Pay Equity Brief to the Government of Manitoba December 11, 2012 1
Equality is not a luxury for times of prosperity. It is a fundamental human right and women s equality is a cornerstone of our democratic society. 1 1 Equal Pay Coalition, 2008, A framework for Action on Pay Equity in Ontario: a special 20 th Anniversary report contributing to Ontario s Future, p. ii. 2
Introduction PAY EQUITY BRIEF TO THE GOVERNMENT OF MANITOBA The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) represents over 27,000 workers in Manitoba, including approximately 1,500 members working in the social services and child care sectors in communities throughout the province. These workers provide a range of critical support and front line services that contribute to maintaining Manitoba s social safety net. Our members who work in this sector interact on a daily basis with children and their families, with people living with disabilities, with the homeless, with those with addictions, with new Canadians, with families in crisis, with women experiencing abuse and with many others facing personal trauma in their lives. These workers, who are primarily women, care for among the most vulnerable members in our society. As a cadre within Manitoba s unionized workers, they are among the lowest paid and have little, if anything, in the way of pensions or benefits. While the work they do is very important, there is a lack of recognition and respect for their contribution to society. Although government agencies provide some of these types of services directly, most are provided by faith and community-based non-profit organizations. The purpose of this brief is to provide support for CUPE s position that the ongoing problem of low wages in the social services and child care sector is discriminatory, and consequently must be addressed through the implementation of pay equity legislation that allows for proxy pay adjustments, similar to that which exists in Ontario (see Appendix A). Who We Are A large network of almost 1,000 agencies, funded mainly by the provincial government, delivers support to children and families in Manitoba. A 2011 study by Harvey Stevens, The Voluntary and Non-Profit Health and Social Services Sector in Manitoba: A Profile of Its Composition and Workplace Challenges and Resources for Meeting those Challenges, describes the agencies providing social services in Manitoba. There is a broad focus to the work of these organizations. Child day care accounts for 30 per cent of all the organizations, services to elderly and disabled persons represent 11 per cent, 9 per cent offer individual and family services and 7 per cent residential care services. Social advocacy, children and youth services, transportation, grant-making, civic and social describe some of the other focuses of these organizations. The sector is also growing in the number of employees. Overall, 44 per cent of respondents indicated a recent increase in employment levels, while only 8 per cent indicated a decrease. The ratio of increases to decreases is highest among those organizations with the greatest number of employees, and the sectors growing the most are elderly and disabled services, civic and social and residential service. Just under half (48%) of the organizations have fewer than 10 employees while 18 per cent have more than 50. Twenty-one (21) per cent have total expenditures of less than $150,000 while 32 per cent have expenditures of more than $800,000. The level of full vs. part-time employment varies considerably. Twenty-three (23) per cent of the organizations have fewer than 40 per cent of their employees working full-time 3
while 27 per cent have more than 80 per cent of their employees working full-time. 2 CUPE members work throughout the province in a variety of non-profit organizations in the sectors identified above. These frontline workers are often living in near-poverty conditions, earning just above the minimum wage, without pensions and often without extended health care benefits. The people employed in these sectors provide services that are an essential component of the socio-economic fabric of our society. However, it would appear that their needs have been forgotten in the planning and maintaining of these services. Poverty, with its well-known catalogue of negative present and future effects on health, well-being and opportunity for economic attainment, imposes costs on women who are poor along with those dependent on them. Growing up in poverty has an adverse impact on children s future economic opportunities. Economic vulnerability also negatively affects women s physical security. To the extent that sex-based wage disparities make it harder for women to attain a basic level of economic security, they create many serious barriers for women in all aspects of their lives. 