CONTENTS
Wednesday 20 March 1991
Appointments review
Juanita Westmoreland-Traoré
Adjournment
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Chair: Runciman, Robert W. (Leeds-Grenville PC)
Vice-Chair: McLean, Allan K. (Simcoe East PC)
Bradley, James J. (St. Catharines L)
Frankford, Robert (Scarborough East NDP)
Grandmaître, Bernard (Ottawa East L)
Haslam, Karen (Perth NDP)
Hayes, Pat (Essex-Kent NDP)
McGuinty, Dalton (Ottawa South L)
Silipo, Tony (Dovercourt NDP)
Stockwell, Chris (Etobicoke West PC)
Waters, Daniel (Muskoka-Georgian Bay NDP)
Wiseman, Jim (Durham West NDP)
Substitutions:
Cooper, Mike (Kitchener-Wilmot NDP) for Mr Silipo
Owens, Stephen (Scarborough Centre NDP) for Mr Hayes
Sutherland, Kimble (Oxford NDP) for Mr Frankford
Clerk: Arnott, Douglas
Staff: Pond, David, Research Officer, Legislative Research Service
The committee met at 1009 in room 228.
APPOINTMENTS REVIEW
Consideration of an intended appointment.
The Chair: Can we come to order, please? Members of the committee, we will start off, as you can see by your agenda, with an up to two-hour review of an intended appointment selected by the third party.
Mr Waters: I would like to make a preliminary suggestion for the group. Because there are two hours, which seems an extremely long time for this, I was wondering if there was any way that we could do that and then do the review immediately afterwards. If we have run out of questions in an hour, can we not review this morning?
The Chair: I think we have to get into a rather technical discussion about the temporary standing order. Let's see how we do; if we do end early, then we can. We will see if that is appropriate.
Mr Waters: We are finding that two hours is a long time.
The Chair: The standing order allows for up to three hours, so essentially if a party wishes to interview an individual for up to three hours, it has that right under the temporary standing order.
JUANITA WESTMORELAND-TRAORÉ
The Chair: Welcome to the committee. Under our rules, we will commence the discussion. I guess I should give you an opportunity, if you wish, initially to make a few brief comments, or would you rather move right into questions?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I just wanted to say good morning to the members, good morning to you, Mr Chairperson, and also to say that I am pleased to be here, that I am committed to employment equity and that I am willing to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thanks very much. We will begin the questioning with Mr Stockwell.
Mr Stockwell: Welcome. I hope it will be the quickest two hours you have been through. First question. You have been appointed by the Premier. Have you in fact taken the job? Are you physically doing the job now?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: What I understand is that I am a nominee, and before the appointment can be actually made, I am called before this committee and there is a recommendation that will issue, I hope favourably, from this commission and then there may be a decision by the government.
Mr Stockwell: So you are not physically doing the work now. You do not have an office.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I have an office to do professional work. I am not working for the ministry at this point.
Mr Stockwell: I see. There was some concern with respect to where you reside. Clearly it is outside the province of Ontario. Was there any conversation about locating in Toronto and who would in fact pay the travelling costs and your living in Toronto? I assume that would be all your responsibility, not the government's.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: There was discussion. It was one of the questions that I was asked during the interview: How did I feel about being from outside of Ontario and what approach would I take in order to accomplish my functions. I answered those questions and I was also informed that within the public service of Ontario there is what is called a relocation package. I was given information on what the conditions were, both with regard to housing possibilities, either in order to search for housing or to purchase housing and what not. There are facilities; there is a plan providing for relocation.
Mr Stockwell: So in fact you are going to move to the province of Ontario.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: That is correct.
Mr Stockwell: With respect to the appointment, I assume you were approached by the government. Was there an outreach by the government to see if you would be interested in applying for this job?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: That is true. I was called and I was informed that the position was available. The person who contacted me was Ms June Veecock and I did subsequently receive another call. I called back and found out a little bit more about the position and I came to two interviews.
Mr Stockwell: With ministry staff?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: No, I think the first interview I was seen by Ms Carol Phillips, Ms Veecock and Ms Winnie Ng and the second interview was with the minister.
Mr Stockwell: There has been a conversation in the past regarding some commissions, etc, with respect to party affiliation and so on. Clearly there is some talk of past appointments being party motivated or politically motivated. Are you a member of a party? Do you belong to a party? Are you working for any specific federal or provincial political association?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I am not a member of any political party nor working for any political party.
Mr Stockwell: With respect to a brief outline on the background, I read the comments and queries and the previous employment. With respect to that, maybe you could give me an outline of your employment history that you feel gives you specifically a new outlook or qualifications with respect to the job that is being applied for or I suppose being hired for today. You could maybe give me a brief outline of the qualifications that you feel put you over and above an applicant from within the province of Ontario.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: That is a double question.
Mr Stockwell: Some would suggest it is loaded.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Well, I was preparing to answer it in stages. But the first question is what in my employment background might qualify me for this position. I have worked as a lawyer, I have been a practising attorney and I have been active in defending cases of human rights both with regard to discrimination based on sex and discrimination based on race and colour. I have been involved in several cases. I have also been involved in cases in my professional career defending activists who were arrested, mainly in demonstrations and occupations.
I have been a commissioner for the Canadian Human Rights Commission. For about three years I was a member of the commission, and in that capacity we received complaints, we received the reports of the investigating officers, we studied them and we were obliged to come to a finding on whether the complaint should go before the tribunals. We were also involved in establishing guidelines for adaptation planning in preparing guidelines for pay equity at the federal level.
Besides that, during the work for the federal commission, I was part of consultation teams that went to several cities, including the city of Toronto, to meet with employers' associations, manufacturers' associations, as well as members from different groups and communities that would be benefiting from these programs. In that way I think I gained some information and some experience with regard to activities and actions in different cities of Canada as well as in Toronto. Of course, my work with the commission led me to participate in different community outreach activities, and that has been very useful to me.
More recently, as a full-time employee, if you wish, I was chair of a Quebec consultative committee or council on cultural communities and immigration. In that function we were responsible for advising the minister on all policy issues dealing with the full participation and integration of people of ethnic and minority background within Quebec and also for design of immigration policies and settlement. Those are some of the areas.
I have also taught five sessions on equality rights for the Canadian Human Rights Foundation. At present I am giving a course on human rights at the law department of the Université du Québec in Montreal. I might also mention just in passing, even though it is not an employment situation, that I have been a member of the court challenges program for CCSD, and that has acquainted me with the --
Mr Stockwell: What is CCSD?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Canadian Council on Social Development. This program is now administered by the University of Ottawa Human Rights Centre, and this has given me a certain familiarity with the cases under section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights.
Mr Stockwell: More specifically, there is some concern with respect to the government, and I do not think the government has taken a position specifically on mandatory hiring quotas. Can you give me your thoughts on that subject and what you think you will be steering your recommendations towards?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I am at the very beginning of a process, so I cannot --
Mr Stockwell: I am obviously not looking for an informed professional response with respect to this specific job. I think what we are looking for today is more along the lines of your own personal viewpoint and where you see needed direction, particularly on mandatory hiring quotas. It is obviously a key issue that you will be dealing with, and I would like to hear what you personally have to say about mandatory hiring quotas.
1020
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I feel we are at the beginning of a very important program that has the potential of affecting not only the employment situation but also values in this society, attitudes and the way we treat people in this society. I believe employment equity is a planning process, and in order for a planning process to be effective, people must be aware and must understand what the objectives are. The planning process has to have objectives that are explicit, that allow people to know what is intended, and these objectives can also in the future allow people to see whether the objectives are being accomplished. They also allow the persons who are responsible to take the appropriate actions in order to achieve those objectives.
When you mention "quotas," I believe the word "quotas" has been used in some circles to refer to targets that are fixed and that sometimes have been seen as maximum absolute numbers of employees who can be recruited or who are to be promoted or in other ways affected in the employment situation.
Personally, I feel that the qualification "quotas" is misleading; I myself use the expression "numerical targets" or "objectives." I believe it is important in employment equity that there be some quantification of the objectives: how many people from the different designated groups are to be recruited or trained or promoted in different situations and in which categories. I think it helps the administrators. But it is important to realize that these targets or objectives are set forth in order to facilitate bringing about a representative and fair workplace. They are not set out as quotas to be limitations on people who are applying, and they are not put forward in an absolute way. They are put forward as guides, and they can in the process of evaluation be readjusted according to the context in a particular industry, in a particular company, in a particular institution. In other words, they are a planning tool.
