CMNT_TITLE

Employment Service Convention, 1948 (No. 88) - Canada (RATIFICATION: 1950)

Cooperation with employers’ and workers’ representatives. The Committee notes the Government’s response received in September 2011 in reply to the comments of the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC). The CLC indicated in September 2010 that the Government affords a low priority to consultation with the social partners on the matters set out in the Convention. It further indicated that there are no advisory committees, as set out in Article 4 of the Convention, involving trade unions and employer organizations dealing with the organization and operation of the employment service in the country. The CLC would welcome consideration to create such advisory committees that would examine specific issues and measure the Government’s progress in implementing the Convention. In the longer term, an Article 4 consultation process could help to better coordinate workplace training by bringing together employers, unions and various levels of government. The Government indicates that it consults with employers and workers on a number of issues related to skills development and employment through, inter alia: (i) meetings of the Roundtable on Workforce Skills (RWS), which is comprised of senior representatives from the business community, unions, and federal and provincial governments; and (ii) sectoral and regional consultations with employers and unions through the Sector Council Program and other Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) initiatives. The Committee notes that Service Canada is reviewing its approach in order to further improve service delivery while realizing efficiencies. This process began in 2009 and one of the objectives is to simplify and enhance Service Canada’s presence across the country by balancing in-person interaction with the online self-service channel. The CLC indicated in its 2010 comments that it continued to uncover claimants who remained unassisted because of staff shortages in Service Canada offices. This has lead to delays in receiving benefits or denial of benefits altogether due to incorrectly filled out forms. Furthermore, with regard to Article 6(b) of the Convention, the CLC expresses the view that the Canadian Employment Insurance (EI) system does not appear to be serious about facilitating mobility between one region or province to another. The Government responded that it is committed to facilitating mobility between provinces and territories. It indicates that a number of studies have looked at the determinants of labour market mobility and whether EI played a role in the decision to migrate for employment. Results of these studies reveal that factors such as personal and labour market characteristics, and moving costs, play a key role in mobility decisions, and it appears that EI is not a barrier to mobility. The Committee invites the Government to continue to provide information on the active cooperation of employers’ and workers’ representatives in the organization, the operation of the employment service and in the development of the employment service policy (Article 4(1) of the Convention). Please also provide information on the effectiveness of Service Canada’s review of the employment service system.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2014.]