Labour Market Policy and Programs in Canada for Persons with Disabilities

Transcription

1 Labour Market Policy and Programs in Canada for Persons with Disabilities Final Report Roeher Institute Cameron Crawford and Robert Marshall Applied Research Branch Strategic Policy Human Resources Development Canada December 2002 SP E (également disponible en français)

2 Paper/Papier ISBN: Cat. No./N o de cat.: RH63-1/ E Internet ISBN: Cat. No./N o de cat.: RH63-1/ E-IN General enquiries regarding the documents published by the Applied Research Branch should be addressed to: Human Resources Development Canada Publications Centre 140 Promenade du Portage, Phase IV, Level 0 Hull, Quebec, Canada K1A 0J9 Facsimile: (819) Si vous avez des questions concernant les documents publiés par la Direction générale de la recherche appliquée, veuillez communiquer avec : Développement des ressources humaines Canada Centre des publications 140 Promenade du Portage, Phase IV, niveau 0 Hull (Québec) Canada K1A 0J9 Télécopieur : (819)

3 Abstract The impetus for this report was the request for Canadian input to an international comparison of disability support programs, prepared by the Organization for Economic Development (OECD) in a publication entitled: Transforming Disability to Ability: Policies to Promote Work and Income Security for Disabled People. The OECD report focused on national government programs and compared the priorities placed on active and passive measures. It became clear that the examination of solely national programs led to a partial picture for federated countries such as Canada. This report provides a more complete picture of the complex employment related disability support system in Canada. This system involves numerous players including federal/ provincial/territorial governments, private insurers and employers. When Canadians are unable to work due to illness, injury or quarantine, they are able to access supports from a mix of sickness benefits, contributory and non-contributory disability benefits, work injury benefits, unemployment benefits, early retirement provisions and other measures. The variations across provinces and territories as well as the distribution of disabled people among such benefits have been recognized and reflected in this report. This useful overview brings together data from various sources to describe the Canadian system. Specifically, it describes: key legislative provisions which authorize and/or require public programs to actively foster the inclusion of people with disabilities in regular employment; Specific policy measures intended to further the employment of people with disabilities; and Income substitution measures and programs for persons unable to work because of illness, injury and other factors related to disability. The report includes a short assessment of current and emerging issues for disability related policy in Canada. It recommends additional evaluative research to examine how well employment- related policy and programming (including training, job placement and entrepreneurial programs) are currently working and if they significantly improve the employment outlook for people with disabilities in Canada.

4

5 Table of Contents 1. Introduction Legislative Framework Characteristics of the legislative framework Anti-discrimination Legislation Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Canadian Human Rights Act Provincial Human Rights Acts Employment Equity Act Quota System Recognition of the Disability-Related Issues Major reforms during the last two decades Social Union In Unison Employability Assistance for People with Disabilities (EAPD) Labour Market Development Agreements (LMDAs) Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities (OF) Federal Disability Strategy Canada Health and Social Transfer National Strategy for the Integration of Persons with Disabilities Job Retention and Work Characteristics of job retention and work accommodation policies Intended or agreed reforms Subsidized and Supported Employment Characteristics of subsidized and supported employment strategies Subsidized Employment Supported Employment Sheltered and Reserved Employment Characteristics of sheltered and reserved employment strategies Major reforms during the last two decades... 25

6 6. Vocational Rehabilitation Characteristics of vocational rehabilitation strategies Vocational Rehabilitation under Workers Compensation Programs Vocational Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Program Vocational Rehabilitation under the Canada Pension Plan Disability Benefit Major reforms during the last two decades Sickness Benefit Programs- Employment Insurance Sickness Benefits Characteristics of the sickness benefit program Intended or agreed future reforms Contributory Disability Benefit Programs Characteristics of the contributory disability benefit program Canada Pension Plan Disability Benefit Quebec Pension Plan Disability Benefit What happens to a contributory disability benefit upon reaching the legal retirement age? Veterans Affairs Canada Disability Pension Benefits for Canadian Forces Clients Major reforms during the last two decades Intended or agreed future reforms: Non-Contributory Disability Benefits Alberta Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped British Columbia Benefits - Disability Benefits Ontario Disability Support Program Work Injury Benefit Program Workers Compensation Characteristics of the work injury program Quebec Pension Plan Disability Benefit Unemployment Benefit Program The Development of the unemployment benefit program Major Reforms during the last two decades Employment Insurance Benefits Active Employment Benefits Re-Employment Benefits Support Measures... 65

7 12. Early Retirement Program - The Canada and Quebec Pension Plans Characteristics of the early retirement benefit program Intended or agreed future reforms Information on Residual Policies Social assistance Systems Reforms to social assistance Level of social assistance System of family support Child Benefits and Tax Credits Dependence on Income Programs and Family Support Policy Assessment and Emerging Issues State-of-the-art assessment Reform experiences Evaluation of policies Bibliography... 89