I may have been a little bit more comprehensive in my reply to your question, but I think it is important to see what is the function of these targets and also to understand that they are a part of the program; they are not the entire program.
Mr Stockwell: I think I understand your answer. It seems you have changed one terminology for another. You have gone from mandatory hiring quotas to numerical targets that can be adjusted and changed. I always have assumed that mandatory hiring quotas, etc, could also be adjusted and changed, Mr Chairman, Mr Chair. I never --
Mrs Haslam: Chairperson, Mr Stockwell.
Mr Stockwell: It is kind of tough when you go "Mr Chairperson." You are defining it at that point.
Mrs Haslam: Mr Chair.
Mr Stockwell: Okay, Mr Chair. I have always assumed that they were adjustable and changeable. Tell me the difference with numerical targets. It sounds like you have changed the words but the definition seems pretty much the same.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I think if you look into some of the materials -- and I do not want to be over-specific and I do not want to be limited in what I am saying here -- but you will see that the word "quotas" has been used in certain situations and it has been interpreted as meaning fixed amounts that are to be attained within a certain period, and if these fixed amounts are not attained, there will be sanctions. At the same time, the quota is used to mean that they are absolute amounts and it is not possible to exceed these amounts. The word "quotas" has been used in historical contexts that have been very derogatory, and that is why I feel the word "quotas" is misleading, because the content and the common usage have become clouded by these racist uses.
Quotas were used, for instance, in educational institutions to cap off the number of people from certain minorities who could be accepted at those institutions, and unfortunately this is not an issue which is totally extinct. It is an issue that resurfaces. So I do not think it is positive to use the word "quotas." I think if we use the word "targets," even if you take a literal interpretation of the word "targets," you will understand what it means. I am not in any way diluting the objective of the program when I talk about targets because there is obviously a monitoring process. There will also be participation from both designated group members and from unions who are concerned about seeing that in the final analysis there is a fair representation of the workforce in the different employment settings and institutions.
Mr Stockwell: I will go on, but I am still having great difficulty breaking off the definition between numerical targets and the suggestion that mandatory hiring quotas are somehow different. I assume sanctions or some kind of penalty will be applied in both instances should they not be achieved.
I guess the next question I go to is small business. There is a degree of certainty among the working establishment out there, I suppose, that a definitive approach can be used in larger businesses, 500 or more employees. There is some concern from small business, 50 or less, about how they would fit into the program, how they would fit into the plan. It is far more difficult and far more costly for small business people to meet the objectives of some government program, simply because they do not have the kind of capital and cash flow that large companies do and they cannot necessarily absorb certain program costs that large businesses can.
Have you any thoughts you can give me with respect to small businesses and whether they can have a degree of comfort that this will in fact be understood and taken into consideration?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I think it is a legitimate concern that has already been expressed. I have looked at some of the materials from former consultations and I know the particular situation of small businesses will be studied. I believe that, as Employment Equity Commissioner, one of my first tasks, along with a team of other people, will be to study, to consult and to make certain accommodations for small business. At the same time, I believe that small businesses, as well as larger businesses, will benefit from employment equity.
I think that at present, in fact, a large proportion of their employees are part of the designated groups. About 60% of the workforce of Ontario falls into these designated groups. When we remove some of the barriers through the planning, we will be able to free up much more talent, much more dynamism, much more commitment in the workplace, so small businesses as well as the large industries and manufacturers will benefit from employment equity.
Mr Stockwell: I am sure I have time left, but I would pass to --
The Chair: What I was going to suggest was we will go in 20-minute rounds.
Mr Stockwell: Fine. I think I was almost dead on.
The Chair: We will come back to you later if you have additional questions. Mr Owens.
Mr Owens: Thank you, Ms Westmoreland-Traoré, for appearing before us today. I am very pleased to see you here. Shortly after the announcement of your intended appointment by the Premier, our friends in opposition raised a kerfuffle about the fact that you are not from Ontario. As a matter of fact, I want to read you a quote from a Toronto Star newspaper article written by Paula Todd, published on 16 February. The quote states: "I don't see how you can understand Ontario if you don't live in Ontario. I think it's so obvious it boggles the mind." The reporter is quoting the Liberal MPP for Lawrence, Joe Cordiano.
1030
Now, I do not understand this quote for a couple of reasons:
First, when we are struggling for a national identity, why would an elected official feel that a person cannot transfer skills from one province to another?
Second, I want to ask you whether you feel that the problems of adults or children with physical disabilities in other provinces are different in Quebec than they are here in Ontario. Do you think that people who are members of visible minorities have different problems in Ontario than they do in Quebec? Do you think the barriers are different in Quebec than they would be here in Ontario?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I am quite aware that coming from Montreal to Toronto will mean there is information that I will have to acquire, that there are contacts and there are networks that I will have to create. I am interested in doing this and I feel I have the skills to do this. On the other hand, I think there is one thing fundamental to persons who have been involved in equality-seeking work, and that is that there are networks of people and these networks stretch across the country. For that reason, I have been involved in major human rights initiatives in this country. During the constitutional amendments in 1982, many women's groups were very active and we lobbied for section 15; then we became involved in creating form and doctrine to flesh out what we thought equality represents in the society.
From that experience, I know there is a basic solidarity: that the problems and barriers facing women, whether they be in Montreal institutions or employments or family settings or personal relationships, are basically the same in Ontario or in western Canada and the Maritimes. With regard to people with disabilities, I had the same experience working with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, both in the type of cases that we received from Montreal or cases that we received from Toronto or from Nova Scotia. We had questions dealing with accessibility, we had questions dealing with harassment at the workplace, we had lack of accommodation on the part of certain major institutions. These were basically the same issues, and indeed many of the people we liaised with in dealing with these questions were people involved at both the federal and the provincial level.
As for work with racial or other minority discrimination, again we have found that the issues concerning recognition of foreign qualification, the issues dealing with overt or systemic discrimination, are really basically the same. So while I am not denying that in some situations there is context, there are numbers, there are regional differences that I have to study -- and I feel that I will have sufficient resources and also I have a certain amount of experience in dealing with new settings -- while I realize that this will be a challenge to me and an important part of my position, I also know that I already have a considerable amount of contact, personal alliances and knowledge and experience from a national setting, and this national setting also translates into the provincial and local reality of Ontario. So I am looking forward to this.
There is an area within employment equity, I feel, that calls for a more specific approach, and that is the area dealing with native peoples and native issues. I hope to be able to discuss that with the minister and then to participate in the consultation. I do not believe the consultation will be a long process but I nevertheless think it is important at this point. I am just mentioning that, with regard to native peoples, I think the issues and the barriers and the exclusion are even greater, and that these are a special concern and should receive very special attention for that reason.
Mr Owens: I would certainly agree with your answer. I clearly take issue with the quote of the opposition member.
I have a letter from Wilson Head, a well-known human rights activist here in Ontario. He sent a letter to the Globe and Mail, and I can tell you that I support this letter 110%. He says in a quote:
"I cannot think of a more highly qualified individual than Westmoreland-Traoré. She is a black woman, thoroughly bilingual and a part-time professor of law, the recent executive director of a major multicultural and race relations organization in Montreal and one of the outstanding human rights lawyers in Canada. Her appointment will do much to overcome the cynicism and distrust resulting from the unfulfilled promises of previous governments."
I end my questioning with that quote.
Mrs Haslam: I want to mirror that and say that I was so impressed with your curriculum vitae. It is three pages and that is just phenomenal, your work in this area alone. I just wanted to say how impressed I was.
What I would like to know is: What do you think your first task would be if you are appointed? What would you see as your first task?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: There are obviously some areas that I feel I would have to address. First of all, the mandate that I will receive indicates that I am to advise the minister and through the minister the government on the structure and implementation of employment equity legislation. I think that is the core of the mandate.