3 Gender discrimination As is the case across Canada and indeed globally, Manitoba s workforce in the social service and child care sector is predominately female. Historically these types of jobs have been viewed as women s work as they are seen as an extension of the kind of work that women have traditionally performed in the home. As a result, this type of work is woefully undervalued and underpaid an obvious example of the systemic wage discrimination faced by women in the paid labour force. It is widely recognized that this type of wage discrimination is one of the factors which contributes to the prevalence of poverty among women: Pay Equity as a Remedy Although the percentage of women working in Manitoba is one of the highest in the country (the rate was 60.3% in 2009), the wage gap between men and women still persists. Women working full-time for a full year in Manitoba earn only 72% of what men working full-time full year earn. 4 As previously stated, the low wages earned by many women are the result of systemic gender discrimination, which in turn requires a systemic approach to resolve the problem. According to a report commissioned by the Pay Equity Review Task Force examining federal pay equity legislation, comprehensive pay equity legislation is the only model that recognizes wage discrimination as a systemic problem 2 Stevens, Harvey (2010). The Voluntary and Non-Profit Health and Social Services Sector in Manitoba: A Profile of Its Composition and Workplace Challenges and Resources for Meeting those Challenges. Prepared for the Manitoba Federation of Non-Profit Organizations, p. 26. 3 Iyer, Nita (2002), Working Through the Wage Gap: Report of the B.C. Task Force on Pay Equity. 9. 4 Parkland Institute (2009). Women s equality a long way off in Alberta. March 2012. 4
that demands a systemic remedy. 5 In keeping with this principle, we are asking the Manitoba Government to implement pay equity legislation to cover the social services and child care sectors as a means of reducing the wage gap for our members and others working in these jobs. Canada and Manitoba are bound by several international conventions and agreements which commit to the principle that pay equity is a fundamental labour and human right, and that achieving pay equity should be a matter of urgency and priority. Among these are the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Labour Organization (ILO) Equal Remuneration Convention, and the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) all of which incorporate the principle that women have a right to equal remuneration for work of equal value. Although CUPE recognizes that the province is facing financial constraints, we strongly agree with the principle articulated in the statement by the Equal Pay Coalition of Ontario, that [e]quality is not a luxury for times of prosperity. It is a fundamental human right and women s equality is a cornerstone of our democratic society. 6 We also note with interest the comments in the same document, where a government as a law maker or in public services and funding agreements perpetuates and sanctions conditions of work that deny equality, this is also a Charter violation. This includes providing funding to transfer payment agencies which results in such agencies relying on discriminatory wages to provide the public service. 7 Indeed, this principle was articulated by Madame Justice Ruth Krindle in the 1992 Manitoba Council of Heath Care Unions court decision, which determined that the provincial government had to allocate sufficient money to close the wage gap that had been identified in the health care sector that was covered by the Pay Equity legislation at the time. Justice Krindle referred to the Preamble of the Pay Equity Act, which included a reference to section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in her finding that section 7(3) of the Act was a violation of the Charter: section 7(3) is patently discriminatory in that it legislatively sanctions the continued payment by the employer to persons performing women s work of salaries that are less that equivalent. 8 5 6 Cornish, M., Shilton, E. and Faraday, F., Canada s International Obligation and Domestic Human rights Obligations to Ensure Pay Equity: Obligations to Design an Effective, Enforceable and Proactive Federal Pay Equity Law. Research paper for Pay Equity Review Task Force, p. 4. Equal Pay Coalition, (2008). A Framework for Action on Pay Equity in Ontario: A Special 20 th Anniversary Report Contributing to Ontario s Future, p. 4. 7 Equal Pay Coalition, (2008). A Framework for Action on Pay Equity in Ontario: A Special 20 th Anniversary Report Contributing to Ontario s Future, p. 20. 8 Manitoba Council of Health Care Unions v. Bethesda Hospital. 1992. Manitoba Court of Queen s Bench, Winnipeg Centre. Krindle J. January 6, 1992. 5