8

9 List of Tables Table 1 Canadian Anti-Discrimination Legislation... 4 Table 2 Federal LMDA Transfers for Active Labour Force Measures by Province/Territory and Year Table 3 Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST) by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Year Ending March 31, to (in Millions of Dollars).. 16 Table 4 Canada Assistance Plan, Total Federal Payments, by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years to (in millions of dollars) Table 5 Workers' Compensation, Expenditures for Hospitalization/Rehabilitation, by Province and for Canada, Calendar Years, 1987 to 1996 (in millions of dollars) Table 6 Vocational Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons, Total Federal-Provincial Cost-shared Payments by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years Ending March 31, to (in millions of dollars) Table 7 Employability Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Total Federal- Provincial Cost-Shared Payments by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years Ending March 31, (in millions of dollars) Table 8 Employment/Unemployment Insurance, Amount Paid for Sickness Benefits, by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years Ending March 31, to (in millions of dollars) Table 9 Employment/Unemployment Insurance, Annual Average Number of Beneficiaries Receiving Sickness Benefits, by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years Ending March 31, to Table 10 Canada and Quebec Pension Plans, Annual Average Number of Disability Pension Beneficiaries, by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years Ending March 31, to Table 11 Canada and Quebec Pension Plans, Payments to Disability Pension Beneficiaries, by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years Ending March 31, to (in Millions of Dollars) Table 12 Sample VAC Pension Benefits for Canadian Forces Clients Table 13 Veterans' and Civilians' Disability Pensions, Number of Beneficiaries, by Province and for Canada, as of March 31, 1973 to Table 14 Veterans' and Civilians' Disability Pensions, Federal Payments, by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years Ending March 31, to (in millions of dollars) Table 15 Provincial Workers Compensation Institutions Table 16 Workers' Compensation, Total Payments, by Province and for Canada, Calendar Years, 1974 to 1997 (in millions of dollars) Table 17 Workers' Compensation, Total Number of Injured Workers or Dependants Receiving Cash Compensation, by Province and for Canada, Calendar Years, 1972 to Table 18 Employment/Unemployment Insurance, Amount Paid for Regular Benefits, Ending March 31, to (in Millions of Dollars)... 66

10 Table 19 Employment/Unemployment Insurance, Annual Average Number of Regular Beneficiaries, By Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years Ending March 31, to Table 20 Canada and Quebec Pension Plans, Annual Average Number of Retirement Pension Beneficiaries, by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years ending March 31, to Table 21 Canada and Quebec Pension Plans, Payments to Retirement Pension Beneficiaries, by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years Ending March 31, to (in millions of dollars) Table 22 Welfare Cases By Reason For Assistance, 95 Percent Sample, March Table 23 Welfare incomes of people with disabilities as a Percent of average provincial incomes (1999 $ s) Table 24 Welfare incomes of people with disabilities as a percent of LICOs Table Provincial and Territorial Welfare Benefits for Persons with Disabilities (in Constant 1999 Dollars) Table 26 Number of Beneficiaries (including Dependants) of Provincial and Municipal Social Assistance, by Province and for Canada, as of March 31, 1997 to Table 27 Provincial and Municipal Social Assistance Program Expenditures, Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years ending March 31, to (in millions of dollars) Table 28 Working Age Persons with Disabilities (Age 16-69), Showing Average Cash Value of Household Income from Various Sources in Table 29 Adults with disabilities (age 15+): Extent to which Others Provide Help with One or More Everyday Activities List of Charts Chart 1 Chart 2 Representation of Persons with Disabilities in the Workforce Under the Act by Sector, 1996 to Share of Hiring and Terminations of Persons with Disabilities in Permanent Jobs in the Workforce Under the Act, 1987 to

11 1. Introduction This report is taken from a response to one of several studies being conducted under the auspices of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) with a view to better understand participating countries approaches to disability policy. The focus of this research is on selected policy sectors that have a bearing on the employment of persons with disabilities in Canada. General context is provided by opening with a description of key legislative provisions which authorize and in some instances require programs to actively foster the inclusion of people with disabilities in regular employment. The report then turns to specific program measures that intend to further the employment opportunities of people with disabilities. These include job retention and work accommodation measures; sheltered and reserved employment; and vocational rehabilitation. Concerning individuals unable to work because of illness, injury and other factors related to disability, the research looks at sickness benefit programming, contributory and non-contributory disability benefit arrangements, work injury programs, unemployment benefit programming, early retirement provisions and various residual and other measures. The report concludes with an assessment of the policy situation in Canada and emerging issues. 1