For that reason, I think it will be important to review the materials that have been gathered so far, with much diligence and expertise, and I also believe it would be important then to organize a short process of consultation, because there is a draft legislation. I believe the former official consultation that took place was a consultation by invitation. These are matters that have to be discussed with the minister, but I think there should be a consultation that is open and provides for participation by the major interested groups. Those are the people from the employer communities, the people from unions, the people from the designated groups. It should ensure that this consultative process is the kind that encourages and permits meaningful participation from all those designated groups.
I feel that for employment equity to be successful, there has to be an important communications component, both internal and public. There has to be a level of acceptance and understanding. And then, obviously, in our work we will be able to give our opinion, our informed opinion to the minister, to the government, on the final draft that should be presented and, hopefully, this will be done rather quickly.
So I see as the first part of my mandate this question of a consultation on a draft on the specifics of the mechanics we can use for affirmative action.
We have talked perhaps only in general terms, but I think that for the objectives of employment equity to be reached -- besides the issue of the numerical targets -- there are the affirmative measures. If we do not have preferential measures within affirmative actions program to help redress the imbalance, then we are going to be perpetuating, under the guise of employment equity, the past inequities. And so there has to be discussion, there has to be realization, there has to be acceptance of these specific preferential measures. They can be discussed, they can be negotiated eventually and they will be put in place, I hope.
1040
Mrs Haslam: Thank you. I know that I personally have been a victim of some discrimination and it is often hard to fight. I am looking for something in employment equity that gives those who have been discriminated against a better chance in the workplace. I am looking forward to seeing what you can do. Is there anyone else with a question? I will pass.
Mr Owens: I just wanted to make one point. The last note that I read from was in fact a letter to the editor of the Toronto Star, not the Globe and Mail, as I had indicated. Thank you.
Mr Waters: Coming from a rural riding, I was wondering if you see any difference in the problems associated with employment equity between rural and urban areas of the province?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I think employment equity addresses certain issues. First of all, within any particular setting, we have to examine what the employment opportunities are. The philosophy of employment equity legislation is first of all to remove discriminatory practices. It is a systemic approach and I believe that whether the legislation applies directly to a particular setting obviously will depend on the definitions and the categories within the legislation. But because it is a question of setting new values for the society, new equality and equity values in employment, the approach is going to be applicable to all employment settings. If we look then within the rural settings, if we have rural industries, industries dealing with farming, major farming complexes, if we have industries dealing with dairy and cattle-raising, commercial export industries, depending on the number of employees, they are going to be affected by this legislation and, as I said, I think it is going to be beneficial because it is going to unleash energies and talents in the society that formerly had been prohibited.
It is true that the measures we will discuss will be tailored to the particular situations. I think what we want to avoid is ghettoization. You will probably find that in some areas there are more instances of migrant labourers. We want to look into the condition and situation of those migrant labourers and see whether they are being treated fairly, what is their possibility of integration and what are their levels of compensation, turnover, recall and what not. I think there is ample room in the rural setting, depending, as I say again, on the context, for there to be a new philosophy in the planning and management of employees with regard to equity. Equity is part of an overall strategy with regard to human resources management.
Mr Waters: You are probably well aware that you are quite well known, and of all of the appointments that have come before the committee, yours is one -- once again, coming from a rural riding -- where there have been comments made, and they have been very good comments. Everyone has been very positive, and I was just wondering, have you had any sort of response from the different designated groups?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: From the different --
Mr Waters: Well, from the groups that you will be working with.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Okay, yes. Before I answer that, I just want to say there was an idea in my mind as I was answering the former question. That was with regard to native peoples. Again the vast majority of native peoples are in the rural areas, and I think it will be important then to see how employment equity will apply to their situation, both with regard to employments that are available to them and creating new employments.
Yes, I must say that I have been very encouraged by the type of response. I was not expecting it. I even think to a certain extent that the initial comment did in a sense make people more defensive of this whole employment equity strategy. I know that it is part of a process and part of a movement that has been taking place in Ontario, but nevertheless I think that because of these comments people have been very supportive. I have received many, many letters, resolutions, press statements, some from coalitions that have been promoting employment equity, some from specific coalitions, the coalition of disabled people, the Urban Alliance on Race Relations, I must say from women's organizations. So I feel this will help me in the work that I have to do. I have received from the manufacturers' association of Ontario. I have received from francophone organizations, intercultural francophone organizations. There has really been a wide expression of support for the initiative in employment equity and for my nomination.
Mr Wiseman: I have been listening with fascination. I really enjoy what you have said so far. I have a thought of my own. I come from an educational background where the school I started in was all of one culture; now it is of multicultures, and we have been experiencing a great deal of difficulty in bringing the cultures together. I do not know if it is specifically part of your mandate, but I think it is going to be part of what you are going to have to deal with. I am just wondering if you have any preliminary thoughts on cross-cultural differences, understanding of historical traditions and how that might be integrated in whatever recommendations you will make to the ministry on pay equity, because, at least from my perspective, I think they are extremely important issues.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I think so. I agree with you. I think the ultimate objective is to bring about a harmonious and equal opportunity workplace and I think in order to do this we are daily working with a multitude of decision-makers, many different situations and settings. For the legislation to be effective, there has to be a certain understanding of the objectives; there has to be an understanding of what these barriers are and what has created these barriers. I think the most effective way of getting at that is allying or combining with these very clear objectives in educational strategy, communications strategy, within the organization, as well as a general public communications strategy.
If we are talking employment equity, there are certain qualitative measures that are necessary in order to succeed in bringing about this fair employment setting. Among the qualitative measures there are obviously programs that deal with information, that deal with enabling the different employees to understand the process, and these programs sometimes are seen as part of anti-harassment mechanisms. These programs also can be assisted by the Employment Equity Commission because we hope there will be certain tools we can make available to the different employers, to the different institutional settings, and these materials will be developed, together with union participation, together with target group participation, and adapted to the particular settings.
But the materials can be available. They can take different forms: they can be written; they can be audio-visual; they can be in the creative forms of public participation, strategies and what not. These materials have to be an integral part because there are unfortunately many expressions that are used. There are very subtle and negative attacks on the principles of promoting equality. I think it is important now to take the initiative and to neutralize some of these expressions that have been used, sometimes deliberately, and we can do this when people understand.
1050
I believe in the perfectibility of human beings and of their basic will to make the society a livable place for everyone. I think people also want to avoid injury and I think employment equity is a planning process that can help us to come to that situation. Employment is central in our living, in our opportunities, in our fulfilment and therefore it is the major area of this legislation. But I believe the principles that are put forth will spill forth in the other assets, in the other aspects of our living. When we have more fair relations in the workplace, it is going to contribute to more fair relations in the community and it is going to help solve some of the social issues that we are facing.
Mr Grandmaître: I have gone through your résumé with a fine-tooth comb and I must congratulate you. I think you are the best of the 24 or 25 candidates who were interviewed for the job. Now that it is a fait accompli -- I think it is a fait accompli now that the minister has announced it and the Premier has written an order in council -- you are ready to start to do your job.
Now that you will become the adviser to the minister and you will be preparing the legislation to be introduced at a later date, maybe I should ask this question to the Chairman: Will this be an ongoing position, or is there a sunset review?
The Chair: I would assume that it is an ongoing position and perhaps the nomination operates on the --
Mr Grandmaître: An ongoing position. Were you told that this position is for ever?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: No. I believe that the legislation will be ongoing.
Mr Grandmaître: Because even ministers do leave their offices, you know.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I believe that the legislation commissioner --
Mr Stockwell: Some of them recently.
Mrs Haslam: And some members --
Mr Grandmaître: And the noise you heard outside was the move of Peter Kormos.
Mrs Haslam: Actually, they were just moving some Liberals' desks around.
Mr Grandmaître: Having said this, I think the opposition had --
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I --
Mr Grandmaître: Do you understand --
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I think I understand, sir.
Mr Grandmaître: -- that this is a permanent job?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: No, what I understand is --
Mr Grandmaître: Not for ever, but at least permanent.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I think I can tell you what my understanding is and it is a important question. I think that the appointment will be an appointment for a three-year period. During that time, I will be called upon, as I say, essentially, to counsel the minister on bringing in this employment equity legislation and hopefully seeing it adopted and beginning the implementation, the setting up of a commission. That all has to be accomplished and the plans have to be at least in their initial stages during that first mandate. I am not aware of anything beyond that initial period.
