we have been able to reach and surpass the government’s benchmark for representation of women in senior management and middle management, and we have exceeded the benchmark for members of visible minorities in overall employment and at the middle management and professional levels. But I also want to say that we are not yet where we want to be. More work is needed, for instance, in achieving progress with aboriginal people and people with disabilities. (Ms. Elisabetta Bigsby, Senior Executive Vice-President, Human Resources and Public Affairs, RBC Financial Group, Canadian Bankers Association)³

In 2000, persons with disabilities accounted for 2.3% of total employment in that portion of the private sector covered under the Act. This is 0.7 of a percentage point above this group’s share of employment in 1987. Growth in employment among persons with disabilities has been much more favourable in federal departments and agencies since the Act’s inception, as the share of employment among persons with disabilities almost doubled from 2.6% in 1987 to 5.1% in 2000.  The CHRC attributes some of this improvement to growth in the number of persons with disabilities who self-identify rather than the number who are hired.⁴

We know the progress of people with disabilities has been absolutely abysmal, everyone recognizes that, but I wanted to say that even where employers have hired and have made efforts, based on their obligations as federal employers perhaps, it’s extremely difficult for people with disabilities, because of the lack of support services that are available to them. We found numbers of individuals who can’t get to the work place, because of the cutbacks in transportation. That’s only one example. There are those who can’t sustain their work, because of the lack of affordability of other medical needs they have. It’s quite profound. (Ms. Penni Richmond, National Director, Women’s and Human Rights Department, Canadian Labour Congress)⁵

Representation in employment among members of visible minorities in the federally regulated private sector has steadily improved since 1987. In 2000, visible minorities accounted for 10.7% of total employment in this sector, more than twice their share of employment in 1987. Banks are by far the largest employer of visible minority workers in the federally regulated private sector; in 2000 the banking industry accounted for 45% of total employment among visible minority employees in this sector as a whole. In 1987, visible minority workers accounted for some 2.7% of total employment in federal departments and agencies, roughly one-half the level of this group’s representation in the federally regulated private sector. Impressive employment growth among visible minorities also occurred in the public sector between 1987 and 2000, when this group’s share of employment reached 6.1% by the end of this 13-year period. The CHRC reports that most of the new hiring of members in this group continues to be largely confined to the ‘Scientific and Professional’ category. Continued improvements in the overall representation of visible minority workers in the federal public service are expected, as departments pursue their hiring and promotion goals as set out in the Embracing Change action plan.

2. Gains Relative to Labour Force Availability

While the aforementioned employment trends clearly depict an improvement in employment among workers in designated groups since the onset of employment equity law, progress vis-à-vis the Employment Equity Act must be assessed in relation to the availability of these groups in the labour market. It is only on this basis that employers are judged whether their workplaces are “representative.” A representative workplace is one in which the proportion of employed members of a designated group is equal to, or greater than, that group’s share of the labour force from which of the employer recruits, commonly referred to as “availability.” The ratio of workplace representation to availability (i.e. the representational ratio) provides a handy measure for assessing employment equity progress in workplaces covered under the Act. A representational ratio that is less than one implies under-representation. Chart 1 provides a graphic illustration of representational ratios for each designated group in the federally regulated private sector, and federal departments and agencies for the years 1987 and 2000. This graphic illustration shows that employment equity progress has occurred in both of these sectors between 1987 and 2000, as the representational ratio for each designated group in 2000 was higher than in 1987. Despite this progress, the situation for Aboriginal people and persons with disabilities in the federally regulated private sector and members of visible minorities in the federal public service remains, in our opinion and the opinion of most of our witnesses, quite unsatisfactory.

According to the data presented in Chart 1, women were slightly under‑represented in the federally regulated private sector in 1987. And despite a marginal improvement in representation among women relative to their availability between 1987 and 2000, women remained slightly under-represented by the end of the latter period. Compared to the private sector, women were more equitably represented in federal departments and agencies in 1987 and since then have reached a position of slight over-representation. While many witnesses who appeared before the Committee acknowledged that women have achieved greater equality in the workplace since the inception of the Employment Equity Act, most were quick to point out that overall equality has not been reached and there is a continued need for this legislation to help women gain greater representation in some occupational categories, especially in terms of managerial and professional occupations.

We have had an excellent representation of women in the highest ranks of our organizations. We’re very proud of this. They have been recruiting from outside, but there has been a very strong promotion from the inside as well. Women may have had a larger role in the past in the lower level jobs, in the clerical jobs, but we have seen many women promoted from those lowest levels to the very highest levels, and we’re very happy to see that. (Ms. Lesya Balych-Cooper, Vice-President, Diversity and Workplace Equity/EAP, Bank of Montreal, Canadian Bankers Association)⁶

Despite some improvement since 1987, Aboriginal people remain substantially under-represented in the federally regulated private sector. In 2000, this group’s representation in employment was about three-quarters of their workforce availability. The federal public service made significant gains in achieving a representative Aboriginal workforce during this period; Aboriginal people went from a situation of under‑representation in 1987 to over-representation in 2000. In terms of the latter period, representation in employment among Aboriginal people in federal departments and agencies was more than twice their availability in the labour force. While the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs has been a major contributor to the increase in representation among Aboriginal people in the federal public service, it is worth noting that substantial progress in the employment of Aboriginal people has also occurred in other federal departments and agencies.