12 2

13 2. Legislative Framework 2.1 Characteristics of the legislative framework Anti-discrimination Legislation Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms came into effect on 17 April 1982 when it was signed by the federal government and all the provinces, with the exception of Quebec. Section 15 came into effect on 17 April 1985, three years after the rest of the Charter. This delay gave governments time to bring their laws into line with the equality rights in section 15. All laws in Canada must be framed under the Charter, which guarantees equality before and under the law, and equal benefit of the law without discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, color, religion, sex or disability. The Supreme Court of Canada has stated that the purpose of section 15 is to protect those groups who suffer social, political and legal disadvantages in society. At the same time as it protects equality, the Charter also allows for certain laws or programs that favour disadvantaged individuals or groups. For example, programs aimed at improving employment opportunities for women, Aboriginal peoples, visible minorities, or those with mental or physical disabilities are allowed under section 15(2). Through the use of section 33 (the Notwithstanding Clause ), Parliament and/or the provincial legislatures can make a particular law that is exempt from certain sections of the Charter for up to five years (fundamental freedoms (sec 2), legal rights (sec 7-14) and equality rights (sec 15). 1 Further, Charter rights are not absolute in the sense that governments can impose limitations that a free and democratic society would accept as reasonable. In doing so, a government must be facing a pressing and substantial social problem and the government s response to the problem must be reasonable and demonstrably justified. The Supreme Court has developed guidelines in this connection. Under the Charter, provincial/territorial and federal governments can put in place affirmative action or employment equity programs to increase the employment of persons with disabilities, without contravening the human rights codes. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms also protects other social programs that redress the disadvantages people with disabilities have faced. (Roeher Institute, 1993). 1 Only two provincial governments have thus far used section 33; use of this provision tends to carry with it a great deal of political controversy. 3

14 Canadian Human Rights Act Under the Canadian Human Rights Act it is against the law for any employer or provider of services who falls within federal jurisdiction to make unlawful distinctions based on race, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, age, sex, marital status, family status, mental or physical disability, pardoned conviction or sexual orientation. The Act covers: federal agencies and Crown Corporations; Canada Post, chartered banks; national airlines; interprovincial communications and telephone companies; interprovincial transportation companies; and other federally regulated industries such as certain mining operations. These account for approximately 10% of the labour force. The Act recognizes that persons with disabilities must have access to premises, services and facilities. The Canadian Human Rights Act and all provincial/territorial human rights acts explicitly prohibit discrimination in employment on the basis of disability. Disability discrimination complaints make up about 30% of all discrimination complaints that come before the Canadian Human Rights Commission in any given year. (Canadian Human Rights Commission, 1999, p. 78) Provincial Human Rights Acts Disability is a prohibited ground for discrimination under all provincial/territorial human rights acts. Table 1 provides the names of the legislative authorities for human rights acts, codes and commissions in Canada. Table 1 Canadian Anti-Discrimination Legislation Jurisdiction Year Passed Full Name of Law Canada 1977 Canadian Human Rights Act British Columbia 1985 The British Columbia Human Rights Act Alberta 1985 The Alberta Individual s Rights Protection Act Saskatchewan 1978 The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code Manitoba 1987 The Manitoba Human Rights Code Ontario 1962 (new law passed 1982) The Ontario Human Rights Code Quebec 1976 La Charte des droits et libertés de la personne New Brunswick 1973 The New Brunswick Human Rights Code Nova Scotia 1979 The Nova Scotia Human Rights Act P.E.I The Prince Edward Island Human Rights Act Newfoundland 1988 The Newfoundland Human Rights Code Yukon 1987 The Yukon Territory Human Rights Act N.W.T 1966 The Northwest Territories Fair Practices Act Source: Roeher Institute (1991) 4

15 Employment Equity Act Subsequent to the 1984 Report of the Commission on Equality in Employment (the Abella Commission), the Employment Equity Act was introduced in It requires federally-regulated private sector employers (including banks, major transportation and communications industries), crown corporations and contractors with the federal government to develop employment equity programs to integrate persons with disabilities, women, visible minorities and Aboriginal people. The Act also covers all federal departments and agencies for which Treasury Board is the employer. Under the Act all federal employers are required by law to have an employment equity plan and to report on that plan to the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Presently a total of about 350 private sector employers and Crown Corporations are covered by the Act. The Act places a positive obligation on the federal public service, federally regulated employers (with 100 or more employees) and federally contracted employers (with contracts over $200,000) to ensure that their workplaces and human resources practices do not exclude people from jobs for reasons other than qualifications and competence. Some assistance is provided to employers to develop equity plans and to remove barriers to employment. The Canadian Human Rights Commission is responsible for monitoring companies and other agencies compliance with their internal employment equity plans and can impose sanctions such as fines for non-compliance. Despite these provisions, the 1999 Employment Equity Annual Report observes that, in 1998 and for the third year in a row, the representation of persons with disabilities decreased in the workforce under the Act. Persons with disabilities represented 2.27% of the workforce in 1998, compared to 2.32% in The most notable decline was in the banking sector. The total number of persons with disabilities in the federally-regulated workforce increased slightly between the two years, but not as rapidly as the entire workforce. Chart 1 shows the net employment (i.e., new hires minus separations) of people with disabilities in various sectors from 1996 to Chart 2 shows the overall hiring and separations picture across all federally-regulated sectors under the Employment Equity Act from 1987 to Governments at all levels, including some municipal governments, have instituted non-legislated employment equity measures in the public sector workforce. In some instances they have also required contractors to comply with employment equity principles and programs. (Roeher Institute, 1993) 5