The Manitoba Experience with Pay Equity We recognize that NDP governments in Manitoba have taken important steps over the years to try to deal with the problems of wage discrimination faced by women in the workplace. Indeed, in 1985, Howard Pawley s government was the first in Canada to introduce pro-active pay equity legislation. However, the legislation was limited in scope, and unfortunately the government was defeated before it could extend pay equity to the rest of the public sector. A Voluntary Framework, introduced in 1990 by the Conservative government, facilitated the implementation of pay equity for support staff in most of the province s school divisions. In addition, the pay equity adjustments for health care workers under the Pay Equity Act were extended to most health care workers in the province through the bargaining process. Although the legislation had some problems, the overall result was that thousands of women (and men in femaledominated job classes) received pay equity wage adjustments, for example in the civil service, universities and health care sectors. However, none of the other predominately female workplaces where CUPE members work have had any type of pay equity initiative apply to them, although the Staffing Stabilization Fund in the late nineties and early 2000 did put some more money into some of the smaller social service agencies. The government has also taken steps to increase wages of workers in child care facilities. While much of government increased funding has gone to expanding the number of spaces available to parents, there has also been some money targeted towards the improvement in wages for Early Childhood Educators (ECEs). Wages Average wages in Manitoba are amongst the lowest in the country. The current average hourly wage for permanent employees is $21.93, and the median hourly wage is $19.00, placing us at 4 th lowest in both measurements. However, at $14.43 and $15.12 respectively, the average and median hourly wages for our social services and child care workers are significantly lower than the average and median wages for the province ($7.50/hr and $3.88/hr lower respectively; see Table 1). It is important to note that the median hourly wage for male permanent employees in the province is $2.00 higher than for female permanent employees; and $2.83/hour higher for average wages. While these are unacceptable gaps, they are less than the gap that exists between male and female workers nationally. Overall, Manitoba compares relatively favourably to other provinces in this respect in the middle when comparing the male-female difference in average wages, and 4 th amongst the provinces for the smallest median wage gap (see Table 2). Given this comparatively more favourable position vis-à-vis male-female wage gaps, the gap between workers in the social services and childcare sectors traditionally female dominated sectors and all other employees, is particularly conspicuous. 6
Table 1. Comparison of Average and Median Wages: Social Services and Child Care Workers and Permanent Employees, Manitoba 9 Average Hourly Wage Median Hourly Wage Manitoba All Permanent (August 2012) Social Services and Child Care Difference 21.93 14.43 7.5 19.00 15.12 3.88 Table 2. dollars). 10 Male-female Employee Wage Gap, by province and nationally (in Average Median Canada 3.88 4.16 Newfoundland and Labrador 4.83 5.00 Prince Edward Island 0.41 0.77 (higher for female employees) Nova Scotia 2.28 2.29 New Brunswick 1.94 1.44 Quebec 2.80 1.50 Ontario 3.60 4.04 Manitoba 2.83 2.00 Saskatchewan 1.62 5.01 Alberta 6.19 7.38 British Columbia 4.92 6.00 9 10 Statistics Canada, CANSIM Table 282-0073: Labour force survey estimates (LFS), wages of employees by job permanence, union coverage, sex and age group, unadjusted for seasonality. Retrieved September 14, 2012 at, http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26. Based on Labour Force Estimates from Statistics Canada, CANSIM Table 282-0073: Labour force survey estimates (LFS), wages of employees by job permanence, union coverage, sex and age group, unadjusted for seasonality. Retrieved September 14, 2012 at, http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26. 7
This data suggests that social services and child care workers are in a significantly more vulnerable economic position than most other workers in the province. Moreover, the gap between this traditionally feminized labour and the total provincial workforce is more significant than the gap between male and female workers for the total workforce. Not only does this raise serious questions concerning the economic well-being of these workers and their families, but also about the overall value placed on this work. Graph 1. Distribution of Current Starting Wages for Social Services and Child Care Sectors 11 30.00 25.00 20.00 As Graph 1 demonstrates, both the average hourly starting wages and overall hourly wages of the majority of classifications in this field fall well below both the average ($21.93) and median ($19.00) wages in the province. What is even more alarming is that both the average and median wages for these workers sit very close to the living wage for a two-parent two-child family, and both are well below the living wage for a single-parent family. 