Canadian HR Reporter

CANADIAN HR REPORTER February 20, 2017 6 NEWS ORDER YOUR COPY TODAY! Visit carswell.com or call 1.800.387.5164 for a 30-day no-risk evaluation THE MOST COMPLETE DIRECTORY OF ONTARIO LAWYERS, LAW FIRMS, JUDGES AND COURTS Ontario Lawyer's Phone Book is your best connection to legal services in Ontario with more than 1,400 pages of essential legal references. You can depend on the accuracy of this trusted directory that includes the most up-to-date names, phone numbers, mailing addresses and emails so you don't have to search anywhere else. More detail and a wider scope of legal contact information for Ontario: • Over 26,800 lawyers listed • Over 8,500 law firms and corporate offices listed • Fax and telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, office locations and postal codes Includes lists of: • Federal and provincial judges • Federal courts, including a section for federal government departments, boards and commissions • Ontario courts and services, including a section for provincial government ministries, boards and commissions • Small claims courts • The Institute of Law Clerks of Ontario • Miscellaneous services for lawyers NEW EDITION Perfectbound Published December each year On subscription $82.50 One time purchase $86 L7796-5932 Multiple copy discounts available Plus applicable taxes and shipping & handling. (prices subject to change without notice) ONTARIO LAWYER'S PHONE BOOK 2017 Basic income pilot recommended Changing labour market could be part of reason for proposal in Ontario BY JOHN DUJAY THE CONCEPT of providing citizens with a guaranteed basic income has been fl oated for de- cades in Canada. And it could emerge once again if Ontario goes ahead with a pilot project this year, having held consultations in the fall. e province may follow the lead of a discussion paper by Hugh Segal, master of Massey College at the University of Toronto, who suggested the province conduct pilot programs in three commu- nities (and one neighbourhood in a large centre) whereby a monthly payment of $1,320 (plus an extra $500 for disabled persons) would be given to all residents (aged 18 to 65) who are living below a de- fi ned income level. Currently in Ontario, basic social assistance or welfare pro- grams are administered under the Ontario Works program and the recipients must be available to work. But Segal's proposal elimi- nates that stipulation. Defi nitions In Canada, basic income has been referred to as a "negative income tax" or refundable tax credit because it could be ad- ministered in conjunction with the Canadian Revenue Agency. As a person's income increases, benefi ts decrease, similar to what currently happens with the Can- ada child tax benefi t, said Evelyn Forget, economist and professor at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg. "In Ontario, I think they are re- ally seeing this basic income as a substitute for income assistance for basic welfare." It's a cash transfer to individu- als or families "that insures a minimum level of income with- out any conditions attached to it, like requiring recipients to work or look for work," said Charles Lammam, director of fi scal stud- ies at the Vancouver-based Fraser Institute. It's an income that ensures ev- eryone is able to meet basic needs and live with dignity, regardless of work status, said Sheila Regehr, Toronto-based chairperson of the Basic Income Canada Network, a non-profi t group. "(It's an) uncon- ditional cash transfer." But guaranteed annual income already exists in Canada, she said, citing the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) for senior citi- zens. "We have been doing this for a generation and it's working well." Pros and cons e Ontario project could work, but only if it eliminates some of the bureaucracy in administering social assistance programs, said Lammam. "In theory, having a single pro- gram that is much more effi cient (and) more simple could be ben- efi cial. For the GAI (guaranteed annual income) to be successful, a lot has to happen," he said, such as getting all governments to agree on a national plan. But a basic income plan would do better as a replacement to the social assistance system and not as an add-on, said Lammam. "To realize that benefi t of sim- plicity and effi ciency, we need to be able to have that consolidation across governments which, we ar- gue... is unlikely for a whole host of reasons," he said. " ere's some theoretical appeal to a guaran- teed annual income, and certainly there's some potential to admin- istrative savings but, in practice, there's a big gap going from the ideal to the reality." Some groups fear the supple- ment might impose a negative outcome on the labour market. Research conducted in the 1960s and 1970s found disincen- tives did aff ect labour market par- ticipation, said Lammam. "By paying people not to work, that creates disincentives. I worry about how the GAI is being posi- tioned as a be-all to fi x poverty," he said. "Poverty is not always simply a lack of income. ere are issues related to mental health and ad- diction that cannot be solved with a guaranteed annual income." But Regehr does not accept the idea of work disincentives. "One of the moral conun- drums lots of people deal with (is) the idea that people on low income just don't want to work or they are lazy. It's just not borne out by fact." A more acute problem for low- income Canadians are barriers to a productive life caused by pov- erty, she said, such as poor health. While guaranteed income for all might cost more money to tax- payers in upfront costs, there are savings to be had, said Forget. "You are not treating bad genes or bad luck, you're treating the consequences of years and years of inadequate diets, inadequate housing. We are paying those costs one way or another." Changing labour market A changing labour market might be another reason for government to guarantee basic income. "We have this new economy where more and more people are being affected by job loss due to automation, the eff ects of globalization, with jobs moving off shore," said Regehr. " ere are many reasons people put forward in support of a basic income and this is a key one." "It's impossible to blame indi- viduals for their situation when all of this is happening in the larger economy," she said. "Even if down the road we fi nd jobs for every- body suffi cient to give you a half- decent income, in the meantime, people really suff er." e current makeup of the la- bour force is geared toward the 40-hours-per-week model, said Forget. "If you think about the dif- ferences in the labour market between the 1970s and today, I think it's pretty clear that the kind of income assistance programs we have are set up for a world where people work 40 hours a week — for a particular fi rm — and you could distinguish between full- time and part-time workers." Today, it is harder for young Canadians to fi nd full-time work, she said. "All of that seems to be disappearing." With a guaranteed income, some workers and employers might feel they have more elas- ticity in deciding what work they would be willing to do. "Without question, it makes it easier for employers to adopt a more fl exible view of hiring la- bour," said Forget. For example, it would be easier to hire a person to work a three- month contract if he doesn't have worry about where the next pay- cheque is coming from. But low-wage employers might face pressure to improve off erings to workers, said Forget. "There might be some people who say, 'I'm really not prepared to do that kind of a job for that kind of a wage.'" However, increased auto- mation will not make workers' jobs disappear right away, said Lammam. " e solution to major changes is about creating an economic framework that ensures increased growth and increased job cre- ation," he said. "Transition pro- grams that encourage people to fi nd alternative work, I think, are more fruitful." Whether automation or global- ization removes jobs, something has to be done, said Forget. "We need some way of transi- tioning from the kind of economy we're in now to whatever is devel- oping out there." Previous attempts Basic income is an idea that has been proposed by various levels of governments over the years: A 1971 Senate committee fl oated the idea and the Macdonald Royal Commission proposed a scheme in 1986. The federal Liberal party also endorsed basic income during its 2014 convention. And from 1974 to 1979, there was a basic income project known as the Manitoba basic annual income experiment (MINCOME). About 1,000 families in Dauphin and Winnipeg — who qualifi ed via their income levels — received monthly cheques. In Winnipeg, the project employed a "randomized sample" in which a small portion of the population received cheques, while in Dauphin, all of qualifi ed residents received payments, making it a "saturation site," said Evelyn Forget, economist and professor at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg. Funding for the $17-million program was shared by the Manitoba government and the federal government. However, MINCOME was cancelled and a full-scale study of its impact was not completed. "By the time the project had ended, nobody was very much interested in the outcomes anymore, so really all the data was sort of shelved and nobody did very much with it," said Forget. "That pretty much was it; it disappeared at that point, it wasn't part of the conversation anymore."

• Cover