16 Chart 1 Representation of Persons with Disabilities in the Workforce Under the Act by Sector, 1996 to % 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% Banking Transportation Communications Other sectors Source: Human Resources Development Canada, 1999b Chart 2 Share of Hiring and Terminations of Persons with Disabilities in Permanent Jobs in the Workforce Under the Act, 1987 to % 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% Share of hirings Share of terminations Source: Human Resources Development Canada, 1999b 6

17 2.1.2 Quota System Canada does not have a quota system to promote the employment of people with disabilities. Instead, the Employment Equity Act requires that the composition of federally-regulated workforces reflect the composition of the broader workforce. To that end the Act requires that federally-regulated employers collect information on the number of people in designated groups, identify under-representation of those groups in company workforces, review company policies and practices for employment barriers, and develop and implement plans to remove such barriers. The external measure against which employers are to assess the representation of people with disabilities in the workplace has been the Health and Activity Limitation Survey (HALS), a follow-up to the Census last conducted in HALS provides information about people who responded to the Census and who have a long-term condition that is generally consistent with the definition of disability developed by the World Health Organization (WHO). Based on HALS it is estimated that 6.5 % of the federally-regulated labour force would have disabilities if they were represented in employment on equal terms with non-disabled persons. Aside from the Employment Equity Act, which pertains to about 5% of the entire Canadian labour force, there is no further federal or provincial/territorial requirement that the composition of Canadian workplaces be statistically representative of the workforce at large Recognition of the Disability-Related Issues A number of government reports in the past decade have pointed to the desirability of including people with disabilities in the regular Canadian labour force. (e.g. Canada. Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights and Disability, 1995; Canada. Federal Task Force on Disability Issues, 1996; Federal/Provincial/Territorial Review of Services Affecting Canadians with Disabilities, 1993). Actual progress at including people with disabilities in employment, however, has been slow. Unpublished reports based on the Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics, and Annual Reports for the Employment Equity Act, consistency show people with disabilities significantly under-represented in employment, even before labour-market services were devolved to the provinces and territories under Labour Market Development Agreements (discussed later). Since the devolution of those services there have been no publicly available research studies that look at the extent to which people with disabilities have equitable access to mainstream labour market services through provincial/territorial programs. 7

18 2.2 Major reforms during the last two decades Social Union The Social Union initiative is the umbrella under which governments will concentrate their efforts to renew and modernize Canadian social policy. It focuses on the pan-canadian dimension of health and social policy systems, the linkages between the social and economic unions, and the recognition that reform is best achieved in partnership among provinces, territories and the Government of Canada. The primary objective of the social union initiative is to reform and renew Canada's system of social services and to reassure Canadians that their pan-canadian social programs are strong and secure. In working to build a strong social union, the Government of Canada and the provinces and territories have reached a broad consensus that the first priorities should be children in poverty and persons with disabilities. First Ministers created the Federal-Provincial-Territorial (FPT) Council on Social Policy Renewal in 1996 and directed it to guide the social union initiative. The Council monitors work on overarching social policy issues and, as well, co-ordinates and supports "sectoral" councils that examine cross-sectoral issues such as supporting children and persons with disabilities. While sharing essentially the same concerns, the Government of Quebec does not formally participate on the FPT Council on Social Policy Renewal In Unison At the June 1996 First Ministers meeting, the Prime Minister, the Premiers and the Territorial Government leaders identified persons with disabilities as a collective priority in the pursuit of social policy renewal. This commitment to persons with disabilities was reaffirmed by the First Ministers at their meeting in December To assist governments in the reforms of benefits and services to persons with disabilities, the federal, provincial and territorial Social Service Ministers agreed in April 1997 that there was a need to develop a shared vision and policy framework to guide future reform. This led to the development of In Unison: A Canadian Approach to Disability Issues. In Unison outlines a shared vision that promotes full citizenship for Canadians with disabilities, building on past initiatives such as the Mainstream Review in 1992 and the Federal Task Force on Disability Issues (also known as the Scott Task Force). The framework targets three broad areas for policy and program development in support of the full citizenship of people with disabilities: employment, income and disability supports (e.g. personal services, and assistive technologies). In Unison represents the first time that federal, provincial and territorial governments have agreed on a common vision and long-term policy directions in the area of disability. 8

19 2.2.3 Employability Assistance for People with Disabilities (EAPD) At the First Ministers meeting in June 1996, the Prime Minister and the Premiers addressed the issue of the needs of persons with disabilities as part of the social policy renewal process. Federal, provincial and territorial governments began working together in 1997 to explore ways to improve the jointly-funded Vocational Rehabilitation for Disabled Persons Program (VRDP). In October 1997, the Ministers responsible for Social Services (with the exception of Quebec) 2 approved a Multilateral Framework for Employability Assistance for Peoples with Disabilities. Key elements of EAPD include: a strong focus on helping people with disabilities prepare for, find, and maintain employment; a new accountability process that focuses on pragmatic outcomes; cost sharing by the Government of Canada for 50% of the cost of eligible provincial/territorial expenses to a pre-set maximum; provisions to ensure that funds are spent directly on assisting people with disabilities to prepare for employment, including a limit of 15 per cent of funding for administrative costs; provision for a three-year transition period to allow provinces and territories to adjust to the changes; and co-operative planning between the Provinces/Territories and the Government of Canada to eliminate overlap and duplication and allow better sharing of information on effective employment measures. Bilateral agreements between the federal government and its provincial/territorial counterparts are for a period of five years, beginning in (see below). A three year transition period provides time for provinces/territories to adjust their programs to reflect the new employability focus, while avoiding disruptions in client service. Under the EAPD, provinces and territories have the flexibility to tailor programs to reflect local priorities and circumstances. Quebec: $195 million, five year agreement signed March 1999 Alberta: $111.5 million, five year agreement signed June 1998 Saskatchewan: $49.5 million, five year agreement signed June 1998 New Brunswick: $26.37 million, five year agreement signed June 1998 Newfoundland: $20.55 million, five year agreement signed May 1998 Nova Scotia: $74.45 million, five year agreement signed May 1998 Prince Edward Island: $6.25 million, five year agreement signed May 1998 British Columbia: $252 million, five year agreement signed May 1998 Manitoba: $79 million, five year agreement signed April 1998 Ontario: *** NA *** 2 Quebec did not endorse the Multilateral Framework, but instead undertook bilateral negotiations which led to the signing of a separate agreement in March

20 2.2.4 Labour Market Development Agreements (LMDAs) In November 1995, the Government of Canada announced its intention to withdrawal from the direct delivery of labour market training (apprenticeship programs, labour market training, co-operative education programs and workplace-based training), stating that labour market training relates primarily to the provincial responsibility for education. Provinces had been advocating a review and realignment of federal/provincial responsibilities in this area. The February 1996 Speech from the Throne iterated the federal commitment to establish new relationships with the provinces and territories to strengthen national and local labour markets. This resulted in two broad sets of programs: a new Employment Insurance (EI) system and Labour Market Development Agreements. The Employment Insurance Act (Bill C-23), which was implemented in July 1996, made a clear federal commitment to work more closely with the provinces and territories in labour market activities. The EI system has two parts: Part I providing for income support for people temporarily out of work, and Part II involving Active Employment Benefits to help unemployed persons return to work. The EI system has a major focus on active support to foster employment rather than passive income support for people who are unemployed. Part II of the Employment Insurance Act provides for a range of active employment benefits and measures to get people back to work as quickly and efficiently as possible. It authorizes the Government of Canada to enter into agreements with each province and territory on the design and delivery of the new active employment benefits and measures contained Part II of the Act. These measures can be tailored to the needs of individuals and local labour market realities. A labour market proposal was made to the provinces and territories by the Government of Canada on 30 May It offered them responsibility for the design and delivery of active employment benefits and measures, funded through the EI Account, as outlined in the EI Act. 3 In December 1996 the Governments of Alberta and New Brunswick signed Labour Market Development agreements accepting the full extent of the federal offer for the transfer of responsibilities. The Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador LMDA was the third agreement to be signed (24 March 1997), and the first agreement utilizing a federal-provincial co-management approach for the delivery of labour market services. Agreements with the other provinces and territories, with the exception of Ontario, followed. Under the agreements the provinces and territories have the discretion to enter into agreements with other organizations (e.g. colleges, voluntary organizations) to deliver labour market services. 3 Under the proposal, if provinces or territories do not want to assume full responsibility for active employment benefits and measures, the Government of Canada is prepared to work with them using various models for the design, delivery and evaluation of active employment benefits and measures. 10

21 Table 2 shows the cash value of federal transfers by province/territory for active labour force measures. The figures do not include income support for Part I of the Employment Insurance Act or transfers to offset the provincial costs of administering labour market services. Table 2 Federal LMDA Transfers for Active Labour Force Measures by Province/Territory and Year Newfoundland / Labrador $85,837, $106,319, $115,799,000 Prince Edward Island $17,787, $21,065, $22,788, $22,788, $22,788,000 Nova Scotia* * An agreement was signed between Canada and Nova Scotia on 24 April Over the agreement s initial three-year period, the Government of Canada was to spend $209.6 million in Nova Scotia on active employment benefits and measures funded through the EI Account. New Brunswick $66.4 million $78.1 million $83.5 million Quebec $457 million $527 million $559 million $559 million $559 million Manitoba $46.3 million $48.7 million $49.5 million Saskatchewan $36.3 million $37.7 million $37.7 million No less than in Alberta $97.5 million $107.5 million $112.1 million 11

22 British Columbia Table 2 Federal LMDA Transfers for Active Labour Force Measures by Province/Territory and Year $205,920, $247,281, $265,920, $265,920, $265,920,000 Northwest Territories $4.41 million $4.893 million ** A minimum of $4.893 million ** A minimum of $4.893 million ** With the creation of the territory of Nunavut on 1 April 1999 resources were to be allocated between the eastern and western territories. Yukon Territory $2,650, $3,185, $3,422, $3,422, $3,422,000 Ontario*** *** As of February 2001, no labour market development agreement had been signed between Ontario and the Government of Canada. The major issues of contention centre on the fair share of national resources available to Ontario for labour market programming and other areas of shared jurisdiction. The Government of Canada continues to administer labour market development programming in the province of Ontario Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities (OF) The Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities (OF) was announced in February 1997 in response to concerns that changes in Employment Insurance and Labour Market Development Agreements would have a relatively severe impact on persons with disabilities, given their lower than average labour market participation and EI eligibility. The program is the responsibility of Human Resources Development Canada (HDRC), with the guidance of a national reference group. The OF has attempted to include the disability community through the establishment of a National Reference Group composed of representatives of national organizations devoted to disability issues. The objective of the OF is to assist persons with disabilities to prepare for, obtain and maintain employment or self-employment resulting in increased financial independence. The total budget of $90 million was allocated equally over three fiscal years, 1997/1998 to 1999/2000. OF has recently been renewed for an additional three years. Potential clients must meet certain criteria to qualify for assistance under the program: first, they must identify as disabled and wanting to work; second, potential OF clients must be legally entitled to work 12

23 in Canada; third, they must be in need of assistance to prepare for or obtain employment or self-employment, although they do not necessarily have to be job-ready; fourth, OF clients must not be ineligible for EI benefits; finally, clients must commit to an action plan designed to assist them into employment or self-employment Federal Disability Strategy On 8 June 1999 the Minister of Human Resources Development Canada released a document entitled Future Directions to Address Issues for the Government of Canada: Working Together for Full Citizenship. The document outlines the Government of Canada s approach for continued work within its own departments and agencies, with the provinces and territories, disability community, and other partners to ensure sustained progress towards full citizenship for people with disabilities. Future Directions builds on the framework contained in the 1998 joint report of the federal, provincial and territorial governments, In Unison: A Canadian Approach to Disability Issues. The document calls on the partners to explore how best to ensure access and inclusion across a broad range of areas from government programs and services, to employment, transportation and information and technology. Future Directions outlines an approach which is designed to: increase public accountability and improve policy and program coherence; build a comprehensive base of knowledge on disability issues (e.g. through data collection and research); build the capacity of the disability community to contribute to policy and program development; address the acute needs of Aboriginal people with disabilities, who face an incidence of disability over double the national average; improve access and remove barriers to disability supports and income support; enhance the employability of persons with disabilities; reduce injury and disability rates through prevention and health promotion. Most recent federal provincial/territorial commitments concerning people with disabilities are outlined in the report published in 2000 by Federal/Provincial/Territorial Ministers for Social Services, entitled In Unison 2000: Persons with Disabilities in Canada. The document presents a review of the labour market and educational status of people with disabilities, as well as an overview of issues concerning access to the disability supports needed for social and economic participation. Having already undertaken to perform a significant amount of research on the disability front, Ministers further agreed to research the labour market needs of persons with disabilities, and the feasibility of a new tax credit to assist with the costs of disability supports. As well, Ministers committed to continue working with members of the disability community in identifying issues, sharing ideas and developing solutions. 13

24 2.2.7 Canada Health and Social Transfer The significant reform of federal-provincial fiscal arrangements in 1996 has led to major changes in the way that provincial social assistance and services to persons with disabilities are funded. The advent of the Canada Health and Social Transfer, or CHST, reduced the amount of the cash transfer to provincial governments in respect of health, post-secondary education and social programs. It also reduced the ability of the federal government to direct the level or nature of such programming that had existed in the previous funding regime (the Canada Assistance Plan (CAP)) through the use of cost-sharing arrangements to favour certain types of expenditures or to prohibit particular program features. The CHST thus opened the way for greater variation in provincial social assistance (welfare) and social services programming, although significant inter-provincial differences in levels of assistance and the comprehensiveness of available supports already existed. While some provinces have reduced benefit levels and made other program changes, it is difficult to disentangle the relative effects of reductions in funding, diverging policy and political approaches, and innovative approaches in program design on the changes in provincial programming. Many social commentators see the end of the CAP and the advent of the CHST as having only negative implications for Canadians with disabilities, and see the reduced role of the federal government in the social policy field as leading to a fragmentation of the social safety net. However, there have been many joint federal provincial/territorial processes, including the Social Union and In Unison projects described above, which apply the principles of cooperative federalism to achieving consensus in addressing social issues in areas such as early childhood development, income security, and supports and services for persons with disabilities. Since 1996, the cash transfer under the CHST has been increased in successive Budgets. Funds however cannot be attributed to specific expenditures. Table 3 shows the recent federal transfers to provinces and territories under the Canada Health and Social Transfer. Table 4 shows the federal contribution to provincial/territorial programs under the Canada Assistance Plan before the CHST was introduced. 14

25 2.2.8 National Strategy for the Integration of Persons with Disabilities In 1991 the Federal Government approved $158 million over five years through initiatives in 11 federal departments and agencies for the National Strategy for the Integration of Persons with Disabilities (NSIPD). This program supported hundreds of projects that improved access to housing, transportation, education and communications between 1991 and Each participating department was required to conduct an evaluation of its initiatives under the Strategy, and HRDC, as the lead department, to co-ordinate an evaluation of the strategy as a whole. The interdepartmental evaluation of the NSIPD reviewed progress in the 11 departments and agencies concerning the program objectives of equal access, effective participation and economic integration. A survey of 202 representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) representing persons with disabilities reported significant progress had been made towards achieving specific NSIPD objectives: 84% of survey respondents felt that there had been great or partial progress made towards effective participation; 79% felt there had been great or partial progress made towards equal access to facilities, goods, or services; and 59% felt there had been great or partial progress made towards economic integration. 15

26 Table 3 Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST) by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Year Ending March 31, to (in Millions of Dollars) YEAR NF PEI NS NB QUE ONT MAN SASK ALTA BC YUKON NWT CANADA , , , ,832 6,953,589 9,371, , ,357 2,311,640 3,546,776 32,350 75,916 26,255, , , , ,226 6,749,521 9,044, , ,823 2,161,044 3,153,622 28,518 67,348 25,044, , , , ,562 7,358,161 9,681,958 1,032,89 897,870 2,273,195 3,310,900 30,198 71,822 26,900,000 Source: TABLE 440: Canada Health And Social Transfer (CHST), By Province and for Canada, Fiscal Year Ending March 31, to Federal-Provincial Policy Relations Division, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Finance Canada. Notes: 1. On April 1996, the Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST) replaced the Canada Assistance Plan (CAP) and Established Programs Financing (EPF). The CHST is a federal block-fund transfer to provinces and territories to provide financial support for the provision of health, post-secondary education, social assistance and social services. 2. The total includes a combination of cash and tax point transfers. 3. For , the total does not include the $3.5B entitlement to provinces and territories for the CHST Supplement for Health Care. 16

27 17 Table 4 Canada Assistance Plan, Total Federal Payments, by Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years to (in millions of dollars) YEAR NF PEI NS NB QUE ONT MAN SASK ALTA BC YUKON NWT CANADA ,501 2, ,051-4, , , , , ,864 4,312 3,153 13,562-1, ,979 12,814 80, , , ,484 36, , ,530 2,698,074 2,507, , , , ,561 10,325 32,123 7,833, ,176 36, , ,274 2,698,594 2,576, , , , ,177 11,581 28,991 7,947, ,576 37, , ,536 2,675,310 2,520, , , , ,545 10,173 28,489 7,880, ,398 35, , ,313 2,486,219 2,282, , , , ,204 10,954 26,318 7,382, ,859 34, , ,936 2,217,945 2,158, , , , ,342 8,170 23,774 6,801, ,967 28, , ,743 1,899,766 2,474, , , , ,881 6,035 22,230 6,601, ,049 23, , ,936 1,723,610 1,761, , , , ,783 5,202 16,859 5,502, ,353 22, , ,789 1,653,783 1,510, , , , ,112 8,111 15,003 5,108, ,399 21, , ,350 1,580,863 1,319, , , , ,787 3,115 13,976 4,726, ,480 19, , ,108 1,545,797 1,132, , , , , ,004 4,438, ,708 20, , ,906 1,605,779 1,052, , , , ,473 2,860 11,576 4,283, ,035 17, , ,176 1,513, , , , , ,788 2,424 10,227 4,000, ,278 16,553 93, ,678 1,399, , , , , ,194 1,641 10,153 3,642, ,958 18,333 86, ,687 1,165, ,252 91, , , ,711 2,650 10,115 3,190, ,463 16,181 70,747 89, , ,660 84,743 87, , ,442 2,393 8,581 2,611, ,477 12,470 60,485 78, , ,533 69,281 72, , , ,570 2,205, ,187 10,268 53,670 66, , ,570 60,181 60, , ,602 1,093 5,865 1,894, ,562 9,983 46,666 61, , ,514 58,106 57, , ,511 1,181 7,697 1,683, ,036 7,381 47,638 51, , ,669 54,451 55, , , ,946 1,561, ,347 10,668 46,820 67, , ,665 53,131 63, , , ,259 1,602, ,775 8,996 41,065 50, , ,860 47,121 42,009 91, , ,720 1,379, ,221 7,013 31,189 35, , ,434 39,826 34,701 60, , ,091 1,056,069 Source: TABLE 434: Canada Assistance Plan, Total Federal Payments, By Province and for Canada, Fiscal Years to Social Development Programs Division, Human Resources Investment Branch, Human Resources Development Canada. Notes: 1. Under the 1990 federal Government Expenditures Restraint Act, federal payments to Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia have been limited to an annual growth of 5% higher than those made in the base year. The payments for included 50% federal contributions and any overpayments were recovered in Payments under the Young Offenders Agreement have been included for years to

28 18

29 3. Job Retention and Work 3.1 Characteristics of job retention and work accommodation policies In terms of job retention and work accommodation, regulations concerning protection against dismissal after the onset of a disability are laid out in the Employment Equity Act and the Canadian Human Rights Act. Concerning job accommodations, the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) recognizes that persons with disabilities must have access to premises, services and facilities. Employers and those who offer goods, services and facilities are encouraged to draw up plans for adapting to the needs of persons with disabilities. Such a plan could include wheelchair accessibility. If a plan has been approved by the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and if it is being followed, the plan provides employers with a defence against complaints. The CHRA defines an accommodation as a means of enhancing an individual's abilities, and of ensuring that workplace performance standards are met, not compromised. The Canadian Human Rights Commission publication Duty to Accommodate details the legal mandate for employers to accommodate workplace conditions to the needs of people with disabilities. The term duty to accommodate refers to an employer's obligation to take appropriate steps to eliminate discrimination against employees, prospective employees or clients resulting from a rule, practice, or barrier that has or can have -- an adverse impact on individuals with disabilities. The duty to accommodate is written into s.2 and s.15 of the CHRA which stipulates that accommodation is required, short of undue hardship. "Undue hardship" is judged based on factors of health, safety and cost (CHRA, s.15(2)). An employee who has been denied accommodation can file a complaint with the Human Rights Commission under the CHRA. Failure to provide accommodation short of undue hardship may be found to be discrimination on the basis of disability. Failure to accommodate can result in punishment by the Human Rights Commission. Several precedent-setting cases have been heard by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, most recently Koeppel v. Department of National Defence (June 4, 1997) and Green v. Public Service Commission of Canada, Treasury Board and Human Resources Development Canada (June 26, 1998). In both cases, the tribunal found sufficient evidence of discrimination by failure to accommodate based on disability, and awarded compensation for lost wages and emotional hardship. In Green, the tribunal ordered that, within a set amount of time, the respondents conduct a substantial review of their policies relating to people with disabilities. 19

30 3.2 Intended or agreed reforms In 1996, the Federal Task force on Disability Issues released its report, appropriately entitled Equal Citizenship for Canadians with Disabilities: The Will to Act. The report (commonly referred to as the Scott Report, after the chair, Andy Scott, MP) acknowledged that disability is a cross-jurisdictional issue but challenged the federal government to provide strong leadership. One of its key recommendations was that there should be a co-ordinated federal approach to disability issues. It proposed the appointment of a Minister or Secretary of State tasked with responsibility for ensuring this co-ordination, together with the establishment of an independent office with power to monitor compliance, report to the public, and act as an advocate within the government. The Task Force also called on the federal government to invite the provinces to establish a pan-canadian approach that builds disability considerations into mainstream programs and policies across the spectrum of government activities. Except in a few specific areas, the government's response to date has been modest. In addition to the proposed changes to the Canadian Human Rights Act confirming the duty to accommodate, the government made amendments to the Income Tax Act, the Criminal Code and the Canada Evidence Act affecting people with disabilities. These included changes to the Medical Expense and Disability tax credits which were announced in the 1997 budget. The report of the 1996 Federal Task Force on Disability Issues, Equal Citizenship for Canadians with Disabilities: The Will to Act, recommended that the government introduce a Canadians with Disabilities Act with enforcement and monitoring mechanisms. To date, the federal government has not taken this approach. Instead, with provincial and territorial governments, it has adopted many of the principles from the Task Force as the basis for a co-ordinated strategy. Quebec, although not a participant, already has an equivalent policy framework for people with disabilities. On October 27, 1998, the government issued In Unison, described as a blueprint to promote the full participation of people with disabilities in all aspects of Canadian society. In Unison represents a significant consensus among the federal, provincial and territorial governments. Its focuses on improving the efficiency, effectiveness and co-ordination of existing programs arguing that people with disabilities are not well served by needless duplication and patchwork services. The report also encourages early initiatives that would further develop an accountability framework through consultations with consumer groups. A number of disability groups have expressed their concern that In Unison represents a further devolution by the federal government of its responsibilities regarding the rights of Canadians with disabilities. They are most concerned that the strategy fails to make any commitment to new funding for those who comprise one of the most disadvantaged groups in Canada. People with disabilities have also emphasized that a strategy with no legislative base remains vulnerable to changes in political will. They are concerned that the focus will shift from a rights-based approach to programs with diffuse lines of accountability and no national standards. Given past performance, the Human Rights Commission agreed with the 1996 Task Force in its support for the enactment of appropriate legislation. 20