Mr Grandmaître: So you are prepared to leave the great city and the great hockey team in Montreal to cheer for our poor Toronto Maple Leafs. Is this your understanding?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: No, in fact, there is a special place, there will always be a special place deep within me for Montreal and Quebec. But at the same time, I believe that Toronto has qualities. I believe I am coming to Toronto in a very challenging and a very serious capacity and I am quite privileged, quite grateful for this opportunity. All in all, I think so far I am very pleased with the way the situation is unfolding. I have begun my real estate investigations and I must say that is about the lowest part of my experience so far, but I do hope that it will be resolved shortly.
Mr Grandmaître: I want to wish you good luck because I have to sign a second lease and I will tell you, Mr Chairman, they are asking quite a bit.
De quelle façon est-ce que vous entrevoyez les conséquences que le Québec et le reste du Canada -- pas les conséquences, mais les problèmes -- qui existent présentement entre le Québec et le reste du Canada ? Quelles sont -- pas vos prédictions, parce que même M. Bourassa n'a pas de prédictions et même beaucoup de personnes n'ont pas de prédictions -- les valeurs que vous voyez entre le Québec et le reste du Canada ?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré : Je crois qu'il est évident que nous sommes actuellement engagés dans un processus de changement. Actuellement, au Québec, je crois qu'il y a une réflexion très fondamentale sur l'avenir du Québec et l'avenir du Canada et je crois actuellement apercevoir également dans d'autres provinces canadiennes une nouvelle interrogation, une nouvelle réflexion sur les relations avec le Québec.
Je crois qu'il y a une évolution qui se fait des deux côtés. Je crois que, au Québec, il y aura de plus en plus une affirmation du caractère national, une volonté d'assumer certains pouvoirs. Je crois qu'il y aura une renégociation avec les autres membres de la Confédération et je vois cela comme étant un processus déjà engagé.
Je ne peux pas, comme vous dites, prévoir quel serait le résultat éventuel. Ça va beaucoup dépendre du processus et également de la compréhension des autres. En cela, je rejoins les préoccupations que nous avons en ce qui concerne la création d'une société équitable égalitaire, dans la mesure que nous ayons à l'intérieur de nos institutions, à la fois nos institutions de vie quotidienne et nos institutions publiques, une acceptation, une compréhension et une approche égalitaires. Je pense qu'on aboutira à une solution acceptable pour tous les partis à la suite de cette négociation.
Mr Grandmaître: Merci. Just to set the record straight, Mr Chairman, I would like to refer to a quote used by Mr Owens a little while ago. The quote mentioned by Mr Owens and attributed to Mr Cordiano did not refer to the candidate who is before us. It was a quote referring to a fair tax commissioner and not this person. I just wanted to set the record straight. I do have a copy of the quote.
Good luck. Let's hope we will meet again very soon.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré : Merci beaucoup.
M. Grandmaître : Très bien.
Mr Owens: Mr Chairman, on a point of privilege: I show you the headline, which clearly says, "MPPs Vow Fight Over Equity Post," which has absolutely nothing to do with the Fair Tax Commission. I do not know which newspaper clipping you are reading, but this is clearly about this intended appointment.
Mr Grandmaître: Well, the same quote was attributed to Mr Cordiano referring to the Fair Tax Commission.
Mr Owens: Maybe he has the same thing to say about two different appointments.
Mr McGuinty: Welcome, doctor. I wonder if I might proceed with two lines of questioning. The first one, to keep it discrete, will deal with the process that led to your being here today; and second, I would like to get into some more of your thinking regarding employment equity and some of the fundamental problems it is addressing.
With respect to the first matter then, was this position, to your knowledge, advertised?
1100
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I am aware of the announcement that was made initially in the throne speech of the employment equity legislation, and also of a specific announcement made by the Premier on 10 December that he was soliciting candidates for this position of Employment Equity Commissioner. I also know that the Minister of Citizenship, Ms Ziemba, has on several occasions in meetings informed persons that this position was available and that candidacies could be submitted. I was not a part of that process. This is information that I have ascertained, and I know that I did submit my candidacy.
Mr McGuinty: Right. I gather there was no formal public advertising by the usual means. By that I mean placing ads in newspapers throughout the province, for instance, major newspapers even. You are not aware of that?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: No, I am not aware of that. I know that this is a government appointment and I know there have been some situations where there has been a formal process, but I am aware that this is an order-in-council nomination.
Mr McGuinty: Okay. I do not know how many applications were submitted, but I understand 24 were considered. Do you know who the other 24 were?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I would refrain from answering. Perhaps the Chair could give me direction on that. I would not like to be in that position myself. I mean, I would not like to be named as someone who had applied and --
Mr McGuinty: No, I am not asking for names. That was not my question. Perhaps I will rephrase it. Do you know --
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Yes, I do know of some persons who were --
Mr Grandmaître: Competing.
Mr McGuinty: Competing? All right.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: It is a small world. It is inevitable.
Mr McGuinty: Sure.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Because, as I say, of the network of people who work in employment equity, in fact I knew all the people.
Mr McGuinty: I ask that because we are faced with a certain disadvantage here in that we do not know who else was competing for this position.
I am going to ask you another question related to that. Since you know some of the others and we do not, do you feel that you are the best qualified?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I think that that would be totally subjective. I would need --
Mr McGuinty: All right.
Mr Stockwell: That is what politics are all about.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I have a certain amount of confidence and assurance that I will be able to fulfil the position with competence.
Mr McGuinty: I would be surprised if you answered me in any other way. I understand that your contact, which led to your being here today, consisted of two telephone calls and two interviews.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I would say directly, if you wish.
Mr McGuinty: Tell us something about the indirect contact.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: When you say "that led to my being here today," I did myself consult many people and ask them if in their opinion they felt it would be the right decision for me, taking into account the different factors in the situation. So perhaps I misinterpreted your question. My being here today is the result of my consultation of many people, discussion, study of what was involved in this mandate.
With regard to the outreach, the fact is that I was consulted by the person whom I mentioned, and I also received an invitation from, as I said, Carol Phillips's office. Then the second invitation came from the minister's office.
Mr McGuinty: Those are the persons with whom you had the telephone conversations and the persons with whom you met, including the minister. Had you made their acquaintance prior to these contacts?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: The initial person, June Veecock, I had known because we are members of the Congress of Black Women of Canada, Ontario Region. I met her, I believe, in Halifax in 1989; that was the first time I met her. Subsequent to that, she was a student, I believe, in Prince Edward Island, but I could be wrong. There were many people who came to Prince Edward Island --
Mr McGuinty: And lived.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: -- for the human rights training, so I may have known her there at that setting. But independently of that, no, this is the first time that I am meeting the people involved in the selection process.
Mr McGuinty: Have any of the terms of your employment been established, and if I might ask one by one: With respect to the term itself, I gather it has been fixed at three years?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: That is what I understand.
Mr McGuinty: Okay. Have there been salary --
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I am trying to negotiate a clause with regard to renewal. I do not want to be trapped.
Mr McGuinty: Okay. Have there been salary negotiations?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I have been told that it could be in an EC5, an executive compensation 5.
Mr McGuinty: Right. Have benefits been discussed?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I have been put in contact with a benefits officer, a very qualified person at the Ministry of Culture and Communications, who has informed me of the options.
Mr McGuinty: Have you selected any options?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I am investigating the option of opting into the employment benefit and retirement plan of the Ontario public service. It cannot be confirmed yet, because I am going through the process, but at the same time I am investigating so that when the process is completed, I will know where I stand.
Mr McGuinty: What about a start date?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: The start date has changed. Initially it was hoped that we would begin, we could go forward in January, and then the process went before cabinet, I believe, on 14 February, which was St Valentine's Day. Then there was the question of scheduling these meetings and so forth. At this point I do not know when the commencement date may be. I hope soon.
Mr McGuinty: I am going to move on to the next area then. You made reference to quotas and numerical targets, and I probably have the same difficulty that Mr Stockwell has in understanding the distinction. I think perhaps what underlies your thinking there, and you can correct me if I am wrong, is a problem of perception. The word "quota" conjures up different meanings because of the historical context.
I can recall in grade 10 English a teacher telling us that if a child walks across the room to get on to a rocking horse, if you are writing a short story and you say, "The child climbed on to the horse," that is one way of putting it; but if you say, "The child mounted her steed," that is another way of putting it, and they both conjure up a different image. But the problem is, a horse is a horse is a horse, and I think the problem of quotas, whether we call it a quota or a numerical target, still remains. I guess the Employment Equity Commission is a proposed solution to a problem, and I want to put something to you and perhaps have you respond.
I think you have described the problem as systemic discrimination. We are all subject to human frailty, and perhaps one would argue that prejudice and discriminatory practices are inherent in humanity and will remain, have been a problem since time immemorial and will continue to be so into the future. Given that negative outlook -- some would call it realistic -- what hope can the Employment Equity Commission have in accomplishing its task? I will leave it at that: What hope will it have?
1110
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I am beginning to have a few years of experience now. When I began working in the human rights area, there were no human rights codes. There was a little bit of anti-discrimination legislation dealing with hotels, campgrounds and motels. So I can see what changes have taken place in the legislative context.
I think now we have not only a situation where we have codes that are seen as quasi-constitutional documents, but we also have a charter that enshrines equality rights and we have a clause that specifically covers affirmative action in our charter. I think those are some fundamental changes and they are also the result of a process of public participation in the sense that there was parliamentary involvement in adopting these legislative tools.
So we can say there has been a certain evolution in the standards and the values of our society, and I think that in Canada and in Ontario today we no longer accept that there are ghettos of employment. We no longer accept as normal and acceptable that women should earn for the same work only two thirds of what a male counterpart would receive when both are equally qualified and have the same experience. I do not think that we accept any more that disabled people be regarded without taking into consideration their abilities. They should be encouraged to work and participate according to their abilities.
I think that those are fundamental changes within our society and I believe that employment equity will be an additional tool. I do not think that it is the entire solution to social change, but it is an important tool, because, as you said, we are beginning now to see that when dealing with change, we can be more effective if we concentrate on the effects and the practices rather than on the intentions and the feelings. Employment equity is the strategy that allows us to use rather conventional methods of planning, to adapt them to the employment setting and to encourage people to change their practices, not necessarily to change their internal thinking. But we will see that when we change practices at a certain point, perhaps in a way that is unobserved, in effect there begins to be a change within our thinking, because we are in contact with people, we are working with them constantly. We begin to develop social relations and certain superstitions that we had formerly fall by the wayside. Even though it is a process, the process becomes at a certain point part of the solution.
I am very positive. As I said, I have seen changes already; I know that these changes are beginning. The headline in the Globe and Mail today talks about the revelations of the annual report of the federal Human Rights Commission, and there is obviously a long road to travel. But we have to put the tools and the institutions in place in order to effect this change.
Mr McGuinty: How am I doing on time, Mr Chair?
The Vice-Chair: You have got about five minutes.
Mr McGuinty: Where does Ontario place in the world in terms of employment equity?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I will be honest with you. I believe that today Ontario is taking the lead in bringing about equity in the workplace. I believe the pay equity legislation is unique and it is very important. It takes a proactive approach to redressing one of the very basic inequities. We may limit ourselves to the employment setting, but what a person earns also determines the quality of living for that person, the educational opportunities of that person and also his family and to a certain extent his community. So attacking the issue of pay equity is very important.
I believe also there are guidelines now in the Human Rights Commission in Ontario dealing with adaptation planning for disabled people, which is also a very fundamental area.
I know there are initiatives with regard to race relations in Ontario, and one of the most remarkable is the new legislation dealing with policing and the affirmative action that is now legislated with regard to police forces in Ontario.
Ontario is, I believe, a microcosm of many social issues, many social areas. If we look to the composition, the multi-ethnic, multiracial composition of Ontario, we will see that it is very diversified, more so than many other parts of Canada, and therefore the challenges are there. There are areas that are very difficult. I believe there are areas of racial minorities where there is a double disadvantage. There are historical patterns of discrimination and prejudice and they require specific measures to be overcome.
On the other hand, I think that in Ontario today there are possibilities for opportunity and there is a recognition of the need for this employment equity legislation. I have seen it being supported in areas, designated groups. Unions have been very vocal on this issue, as well as the manufacturing and commercial community. I think, bringing those different elements together, there is opportunity for sustained change in Ontario.
Mr McGuinty: There are a few points that were raised by our committee's research officer, and these are concerns that have been raised by business representatives. I wonder if you might address those. The first issue is that some businesses feel they will be forced to hire unqualified workers. I am sure these are classical arguments, but I would like to hear your response to them, please. Second, there is the impact on other employees who feel that they are being passed over. Thirdly, they feel there may be a problem that there are simply not enough eligible potential employees in the target groups.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Okay. You know, we are dealing with a lot of people when we talk about employment equity. We are talking about 60%.
Mr McGuinty: Yes.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: The whole phobia around forcing employers to hire unqualified people -- if we look, for instance, at one group, people of different racial and ethnic origin in one setting, we will find that on average within that group we have persons who have more qualifications. We have 27% of the group with university education as compared to 17% of the general population in Ontario. These are Ontario figures. So when we look at the bottlenecks that have been created for this particular target group, we will say that it is not related to qualification in terms of education and experience, that in fact there is a pool of people that is being underemployed and underpaid.
When we look to the group of women, we can find the same situation. It is a fact that there are certain areas in which there has not been the opportunity, and therefore the experience is not the same as with other groups. In situations like that, we have found it important to examine alternative methods of acquiring pertinent experience, because a person may not have had experience in the conventional sense in a particular work setting, but may have experience that relates to the type of functions and tasks performed in that employment and that can then be evaluated and will qualify the person effectively.
1120
I find that the whole question of forcing people to hire unqualified is very much of a bog and I feel that most often there is a breakdown in outreach and in the selection process. I do not feel the objective of employment equity is to force employers to hire people who are incompetent, because there are sufficient numbers of competent people available. You would be surprised at the number of times that employers will offer training, will offer to place people in circumstances where they can acquire experience in order that they can be promoted and work in a new occupational setting. When I say this, I am referring to that group of people that in the past has more or less been favoured within the workplace, and we call those people white, able-bodied males of heterosexual orientation. You would be surprised at the affirmative measures that exist already in practice for that group of people. What we would like to do is simply make the playing field more fair.
With regard to the impact on others, I feel there will be an impact on others. I feel that if we are talking about equality, it means sharing, but I do not believe that it necessarily means sharing the same pie. I believe that when others are included, we are going to increase patterns of consumption and possibilities; we are going to increase the need for education and training facilities; we are going to develop further potential in our economy and in our society. Therefore, I think that when the competition is fair, we are going to get the best candidates -- the best candidates are going to be selected -- and also we are going to be working in a larger economic setting.
Now the impact on others, I know, is a consideration for employers and for managers of human resources because it has to do with the motivation, the dynamism, the culture in a particular setting. Therefore, it is important to have an informational, educational, communication strategy so that people will understand what the objectives are, how they are going to be achieved and what everybody's opportunity is going to be.
This privileged way of attributing certain employment opportunities has worked to the disadvantage of many people, including some in that traditional group that I have spoken about, because the opportunities very often have been shared by personal relationships. In an employment equity setting, there will be more transference, which means that all people will be able to compete for certain opportunities.
The other thing, and maybe the final thing I will mention because I know you can only talk in generalities here, is with regard to setting objectives, and I still maintain there is a difference between the numerical objectives and the quotas. With regard to setting the objectives, whether they be numerical or qualitative, there is a factor of reasonability and a factor of impact upon a particular setting, and that is a serious matter that has to be evaluated together with all the other factors. There are many practitioners now in employment equity who are skilled and who are able to evaluate with employers who are of goodwill to bring about and to set up targets that are appropriate to any particular setting.
Finally, with regard to there not being enough eligible employees, in a certain way, this comes back I think to the first question: that at the same time, with regard to setting up these targets, it is important to take into consideration not only those people who are available to do a particular task, but also those people who are readily available and can be qualified in a reasonable period of time. This is because employment equity strives to create a representative workforce and strives in fact to promote equality within the society.
It is a shared burden. It is a burden for the employment situation as well as for the larger community, and I think that is why there is also provision in the draft legislation for setting up an institute to help in the training, an institute that would be funded both with public and private funds that would assist in training and retraining of employees and workforce in Ontario.
This is an issue, but I think it is an issue that is a part of an employment strategy, and employers will benefit as much as employees and target groups, including native peoples, if there is a better understanding and a better planning for workforce assets as they are in Ontario now. Where we find areas where there has been a historic and traditional disadvantage in a particular group, then the particular measures will have to take that into consideration, and the measures probably will include more outreach, more training, more communication than in settings where we have readily available large pools of qualified candidates.
Mr Stockwell: I will go back and go on the record in saying I frankly do not see any difference. Maybe I am just missing the point, but I definitely do not see any difference and I want to go on the record suggesting the targets -- and if you could give it to me in writing, maybe I will understand it better that way.
Another question is, we have now, it seems to me, Ontario policy on race relations, the race relations directorate in the Ministry of Citizenship, to promote this, as well as the Office for Disabled Persons, the Ministry of Labour, and so on and so on. It begs the question. We now will be setting up this commission on employment equity, but it seems that some of these programs were adopted or in fact incorporated elsewhere in the government. They are obviously new ideas and concepts that you are bringing forth, $25 million to $31 million in new program money.
You are talking about a three-year contract. The likelihood of your being turned down by this committee is as likely as our organizing a parade down Bay Street for the Toronto Maple Leafs winning the Stanley Cup. You are going to get this job; there is no doubt in my mind. There are a number of NDP members here who happen to agree with Mr Rae, surprisingly. So when you come back in three years, how are we going to measure your success? We always have words. We interview and there are words and then someone comes back a few years later and there are new words and new phrases and new terms.
If it were my money -- and I suppose a small portion of the $25 million to $32 million is -- it is more than I prefer, but it is my money, and the question I have is: When you come back in three years, where do you want to be? If you are not at a certain level or have not achieved certain goals, you would consider it to be less than successful, I suppose. What is rousingly successful? What is excellent in your opinion?
In three years when you come back, I want to be able to sit here, if I am on this committee, and say: "Gee, you have not accomplished what you said you were going to accomplish. Is it your fault? Is it the government's fault? Whose fault is it? Let's determine where we have to go from here to achieve what we wanted to achieve."
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: First of all, with all deference, I am not the government. I will be named Employment Equity Commissioner and, during that preliminary period, I will be responsible to counsel the minister on the adoption of legislation. My first objective personally will be to see that that material and that advice is submitted to the minister and the government within a relatively short time so that the legislative process will begin. I believe that for that legislation to go forward, it will require the co-operation of all MPPs. At the same time, I believe, as a part of my mandate, I will participate in interministerial committees.
1130
You have mentioned that several programs exist. There is now a strategy within the Ontario public service dealing with employment equity, and I will be liaising with the Human Resources Secretariat and with other agencies, the women's directorate as well as the body for the disabled employment, the council for the disabled employment and the agency for disabled employment within the Ministry of Labour. I will have to do a certain amount of collaboration, consultation, co-ordination with the other agencies that are within government and that are operating.
I will be called upon also to interrelate with the public sector in Ontario, the municipal organizations that have been very active in employment equity and have plans in different stages. With the unions and with management, there will be on the part of the commission a close relationship once this commission is set up.
If you ask me what my objectives are, my first objective is legislation, and I think that is the fundamental change that I hope will be accomplished. That legislation will bring in mandatory employment equity programs with content in the Ontario society.
Mr Stockwell: Mandatory employment equity programs --
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: With content.
Mr Stockwell: -- with content.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: That is right.
Mr Stockwell: The key phrase there.
Mr Owens: Keep going.
Mrs Haslam: It was one of your usual remarks.
Mr Stockwell: Huh? I did not hear that.
With content, okay, and I guess that is going to be the difficult definition.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I think it is important because once the legislation is in place, it will be a structure as well as a guide. It will set up the commission and the commission will begin its work. As far as I can see, if these three objectives are attained within that initial period, then I believe a certain major part of my mandate will have been accomplished.
I believe that in the setting up of the commission, in requiring the negotiation and the adoption of these plans, an evaluated process can begin, which in effect will mean that persons from the different groups will have additional opportunity, will know of their opportunity, and there will be specific preferential measures in place to help redress the imbalance that has occurred within the employment setting.
Mr Stockwell: Is there any particular legislation regarding mandatory employment equity with content now available elsewhere that we could look to?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Elsewhere than in Ontario?
Mr Stockwell: Right. North America. I do not know.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Within the public service of Canada, there have been some affirmative action measures. However, these affirmative action measures have not been very successful. The best example is the legislation dealing with the participation of francophones in the federal public service, where there has been a remarkable improvement in the representation.
Within the United States, which is elsewhere if you wish, there has also been some marked improvement in the integration into the workforce of women and a better distribution and representation of women within that workforce. This has been accomplished through the contract compliance mechanisms.
Mr Stockwell: Contract compliance?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: That is correct. The contract compliance mechanisms impose affirmative action programs for certain suppliers and for certain contractors with certain federal agencies, and they exist also at other levels. So these are in a way mandatory affirmative action programs. We have found that voluntary --
Mr Stockwell: Like union shops, in essence? As a supplier, must you be a union shop with contract compliance?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: This relates to a different area. This relates to a different area. The affirmative action that I am referring to has to do with minorities, women, native people --
Mr Stockwell: I understand that, but the contract compliance would be set up in that fashion.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: The contract compliance is a clause that is monitored by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. There are reporting requirements. There are surveys to be done of the workforce. There are objectives that have to be attained with regard to the groups that I have mentioned and this is not done, as far as I know, in a particularly structured way with unions in the United States.
Mr Stockwell: Okay, thank you. The next question, and I suppose it will be my last, if we are going to have 10 minutes left --
The Chair: You have got quite a bit of time.
Mr Stockwell: Oh, are we going to go 20 minutes?
The Chair: You have another 10 minutes anyway.
Mr Stockwell: That is fine. When you refer to mandatory employment equity with content, would the content include numerical targets?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I believe it is important in any process of planning that there be objectives that are readily known and that have taken into account the particular setting with regard to the size of the workforce, with regard to turnover in the workforce, with regard to growth in the workforce, with regard to availability. I believe that with regard to employment equity it is important that we have numerical targets so that the administrators will know what is expected of them at all levels of the organization so there can be a certain amount of accountability.
It will also be important for people in those target groups, so they can know what is to be expected. In order for these targets to be workable, it is necessary that they be associated with certain qualitative measures that deal with information, that deal with training, that deal with removing barriers within the workplace. The targets cannot be achieved unless jointly there are other measures that are qualitative within the workforce.
The other thing that perhaps is not always put forth with the same vigour and which is nevertheless equally important is that within the employment equity planning process there are what we call general measures, measures that are going to be of advantage and benefit to all members of the workforce. Examples of this, for instance, are day care facilities. Day care facilities are often seen as an advantage to women: They will help women participate more fairly in the workplace. But in fact, when there are day care facilities, they are of benefit to all employees in the workforce. You will find many measures that will be important and will improve the workplace setting and the quality of the workplace setting within an employment equity program.
Mr Stockwell: Thank you for your attendance. I look forward to the legislation.
Mr Sutherland: I just want to ask a couple of questions. Many companies have talked openly in the media and certainly in some of their publications and annual reports about changes in human resources strategy in attempting to get the best people for the job. I was wondering whether you would care to comment on whether you think those types of strategies have had any impact whatsoever in creating a more equitable workplace.
1140
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I feel that the best people can raise different considerations. I think the objective in a fair employment situation is to recruit qualified people for the positions that are to be filled, and those qualifications have to be determined according to the essential functions to be performed by any individual. There has to be a review of the description of the particular employment, as well as the qualifications that are required for that employment, for us to make sure that the system is non-discriminatory. When we begin with the question, the best people, this can lead to a certain amount of subjectivity. It is important for us to look at the objective requirements and whether those requirements are in effect in relationship with the essential functions to be performed.
Once this is done, I think we have to examine the recruitment strategy that is used, because in order to effectively obtain the qualified people -- and there can be many people who are qualified for the position -- we have to see whether the recruitment is in effect non-discriminatory. It is only after we have gone through the whole process that we will see whether those strategies that purport to recruit the best people are in a position to recruit the best people.
Mr Sutherland: My second question has to do with the issue of distribution, which we have not talked about too much this morning. I certainly know the goal of employment equity is many people in the visible minorities and those groups are working in very low-paying jobs. I was wondering whether you see the goal as just to move them up into some of the areas of high-paying jobs where they have not been represented or into areas of management and decision-making?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I do not think anybody would refuse an increase, especially if a person is qualified and has been underpaid for a certain amount of time. But I think that is one of the factors in the general employment setting. I think the major objective of the employment equity legislation is to give all the employees and potential employees a fair opportunity to participate and to obtain employment in all the different sectors of a particular industry or institution. When we find there are groups that have been relegated to certain areas and they are over-represented in certain areas and very much absent in others, then we know there are hidden barriers for these groups. There are hidden barriers for women as well, and one of the things that amuses me, even though it is very serious and indicative of the discrimination in our society, is the fact that, as we go along with certain programs, we find that we create new ghettos. We have created for women what is now called a velvet ghetto: It is the role of women executives in certain functions such as communications, personnel and employment equity. I think we have to be aware and we have to have a strategy that is company-wide, institution-wide, in order to avoid these dysfunctions.
Mr Sutherland: One more question, if I may, Mr Chair. You talked earlier about being happy with some of the changes seen from a legal standpoint, in terms of human rights codes that have come into place, the Charter of Rights and the proposed employment equity legislation. What is your overall sense of attitudes in the public at large to those changes?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I think there are different levels and there are different levels of consciousness. I think there is certain speech that today is no longer acceptable. I think that in many communities now, whether they be management communities, union communities or public forums, people are much more knowledgeable as to what type of discourse is acceptable. People have become very sophisticated with regard to human rights communication.
At the same time, I feel there are still very basic discriminatory practices, that there is exclusion within this society, that it is covert and that we are obliged to take these concrete measures in order to get at it and to get the results. I do not believe we are going to be able to change attitudes overnight, but I believe it is important to require of people that their behaviour be socially acceptable and I think that that is what we can assure that we can begin to achieve.
Mr Wiseman: I would like to go down a different road with you just for a minute, and it has to do with areas that turn out to be barriers that people did not expect to be barriers in the first place. For example, let's say you are a small businessman and you have two very qualified people. The job is to use the telephone a lot and do a lot of long-distance telephoning, and one of your very qualified people is totally deaf and uses the machine called a TTY machine.
You are stuck with a major problem because you may want to hire that person but you know your long-distance phone bills are going to be prohibitive. Bell Canada would give you a benefit on long-distance charges using your personal phone but will not do it for business. There you have a barrier that was not perhaps meant to be a barrier but turns out to be one. Have you any thoughts about looking at how those kinds of barriers can be removed, particularly in that kind of situation?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I think the first requirement is really to examine the workforce, to examine the requirements, to examine employment practices and to eliminate that which is discriminatory. I think that is the first obligation and it is an obligation simply under anti-discrimination legislation. As a part of that first obligation it is necessary to incorporate reasonable accommodation. That has nothing to do with employment equity; it is simply anti-discrimination, and reasonable accommodation has been defined as being those measures which are necessary to permit a person who is qualified to do the essential functions of a particular work, to allow that person to be employed, provided it does not cause undue hardship. There are within the codes rules and an interpretation of those rules dealing with undue hardship.
I cannot answer in a particular setting what would constitute undue hardship because I would have to know the size, I would have to know what the gains are, I would have to know what other measures have been taken within that company. Many factors go into play to decide whether it is undue. It may be that this person would be available to do another function. It depends on the overall, but it is a fundamental requirement of non-discrimination that there be reasonable accommodation, to the extent that it does not incur undue hardship for employers.
I think we have to give the necessary information and also provide support in the sense that there will be additional training that permits a person to have a larger opportunity for applying to positions of different kinds and not to be restricted to any one particular employment. This training can be a financial obligation that is borne not only by the company individually but through certain public measures as well. These public measures can also be available through professional centres, through some of the high schools and some of the regional the technical institutions. It is a collaborative effort, so that you cannot automatically pronounce yourself on one specific instant, but it is a fact that the question of accommodation is essential and the fact of undue hardship is also a part of that definition of accommodation.
Mr Wiseman: Thank you.
1150
Mr Owens: This is a point of personal philosophy. I am a little bit saddened that we actually have to appoint an employment equity commissioner in this province. I am also saddened by the fact that we have to legislate dignity in the workplace. As I look across the committee room I see that without having this type of legislation we have clearly disfranchised a pool of talent basically in favour of those who are white, male and ambulatory. That, as a human being, saddens me.
My question is with respect. The phrase you use, "tools in the workplace." What type of tools would you see being put into the workplace to ensure that employment equity is not only carried out to the letter of law? We all know that there is a letter of the law and there is a spirit of the law. How would you ensure that that spirit is carried out in its fullest intent?
The Chair: Doctor, I am going to encourage you to keep your response to two to three minutes because we are on a tight schedule here.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Okay. I think the commission can be instrumental in making available to all parties concerned in a particular workplace, that is, the management, the union and the particular designated groups, different measures that can help to ensure that the objectives will be met. These measures will depend on the particular circumstances of a workplace. I see that where you have a workplace in which you have a number of employees representative of the general population, a number of employees from the particular designated group, but these people are in fact segregated in certain employment areas, then there are different possibilities.
Some of the possibilities deal with bridging; some deal with improving mobility within the organization, lateral as well as vertical; some deal with allowing some of the employees to gain experience in positions which are created temporarily; some include additional training or apprenticeships in situations that will allow that person to be eligible for new competitions as they open. In other words, measures can be taken to improve the mobility of people within the organization, and there can also be measures that allow people within an organization to move from one sector of the organization to another.
I feel that when we want to make employment equity effective, we have to look at the gamut and we also have to be creative. There are measures that can be devised in certain sectors that we have not yet thought about but which we will encourage.
The Chair: Mr McGuinty, a question and response up to five minutes.
Mr McGuinty: Doctor, you must have had discussions with someone at some point advising you that you were to appear before this committee. What is your understanding, please, of the role of this committee with respect to your appointment?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I discussed with the clerk of this committee, who sent me the rules of the committee and some examples, and therefore I understand that this committee will examine, will question, will deliberate, will make a recommendation that will then go to the House, eventually to cabinet, and at that point cabinet will adopt an order in council. As far as I am concerned, an order in council appointing me has not yet taken place.
Mr McGuinty: Did anybody other than the clerk discuss the role of this committee with you?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Carole Phillips, who is the assistant to the Premier, also discussed the role of this committee with me.
Mr McGuinty: Has anybody commented on your chances of meeting with success here in terms of having your appointment approved by this committee?
Mr Stockwell: Yes, I did.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Thanks.
Mr McGuinty: Other than the members of this committee.
Mr Stockwell: I have been deadly accurate so far.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Many people.
Mr McGuinty: And what do you understand your chances to be of meeting with success here?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I am a very optimistic person.
Mr McGuinty: Before you came in here, for instance, undoubtedly you understood that your recommendation was made by an NDP minister and that there are six NDP members sitting on this committee versus five opposition. Did you understand that before?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I know that it was a third party that asked to meet me.
Mr McGuinty: That was not my question. Did you understand the political makeup of the committee?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I was told that there were a majority of members of the NDP party on this committee, but I understand, from reading different documents and also from the rules of the committee, that this process is to ensure that the nomination process is a transparent process, that the members of this committee and the general public are informed as to who government nominees are, what their background is, what type of qualifications they may bring in to the position. I feel that is democratic and it is a good process, even if personally it can at times be trying.
Mr McGuinty: Are you apprehensive in any way about the outcome of our deliberations?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Well, I am sensitive --
Mr Grandmaître: Do not be.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I will leave it at that.
Mr McGuinty: I will conclude by saying that those questions and the ones that I posed earlier are not directed in any way to you personally, but rather to help me and perhaps other members of this committee understand the process that we have to contend with. I want to take the opportunity to welcome you to Ontario. I want to welcome you to your position. The appointment will undoubtedly go through. I think the challenges before you are daunting, formidable, but I do not think they are insurmountable, and I am heartened by your faith in humanity. I thank you.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Thank you.
The Chair: I shortchanged the government party and there are a few minutes left. Mrs Haslam, I think, would like to have another question.
Mrs Haslam: I just want to go on the record, Mr Chair, to say that I do not see this as a discrimination against me, even though I was first on the list and you passed me over for three male people on my side.
Mr Stockwell: White, heterosexual --
Mrs Haslam: White, male. Look around this committee. And I face this situation quite often.
Going away from that and looking at time -- and I would have passed by it, but I feel it is a very important area that perhaps we have not had any comments on -- I would ask you just to comment briefly on situations in our ridings where we now have associations for community living. The people are coming out of homes and they are going into the community to live. They are looking for jobs and work in the community rather than a workshop situation. Would you comment on that and where you feel that can fit into this employment equity?
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: I think that inasmuch as persons with disabilities are specifically one of the designated groups, the employment equity strategies have to be designed to take into account the special needs of this disabled community. I know that as we do our work or in future as the commission will do its work, it will probably be overwhelmed with the amount of planning and the amount of information and the amount of communication that has to be done, but I think it is important for the commission to take a balanced approach and to make sure that each of the designated groups receives the proper attention and is a part of our planning strategy at the level of the commission itself.
With regard to people who begin living in the community, I believe one of the most important things is that they can be employed according to their abilities. For this to happen there has to be employment opportunity, and for them to be able to have access, there has to be a certain amount of outreach on the part of the institutions and the employers that they can normally address themselves to.
1200
I think this will be a challenge for communities across Ontario and in the major urban settings: that they see within their workforce to designate and to describe properly the requirements and qualifications for the different types of employment. If they do not look again at the types of qualifications for the essential functions in their different positions, then they can continue unwittingly and unintentionally to discriminate against this community group. Of course the whole community bears the burden of that exclusion because then these people do not reach their potential and obviously they remain within social service settings.
The Chair: Thanks very much, doctor. That concludes the interview, and we thank you for your appearance here today and wish you well.
Dr Westmoreland-Traoré: Thank you very much.
The Chair: Before we adjourn, members, we have a couple of matters to discuss. As you know, there was a bit of a brouhaha in the House yesterday in respect of our request for additional sitting time. One of the problems apparently is that, even though we made a request for additional sitting time, we were not specific in terms of what was an appropriate time for most of us. The suggestion arrived at by at least two of the party whips was Thursday afternoon, which is indeed going to create a number of problems for some members of this committee. We have been asked to suggest an appropriate time so the government House leader can introduce a new motion today establishing that additional sitting time. Mr Grandmaître?
Mr Grandmaître: Yes, Mr Chairman, on the same subject, I was very disappointed because I thought we had initially --
The Chair: Excuse me. I would ask those in the audience to move out into the hall if you want to have discussions, because we are still trying to carry on this morning. I would very much appreciate it. Sorry, Mr Grandmaître.
Mr Grandmaître: I think we initially understood among ourselves that we would prefer Wednesday, but now they are thinking of having us sit on Thursday afternoon, and I must advise the Chair that none of us can attend a Thursday afternoon meeting.
The Chair: Put on the record that Thursday afternoon is very difficult for me as well. Anyone who lives a distance from Toronto is trying to catch connections on Thursday afternoon or Thursday evening back to their riding. It poses a significant problem for any of us who are some distance from Toronto.
Mr Waters: I checked with someone from the whip's office on the way in and the three whips are sitting down to work this out at this point in time.
The Chair: They are looking for some direction from this committee.
Mrs Haslam: Just as a point of clarification, to tell you the truth, Thursday afternoon is not a good time for me either, but it is not a good time for another reason. Are you saying that people will be leaving on Thursday afternoon and therefore this time is not good?
The Chair: To catch flight connections, trains, those sorts of things.
Mrs Haslam: Before 6 o'clock?
The Chair: If you try to leave here to get out to the airport, even if you are leaving at 5:30 or 6 o'clock, it is a pretty difficult thing to do.
Mrs Haslam: Then how come I am on call until 6 o'clock?
The Chair: The suggestion has been made on Wednesday afternoon. I am just looking for some consent on that, if we can look at that as an alterative.
Mrs Haslam: I believe there is already another committee on Wednesday afternoon.
The Chair: Maybe we are going to have to hold back on our suggestion for extra sitting time, if we cannot reach agreement on this. Mr Wiseman?
Mr Wiseman: I think there can be consensus on when time is available for the committee. Wednesday afternoon was mentioned. How many have a bad Wednesday afternoon? How many cannot make it Wednesday afternoon?
The Chair: To expedite this, why do we not refer it to the subcommittee? Each caucus can discuss it and come up with two or three alternatives. We can have the subcommittee look at it and resolve it.
Mr Wiseman: It looks like Wednesday afternoon is best. If you have House duty and you have to be in the House, that is a problem, but --
Mr Stockwell: What are you going to do today? What are you going to ask the whips to do in the House?
Mr Wiseman: We will have to ask the whips to hold it.
Mr Stockwell: Fine. I think I would prefer it. I do not think we have anything pressing anyway.
The Chair: Do you want to refer this to the subcommittee then?
Mrs Haslam: Is that what the problem was in the first place, that the subcommittee had not met to discuss this?
The Chair: It was discussed. In essence the committee requested additional sitting time because of the number of appointments coming before us.
Mrs Haslam: Yes, I have the letter. Was it just that the date was not appropriate or what was the problem?
The Chair: Thursday afternoon is a problem for many members of this committee.
Mr Grandmaître: Absolutely.
The Chair: They simply will not be able to attend.
Mr Grandmaître: And if we cannot agree on Wednesday afternoons, Mr Chairman, then we will revert to our normal Tuesday or Wednesday meetings.
The Chair: I think that is the alternative being suggested. If we cannot agree on Wednesday afternoons, we are simply going to withdraw the request for additional sitting time.
Mr Stockwell: Who does have trouble with Wednesday afternoons? I have not heard any members tell me they have trouble with Wednesday afternoon.
Mrs Haslam: Me. I think there is another committee. I have to check my House schedule. I am sorry.
Mr Stockwell: So you have one person who has potentially got --
Mrs Haslam: But we are leaving it until the executive meet.
Mr Grandmaître: Well, I think we all have --
The Chair: Can we agree to get back to the subcommittee? Okay.
Mr Waters: I made a note of it.
Mr Owens: I am substituting --
The Chair: There was one other suggestion, was there not? A request for a change of starting time for next week.
Mr Stockwell: Yes, next week we are going to have an hour to determine whether the committee concurs with the tenant appointment review on 20 March. Can we move that from 9:00 to 9:45?
The Chair: Do we have any disagreement with that?
Mr Stockwell: I do not think we are going to have a long debate.
Mrs Haslam: I do not think we are either.
The Chair: All right.
Mr McGuinty: Mr Chairman.
The Chair: Wait, please. Mr McGuinty has another request.
Mr McGuinty: I wonder if we could just have some direction or a reminder for my sake in terms of how we are going to deal with proposing amendments to the terms of reference. Are we going to be meeting specifically to contend with that at some point?
The Chair: Yes. That is one of the matters the subcommittee should be dealing with in its next meeting as well, to set up a specific meeting so that we can discuss the report of this committee in respect of the permanent standing order.
Mr Stockwell: Can I make a motion that we refer that to the subcommittee?
The Chair: I do not think that is necessary. I think it is understood that that will be on our agenda.
Mr McGuinty: I was going to suggest that it would be helpful to have Ms Phillips appear before us once again in order to outline the procedure that is involved in advertising appointments, for instance, and generally what leads up to people appearing before us so that we can, with that information in hand, more properly address the terms of reference and any changes.
Mrs Haslam: Will that not be discussed in your subcommittee?
The Chair: I suggest that all members of the committee who have ideas or suggestions in respect to how we approach this advise their representative on the subcommittee. We will indeed discuss those at the subcommittee meeting.
Mr Grandmaître: Another point. The House was told that these nominations or appointments, the list of these nominees for jobs on agencies, boards and commissions would be published in libraries, at municipal chambers or municipal offices. I have not seen any of those lists, and a lot of my constituents are asking me, "Where can I see a list?" When do we expect a list in every library, as we were told? Municipal complexes, union halls, etc.
The Chair: We will inquire with the cabinet office and get an answer for you in respect to that. We will confirm it.
The committee adjourned at 1208.