12 According to a 2009 report by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA), the living wage for a Winnipeg family with two working parents and two children is $13.44/ hour. A single parent with two children would have to make $25.44/hour and with one child, s/he would need to earn $18.64/hour 13 (See Table 3). Examination of starting wages presents an even more acute situation: the average starting wage for these workers is $13.60 and the median starting wage is $13.83, and thus barely meeting the living wage as determined by the CCPA. 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 0 20 40 60 80 11 As social workers are a classification that are paid notably higher than most other classifications in this sector, and are thus not representative of the majority of wage rates, they have been excluded from this analysis. 12 13 Based on calculations of a living wage by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) Manitoba office. The primary determinants of the living wage are income from employment and family expenses. However, the calculation also factors in the income the family receives from government transfers and deductions from income for statutory contributions (EI and CPP) and income taxes. Thus, the living wage is the hourly rate of pay at which a household can meet its expenses once government transfers have been added and government deductions have been subtracted. (CCPA, 2009, p.15). See, The View From Here: How a living wage can reduce poverty in Manitoba, CCPA MB, 2009. 20/20, A Clear Vision for Winnipeg: 2010 Alternative Municipal Budget, CCPA-MB, 2010, p. 31. 8
Table 3. Living Wages for Parents with One and Two Children 14 Winnipeg Brandon Thompson Two-parent, two-child living wage $13.44 $11.10 $11.18 Single-parent, one-child living wage $18.64 $16.99 $16.39 Single-parent, two-child living wage $25.44 $18.31 $18.88 14 CCPA 2009, The View From Here, p. 16. 9
Here, it is crucial to note that living wages have not been calculated for more recent years. Therefore, it is very likely that a larger portion of the wages represented above would fall below 2011 living wage calculations, possibly even the average and median wages considering their current proximity to these figures. Current median and average starting wages would almost certainly fall below the calculated 2009 living wage it is CUPE s position that this is an unacceptable circumstance. A more recent measurement of living standard (for the city of Winnipeg) has been conducted by Winnipeg Harvest and the Social Planning Council of Winnipeg. According to their 2012 Acceptable Living Level (ALL) report, the ALL for Winnipeg for a single male is $18,090; for a single female, $22,607; for a family of four, $52,548; and for a single parent with two children it is $38,152. 15 Again, depending on family size, it is clear that a significant number of our social services and childcare workers are living below this measurement. Not only are many of these workers thus faced with precarious economic subsistence based on the calculations developed by these three organizations, but, it is reasonable to conclude that many social services and child care workers are living close to or below low-income measurements such as the low-income-cut-off (LICO) and market basket measures (MBM) threshold for the province. 16 15 16 Winnipeg Harvest & the Social Planning Council of Winnipeg (2012). A More Inclusive and Generous Canada: The 2012 Acceptable Living Level, p. 8. Statistics Canada, 2010, Low Income Cutoffs before tax: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/201 1002/tbl/tbl02-eng.htm; The MBM is a measure based on the disposable income required for a specified basket of goods and services a family would consume. In addition to income taxes, the MBM deducts items The beneficial effect of extending pay equity legislation to cover social services and child care workers can be illustrated by way of comparison with other traditionally feminized sectors whom have benefitted from pay equity legislation. For example, rates of pay for similar support and care-related work performed in the healthcare sector are notably higher. An examination of 40 job classifications (see Table 5 in Appendix B) in the health care sector, that either exist in the social services and child care sector, or where the work best approximates job classifications in this sector, shows that the average hourly wage rate is $3.45 higher, and the average hourly starting wage is $3.06 higher for our health care support workers than for social services and child care workers. It should be noted that these 40 classifications generally represent the lowest wage rates in this sector. The average hourly wage for the selected classifications is $17.88, compared to $19.10 an hour for the total sector (health care support workers represented by CUPE); the average starting wage is $16.66/hr, compared to $ 17.79/hr for the total sector. 17 Despite this, these wages are still well above the average rates of pay for social services and healthcare workers (see Table 4). 17 such as payroll taxes, out-of-pocket costs for child care and prescription drugs before arriving at disposable income. The 2009 MBM for a reference family of two adults and two children for rural Manitoba was $28,745; for communities of less than 30,000: $30,327; for Brandon: $28,884; for Winnipeg: $ 29,778. Low Income Lines, 2009-2010, Income Research Paper Series, Statistics Canada, Ottawa, June 2011. Some trades, communications and public relations classifications which are either not representative of average classifications, or are found at one or very few worksites, are not included in these figures. 10
Table 4. Comparison of Social Services and Child Care Sector and Selected Health Care Support Sector Hourly Wage Rates Health Care Social Services and Support Workers Child Care Workers Difference Average all 17.88 14.43 3.45 Average starting 16.66 13.60 3.06 Previous research we have conducted has raised concerns about the level of pay for many of our health care support workers, particularly with respect to the extent that many of these workers also earn below the average and median wages in the province, and in some cases close to or below the various low-income measurements discussed above. Thus, it is not our contention that these wages represent an ideal level of remuneration. Rather, it is alarming that a large proportion of social services and childcare workers, are earning substantially below these already low levels of pay. There are CUPE members in these sectors whom have told us they need to supplement their incomes by holding second jobs and accessing community services to cope with their needs. Members working with intellectually challenged individuals generally have start rates around $10/hour and find themselves at the top of their scale after five years experience with $12-$13/hour. During discussions with CUPE members working in this field we have heard about their need to have two or three other jobs in order to make ends meet. This included working at Subway Restaurants, having flyer routes and doing shifts as Health Care Aides. Some talk about their experiences of using the community food bank at the end of their 60-hour work-week. Others talk about their dependence on overtime hours or subsidized housing. In the rural areas we hear members talking about the need to move to urban centres to find work that would feed their families. We have spoken to workers who do not feel that they can retire though they are working well into their sixties and beyond because they do not have a pension plan. In addition, we have heard employers talk about the issue of recruitment and retention and the difficulties involved with continuously training new hires. Over the past 10 years the provincial government has made laudable inroads in tackling poverty in the province, reducing the poverty rate from 10.8% in 2000, to 9.7% in 2009. 18 It is alarming that any portion of our workers is living below, at, or close to these low income and poverty measurements. With respect to this sector, we have very serious concerns about the extent to which this situation reflects a perpetuation of gendered wage disparity. This circumstance not only threatens the economic well-being of these workers, but the deleterious effects of living in, or under the threat of, poverty, on social, physical and psychological well-being are well documented. Moreover, these effects are not generally restricted to individuals, but serve to similarly jeopardise the well-being of an individual s family members. Such 18 Government of Manitoba, 2012, Budget Paper E: Reducing Poverty and Promoting Social Inclusion, p. E2. 11
outcomes run counter to poverty reduction initiatives undertaken by the province. A final but important point to note in the discussion of wages in this sector is that not only do chronically low wages have a negative impact on workers and their families, but also on the delivery of services themselves. According to the Child Care Human Resources Sector Council: The review of current literature on the human resources issues facing employers in early childhood education and care revealed ten primary issues facing the sector. The most commonly noted human resource issue facing the sector was the difficulty employers face recruiting and retaining qualified staff Low wages and benefits in the early childhood education and care sector as a whole have long been recognized as a key factor contributing to recruitment and retention challenges. 19 Broader Economic Considerations We appreciate that the Province is facing unusual financial constraints due to unanticipated flood costs from 2011 and slower growth resulting from the global economic downturn. However, we reiterate the position that equality is not a luxury for times of prosperity. It is a fundamental human right and women s equality is a 19 Child Care Human Resources Sector Council (2009) Supporting Employers in Canada s ECEC Sector, pp. 37-38. cornerstone of our democratic society. 20 Our main contention is that this is fundamentally an issue of social justice. Nonetheless, there are compelling economic arguments that support the extension of pay equity legislation to the social service and child care sectors. In difficult financial times the value of public services increases, playing an important role in the redistribution of income. A 2012 OECD report looking at five major categories of public services: education, health care, social housing, childcare and elderly care argues that that public services play a significant role in reducing the impact of economic inequality and improving the standard of living for individuals and families. The report notes that the redistributive effects are stronger among specific population groups at higher risk of poverty. 21 Women, low-income, immigrant and racialized workers are more reliant on public services. This is particularly relevant given the fact that international immigration is the most significant factor contributing to Manitoba s population growth, and that from April 2011- April 2012, international immigration to the province was at its highest level since 1973. 22 Social service spending also confers specific economic benefit by supporting productive capacity and contributing to social capital. For example, a 2009 study by the Child Care Human Resources Sector Council found that 20 21 22 Equal Pay Coalition, 2008, A framework for Action on Pay Equity in Ontario: A Special 20 th Anniversary Report Contributing to Ontario s Future, p. ii. OECD (2012). The Impact of Publically Provided Services on the Distribution of Resources. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers no. 130. p. 4. Government of Manitoba, Manitoba Economic Highlights, September 7, 2012. 12
investing in child care provides the greatest economic benefit of all sectors of the Canadian economy. They argued that investing $1 million in childcare would create 40 jobs, which is at least 43% more jobs than the next highest industry, and four times the number of jobs generated by $1 million in construction spending. The same study also concluded that child care can provide a strong economic stimulus, in that for every dollar invested in child care there is an increase of $2.30 in the GDP. 23 Earlier research conducted by the Child Care Coalition of Manitoba produced similar conclusions. Their analysis of the economic and social impact of child care across the province found that every $1 invested in child care generates $1.58 of local economic activity. It also found that child care is a strong job creator, in that every 2 full-time child care jobs supports another full-time job. 24 Despite the potential economic value attributable to public sector employment and service delivery in the social services and child care sectors, we remain cognizant of the fact that the province is operating in a financially constrained context. However, we do not believe that public sector employees, and especially those who not only look after our most vulnerable members of society, but are themselves amongst our most economically vulnerable workers, 23 24 Child Care Human Resources Sector Council (2009), Understanding and Addressing Workforce Shortages: Socioeconomic Effects and Net Benefits, pp. 30-31. Child Care Coalition of Manitoba (2004). Time for Action: An economic analysis of child care in Winnipeg, p. 2. should shoulder the burden of deficit reduction. Moreover, this more challenging economic environment is not characterised by a weak or underperforming economy; but quite the opposite. Economic Forecast Economic indicators for the provincial economy have been, and continue to be, strong. Population growth experienced its second highest increase in 40 years in 2010-2011, unemployment is the third lowest amongst the provinces, and in January 2012, the number of people employed was the second highest on record. 25 The province also notes: From 2006 to 2011, private capital investment in the province has been particularly strong, increasing by 34%, compared to a 14% national increase. The increase in business investment has contributed to labour productivity gains. According to Statistics Canada, from 1997 to 2010, Manitoba s labour productivity growth was the third strongest among provinces and above the national increase. This increase in productivity improves the competitiveness of Manitoba businesses and supports sustainable growth in production. 26 Over the past 10 years the province s growth in economic activity has been the most stable in Canada, and in the past 5 years economic growth has outpaced national growth, averaging 2.4% from 2005 to 2010; the highest among provinces and 25 26 Government of Manitoba, Manitoba Economic Highlights, September 7, 2012; Government of Manitoba, Manitoba Economic Highlights, February 7, 2012. Government of Manitoba, Budget Paper A, 2012. p. 2. 13
double the national average. 27 The government projects that the province s real GDP will grow 2.4% in 2012, and 2.2% in 2013, higher than, and then matching, the respective forecasted national rates. 28 Economic forecasts for the province s economy are therefore positive, with the government committing to returning to surplus in Budget 2014. 29 27 28 29 Government of Manitoba, Budget Paper A, 2012, p. 2. Government of Manitoba, Manitoba Economic Highlights, September 7, 2012. Government of Manitoba, 2012, Manitoba Budget, 2012, p. 9. 14
Table 5. Manitoba GDP Real GDP at Market Prices (chained 2002 dollars) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Real GDP 40,038 41,098 42,728 42,516 43,498 44,469 Percent change 2.6 4.0-0.5% 2.3 2.2 In the last budget the province highlighted the fact that tax cuts delivered since 1999 will save Manitobans more than $1.2 billion in lower taxes this year, including $424 million in savings for business. 30 In fact, Manitoba was the first province to eliminate the small business tax rate (2010), and in early 2011 the province eliminated the general corporation capital tax. While we support initiatives to increase affordability in the province, we strongly caution against measures that compromise the ability for government to address gendered wage disparity and the problem of below living wage incomes for many workers in this sector. from the conservatives in 1999. The net debt to GDP ratio is forecast to rise 1.3% to 27.4% in 2012/13, with a projected downward trend in 2014/15.31 Efficacious economic stewardship has resulted in a strong economic position for the province, despite challenges posed by record flooding and the 2008 global recession. Both the government and the Conference Board of Canada predict continued growth for the Manitoban economy. Similarly, we recognize the motivation underpinning plans for expeditious payment of net debt, and addressing core government deficits resulting largely from severe flooding in 2011. However, it is important to note that total government debt is considered moderate. Even after the global economic downturn and record flooding last spring, the province is in a relatively good position compared to other provinces. In Budget 2012, the province outlines the significant improvements that have been made in the net debt to GDP ratio over the past decade; a reduction from 32.9% to 26.1% since taking power 30 Government of Manitoba, Budget 2012, Speech, p. 9. 31 Government of Manitoba, 2012, Manitoba Budget, 2012, p. 17. 15
Conclusions and Recommendation We acknowledge the important steps that successive NDP governments have taken in addressing both wage discrimination and poverty in the province of Manitoba, and the improvements that have resulted as a consequence of these initiatives. However, as we have highlighted with this brief, the persistence of systemically low wages in the social services and child care sectors points to the fact that there are still areas where attention is urgently needed. We understand that this requires government resources in economically challenging times, but we also note that it is in such times that public services are even more vital to Manitobans. Moreover, we note that the economic forecast for the province is favourable, and that public service delivery and good wages are economic drivers. However, these arguments notwithstanding, this is fundamentally a human rights issue, and therefore should not be contingent upon improved economic conditions. Pay Equity Proposal In order to confront the ongoing problem of low wages, which we believe is discriminatory, contributes to the instability of this sector, and jeopardizes the well-being of workers and their families, we are calling on government to introduce legislation to apply to the child care and social services sector, to allow for proxy pay equity adjustments, similar to the provisions in the Ontario Pay Equity Act. This method allows for a system of comparison to be made in workplaces which are female-dominated and lacking in male comparators. This type of legislation would require employers to implement pay equity for female-dominated classifications that have been found to be of comparable value, to jobs in the public sector that have been subject to pay equity adjustments. 16
Appendix A: Ontario Legislation Background In 1988, the Government of Ontario introduced pro-active pay equity legislation which covered all of the public sector and employers in the private sector with at least ten employees. The government realized that the pay equity mechanism of job-tojob comparisons would not work in predominately female workplaces; that these very jobs that had amongst the lowest wages, and that there needed to be an effective way of dealing with this. Consequently, they commissioned a report to look at ways to deal with this problem, and in 1992 they legislated proportional and proxy pay equity. The Harris government, elected in 1995, abolished the legislation, but this was successfully challenged in the courts, and, as well, there was a further court challenge by the unions on the issue of delaying the proxy pay equity wage adjustments. In 2003 there was a mediated settlement between the unions and the government which resulted in 100,000 women in predominately female public sector workplaces across Ontario receiving up to $414 million in pay equity over three years. Method Under the Ontario model, employers in the public sector must first notify the Pay Equity Commissioner that they tried but could not find a male comparator position for at least one of the female job classes in their organization. The Commission would then confirm that the organization could not achieve pay equity by the job-to-job or proportional value methods, and would be issued an order to use the proxy method. A key female job class in a bargaining unit must be compared to the female job class in the proxy establishment whose duties and responsibilities are similar to those of the key classes. The comparison must be carried out as if the female job classes in the proxy establishment were male job classes of the seeking employer. Comparison would then be done using the proportional method of comparison (through regression analysis) 32. Results Overall, the proxy method of achieving pay equity has resulted in more money for women in female-dominated workplaces. In 2003 almost 100,000 Ontario workers in over 2,300 low-paid, predominantly female, public sector workplaces (i.e., nursing homes, child care centres, developmental services agencies, shelters, and home care) reached a three-year proxy pay equity deal with the provincial government worth up to $414 million after a Charter challenge. The settlement included more than 10,000 CUPE members. A study released in 2010, which reviewed proxy pay equity outcomes in Ontario, indicated that the average hourly wage gap identified through the proxy process was $4.10 for childcare/daycare workers, $4.03 for women s services/shelters and $2.52 for immigrant/settlement services, among the many job classes that were reviewed. (Assessing Proxy Use and Outcomes in the Broader Public Sector 2009/2010, Ontario Pay Equity Commission). 32 See the Ontario Pay Equity Commission for more. 17
Appendix B: Health Care Support Workers Wage Comparators Table 5. Selected Health Care Support Workers Wages Activity Aide Hourly 15.040 15.491 15.956 16.434 16.927 17.435 (Uncertified) Cook 3 PIO Hourly 22.414 22.951 23.549 24.176 24.802 25.487 Cook 2 PIO Hourly 20.876 21.398 21.950 22.548 23.163 23.818 Cook 1 (Entry) Hourly 17.818 18.353 18.903 19.470 20.054 20.656 Cleaner Hourly 14.479 14.913 15.361 15.822 16.296 16.785 Housekeeping Aide Incinerator Operator Attendant I (Westman Hourly 17.286 17.805 18.339 18.889 19.455 20.039 Laundry) Rehab Assistant Hourly 17.044 17.555 18.082 18.624 19.183 19.759 Secretary I Hourly 16.799 17.302 17.822 18.356 18.907 19.474 Dietary Aide Hourly 14.479 14.913 15.361 15.822 16.296 16.785 Housekeeping Aide Maintenance I Hourly 17.284 17.802 18.336 18.886 19.453 20.037 Health Care Aides Hourly 16.548 Untrained PCH Cook I - PIO Hourly 19.159 19.460 19.759 20.058 20.358 20.656 Housekeeping Aide I Hourly 14.479 14.913 15.361 15.822 16.296 16.785 Housekeeping Aide II Hourly 15.493 15.958 16.437 16.930 17.438 17.961 Housekeeping Aide II Hourly 16.463 16.764 17.061 17.360 17.660 17.961 PIO Laundry Aide I Hourly 14.479 14.913 15.361 15.822 16.296 16.785 Laundry Aide II Hourly 15.550 16.016 16.497 16.992 17.502 18.027 Community Support Hourly 17.044 17.555 18.082 18.624 19.183 19.759 Worker Rehabilitation Assistant Nursing Assistant Mental Health Rehabilitation Worker Secretary I Hourly 16.799 17.302 17.822 18.356 18.907 19.474 Child Life Assistant Hourly 16.953 17.534 18.134 18.721 19.387 20.014 20.764 21.485 Community Health Hourly 19.159 19.460 19.759 20.058 20.358 20.656 Worker Adult Day Care Hourly 18.596 19.153 19.728 20.320 20.930 21.557 Facilitator Cook Dietary Aide Hourly 14.479 14.913 15.361 15.822 16.296 16.785 Housekeeping Aide Maintenance I Health Care Aide Hourly 17.284 17.802 18.336 18.886 19.453 20.037 18
Health Care Aide Hourly 16.548 (Untrained) Activity/Recreation Hourly 17.044 17.555 18.082 18.624 19.183 19.759 Worker Supervisor/Lead Hand Hourly 16.384 16.876 17.382 17.903 18.440 18.994 Dietary Aide Hourly 14.479 14.913 15.361 15.822 16.296 16.785 Housekeeping Aide Maintenance I Hourly 17.284 17.802 18.336 18.886 19.453 20.037 Health Care Aide Hourly 17.044 17.555 18.082 18.624 19.183 19.759 (Trained) Health Care Aide Hourly 16.548 (Untrained) Lead Hand Linen Hourly 17.044 17.550 17.550 18.080 18.620 19.180 19.780 EB/mh/cope 491 October 10, 2012 19
20