In short, the study concluded that in spite of some of the gains that had been acquired under the Employment Equity Act for aboriginal women, aboriginal women continued to face barriers to fair and equitable treatment in the workforce. When the study examined the effectiveness of employment equity programs, it concluded that “the difficulties faced in a non-aboriginal environment by the vast majority of women interviewed are so daunting that none of the existing programs appears suited to meet this need effectively.” (Ms. Manon Lamontagne, Consultant, Femmes Autochtones du Québec)⁷

Although marginal progress was made between 1987 and 2000, the gap between representation and availability for persons with disabilities in the federally regulated private sector remains significant. Representation in employment for persons with disabilities was roughly one-third of this group’s availability in 2000, a situation that the Committee finds unacceptable and worthy of special action. The federal public service enjoyed better success achieving a representative workforce among persons with disabilities during this period, when the representational ratio in that sector almost doubled between 1987 and 2000. For the first time, overall representation of persons with disabilities in employment in federal departments and agencies is comparable to Treasury Board’s availability benchmark of 4.8%, a level of availability that is significantly less than the 6.5% benchmark applied to federally regulated private sector employers.

At present, the track record for ensuring equity for persons with disabilities, much less those with psychiatric disabilities, is far from shining. According to the 2001 Employment Equity Annual Report, persons with disabilities represent 2.4% of the workforce, drastically below the labour market availability of 6.5%. The representation of persons with disabilities fell this year continuing a declining trend that started in 1996. This group has experienced the least progress under the Act. The rate at which employees with disabilities are leaving the workforce is alarming. In 2000, the number of employees with disabilities terminated was higher than that hired. (Ms. Wendy Steinberg, Policy Analyst, Canadian Mental Health Association)⁸

Since the inception of employment equity, federally regulated private sector employers have traditionally employed a higher proportion of visible minorities than their counterparts in the federal public service. While the extent of representation among visible minorities in both sectors improved between 1987 and 2000, visible minorities in the federally regulated private sector were slightly over-represented by the
year 2000. Significant under-representation of visible minorities persists in federal departments and agencies, despite the fact that the availability benchmark applied to the federal public service is significantly lower than that applied to the private sector.⁹ The Committee is hopeful that the relative employment position of visible minorities will improve significantly in the federal public service in the near term, as the positive measures contained in the Embracing Change action plan begin to bear fruit.

Unfortunately, we are not yet as representative with respect to visible minorities. The Secretariat’s Embracing Change program was implemented to respond to this challenge by setting benchmarks for the recruitment, promotion and training of visible minority employees and focusing on ways to change the corporate culture in our institutions. (Mr. James Lahey, Associate Secretary, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat)¹⁰

3. Additional Action

Like the approach adopted in the federal public service to better address the equity needs of visible minority workers, the Committee believes that specific workplace strategies should be developed to advance employment equity among persons with disabilities and Aboriginal people. These strategies should also incorporate special initiatives like those delivered under the now defunct Employment Equity Positive Measures Program (EEPMP) and the Enabling Resource Centre (ERC), a longstanding program designed to help public service managers provide the technology and means to accommodate persons with disabilities. According to correspondence from the Presidents of the Treasury Board and Public Service Commission to the Committee, EEPMP and ERC are no longer needed as they have helped individual departments become self‑sufficient in achieving employment equity objectives in the federal public service. We were also told that this decision is in keeping with government’s approach to modernizing human resource management in the federal public service. Members of the Committee are displeased by the fact that the Treasury Board and the Public Service Commission terminated the EEPMP and the ERC as we were in the middle of reviewing the Employment Equity Act. Furthermore, the CHRC recommended that the Committee examine the possibility of extending funding for these programs with the Treasury Board. Because most members of the Committee are not convinced that individual departments and agencies have become self-sufficient in delivering these measures, we do not support the termination of these programs at this time. 

The workplace strategies for persons with disabilities and Aboriginal people should be developed in partnership with employers covered under the Employment Equity Act, disability organizations, Aboriginal organizations and other stakeholders in the community. Funding should be secured to create entry-level employment opportunities, partnering arrangements with voluntary sector organizations that support the hiring and development of Aboriginal people and persons with disabilities, and the development of supports to facilitate physical and cultural accommodations in the workplace, respecting the constitutional jurisdiction of the provinces and in harmony with programs existing in certain provinces.

While many programs have met with limited success, a few have made noteworthy progress. Concerns are not about the Act per se, but rather improvements that could be made with the Act. Most of the necessary initiatives are already in place. What remains is to work at making them more effective. The high turnover of aboriginal employees due to unfriendly or culturally insensitive work environments could be addressed by mentorship, cultural accommodations, as well as development of various other support systems in the workplace. (Ms. Marie Frawley-Henry, Director of International Affairs, Assembly of First Nations)¹¹

Disability organizations have not been recognized for the knowledge, support, linkage and expertise they can bring to make this work. Linkages are needed between the individual community, training and education providers, the labour market and the workplace and disability voluntary sector organizations can make this happen. They play roles in identifying individual goals and support needs, they broker access to support and labour market resources, they provide peer support and motivation, they provide employer education and awareness, they provide on‑the-job training, accommodation, and facilitate co-worker relationships and they assist employers in meeting labour market demand by linking to supply … The federal government could take leadership in the federally regulated sector. They could take leadership within the labour market to demonstrate and create a proactive equity strategy, establishing a partnership through the workplace equity programs. They could invest resources for workplace development as in the public service, and they could fund disability voluntary-sector organizations to play linkage roles. (Mr. Michael Bach, Vice-President, Canadian Association for Community Living)¹²

Recommendation 1

The Committee recommends that: