I am honoured to rise in the House today to speak, on behalf of the great residents of Newmarket–Aurora, on the Working for Workers Four Act. This bill encompasses four main themes: (1) supporting workers in the service sector by clarifying existing provisions and adding new provisions to better protect workers; (2) striving for fairer treatment in the hiring process by ensuring increasing transparency and access to employment opportunities for all workers, including newcomers; (3) creating enhanced worker protections by strengthening employment standards and health and safety protections and supporting injured workers; and (4) encouraging labour market mobility by removing barriers to accessing good jobs/pathways in regulated professions and compulsory trades.

Our government is giving workers the help they need to find better jobs and bigger paycheques, while having their privacy protected.

That is why Ontario is proposing legislative changes that would require businesses to include salaries in job postings, giving workers more information to make decisions that benefit them. In 2022, only 30% of online job postings had salary information in Ontario. Pay transparency has become more common as workers desire open discussions about their wages while they are facing rising costs of living and ongoing pay discrepancies. If the legislation is passed and proclaimed, Ontario employers will be required to include expected salary ranges on all publicly advertised job postings. This is one step towards closing the gender pay gap, as research shows women in Ontario earned an average of 87 cents for every dollar earned by men.

Cathy Taylor, executive director of the Ontario Nonprofit Network, said, “Our research indicates that pay transparency is a key decent work practice that supports the recruitment and retention of top talent. Ontario’s non-profit sector employs 844,000 workers, 77% of whom are women, and we know that equitable compensation practices such as pay transparency can help reduce the gender wage gap and address systemic barriers that women, especially equity-deserving women, face in compensation. When salary ranges are disclosed on postings, job seekers have an easier time identifying whether the position and its compensation are the right fit while also supporting effective and streamlined recruitment processes for employers. We applaud the Ministry of Labour for taking this important step forward to embed decent work practices in legislation.”

In addition, our government is proposing to require employers to disclose if artificial intelligence—AI—is being used during the hiring process, giving workers more information to make informed decisions in their career search. With the increasing use of AI to streamline candidate selection and the historical pay differences between men, women and those from under-represented groups, we are taking action to ensure our province can tackle the labour shortage and job seekers get a fair shot at the Ontario dream.

In February of this year, 6.6% of businesses in Ontario were planning to adopt AI over the next 12 months. This number will likely increase over the coming months and years. The fact is, governments have a responsibility to keep up with evolving technologies. AI technologies can adopt harmful biases and decision-making that even their owners don’t properly understand. Algorithms generate high volumes of personal data about applicants and employees. As employment decisions affect people’s lives, job seekers should be informed when automated systems are being used to make hiring decisions.

Christin Cullen, CEO of the John Howard Society of Ontario, said, “The John Howard Society offices across Ontario specialize in assisting job seekers facing multiple barriers in finding employment. A transparent recruitment process is crucial to ensuring that applicants are well informed and have the tools they need to make decisions about their careers, which is why we welcome the Ontario government’s initiative to introduce legislation that requires employers to provide more comprehensive details in job postings, enhancing applicants’ access to information surrounding the hiring process.”

Thirdly, to help end workplace misconduct and hold abusers to account, our government is proposing to conduct consultations and detailed analysis on the use of non-disclosure agreements—NDAs—in the settlement of cases of workplace sexual harassment, misconduct or violence. The consultation would identify legislative options to restrict the use of NDAs while protecting the rights of victims and survivors. Ninety-four per cent of Canadian Bar Association members recently voted in favour of discouraging the widespread use of NDAs in settlement of cases of harassment and discrimination.

There are concerns within the legal and survivor communities about the adverse impact of using NDAs. Signing an NDA could prevent survivors from talking about their experience and protect perpetrators unjustifiably. However, prohibiting or limiting NDAs could be a disincentive to settlement, forcing more matters of this nature to litigation. Consultation with the legal community, survivors and employers would support a more complete assessment of risk and benefits.

Additionally, our government is introducing legislation that would, if passed, support injured workers by enabling super indexing increases to Workplace Safety and Insurance Board—WSIB—benefits, above the annual rate of inflation. What this means is that for an injured worker who earns $70,000 a year, a 2% increase could mean an additional $900 annually on top of the cost-of-living adjustments, which were 6.5% in 2023.

The proposed super-indexing amendment to the WSIB would, if passed, enable the government to make regulations setting out additional indexation increases and the dates on which they are to be imposed. This would require the board to apply the prescribed increases to benefit amounts—increasing the money injured workers receive. The proposal would deliver on our government’s public commitment to increase WSIB benefit payments to injured workers and survivors. This increases fairness to these recipients and helps them at a time of rising costs.

Ontario is also improving cancer coverage for firefighters and fire investigators by lowering the employment period needed to receive presumed compensation when diagnosed with esophageal cancer from 25 to 15 years. This means a firefighter with 24 years of service would no longer have to contest that their cancer was connected to their employment, giving them faster access to WSIB benefits and other critical services. Firefighters are everyday heroes, and they deserve our support. We are taking action to assist our brave firefighters and fire investigators dealing with cancer after workplace exposure to cancer-causing substances and chemicals.

On November 9, I attended the 2023 Central York Fire Services recognition ceremony in Aurora. It was an amazing event, so well attended by our local Newmarket and Aurora firefighters, their families, as well as local dignitaries, all in support of our local firefighters. I was so honoured to be there to recognize newly hired staff, federal exemplary service medals and bars, as well as the provincial long service medals and bars. These individuals choose a higher-risk profession. They are a unique brand of people who voluntarily place themselves in harm’s way in service for others.

As Edward Croker, the fire chief of the New York City Fire Department at the end of the 19th century, recognized, “When a person becomes a firefighter their greatest act of bravery is accomplished. What they do after is all in the line of duty.”

I also recognize the families for their unwavering support. It may not seem like a lot, but without their support, the firefighters could not make the difference that they have made and continue to make for the benefit of our community members.

After the ceremony, I had a conversation with Jason Beuving, president of the Central York Professional Firefighters Association, who was pleased with the minister’s announcement the day before regarding the improvements being proposed: “We’re very thankful to this government for recognizing that our current legislation needs to be amended. Reducing the latency period from 25 years to 15 years means the fallen firefighter’s death is recognized as a line of duty death and ensures that they, and their families, will have security moving forward should they succumb to esophageal cancer.”

I would also like to highlight the feedback I received from Ian Laing, fire chief of Central York Fire Services: “Firefighters are dedicated to serving their communities, and unfortunately, despite continually evolving safety measures, this job puts them at risk for various types of cancers. Continued support and enhanced policies that further protect the firefighters that put their life on the line to protect us all is very important. I am proud that Central York Fire Services recently introduced a wellness program that promotes early detection of medical issues. The program offers all firefighters an extensive annual medical exam based on the unique risks and adverse working environments that firefighters face daily.”

Furthermore, to help workers dealing with a critical illness, the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development will be launching consultations on a new job-protected leave to match the length of federal employment insurance sickness benefits, which is 26 weeks. Currently, under the Employment Standards Act, employees are entitled to three days of unpaid sick leave per year for personal illness, injury or medical emergency.

Also, the ESA currently provides unpaid job-protected critical illness leave for employees to care for specified family members with a critical illness. However, it does not apply to employees with a personal critical illness. A job-protected leave could ensure workers who receive a diagnosis of cancer or other diseases peace of mind, while they seek treatment, that their job will be there for them when they return.

If approved, these changes would expand on the groundbreaking actions the government has taken under the Working for Workers Acts, 2021, 2022 and 2023, that are already helping millions of people by introducing more leading-edge, pro-worker supports to help workers earn more, increase protections, and support newcomers.

Speaker, Ontario is facing a historic labour shortage, with nearly 250,000 jobs unfilled, which is costing billions in lost output. At the same time, only a quarter of internationally trained immigrants in Ontario work in the regulated professions they are trained for. To build a stronger province that works for everyone, we need newcomers with experience in health care, skilled trades and other critical sectors to be able to contribute when they arrive in Ontario. Our government could be earning $12 billion to $20 billion of GDP growth in each year by 2025 by closing unemployment and increasing participation rate gaps for recent immigrants in Ontario’s labour market. That is why our government is leading the country with proposed changes to help internationally trained immigrants work in the fields they’ve studied in, to build stronger communities for all of us.

After introducing historic legislation that banned regulated professions from requiring Canadian work experience in more than 30 occupations, we are introducing new legislation to prohibit Canadian work experience requirements in job ads or application forms. If you have work experience, regardless of which country you obtained it from, you should have a fair shot at being considered in a job interview. We want employers to hire the best candidates, and too many are unfortunately screening some of these options out before they’ve had a fair chance to be considered. Our government intends to introduce legislation that would, if passed, amend the ESA to prohibit employers from including a requirement for prior Canadian work experience in job ads or application forms. The proposed change, if passed, would ensure that prospective employees with the knowledge, skills and abilities to perform a job are not screened out during the initial stage of hiring.

In addition, these changes would, if passed, make it easier for international students learning in our province to qualify for the Ontario Immigrant Nominee Program, and improve oversight and accountability of how regulated professions like engineers, architects and geologists use third-party companies to assess international credentials, to ensure it’s done quickly and fairly.

Together, these changes will help thousands of otherwise qualified professionals pursue their dreams over the coming years, all while maintaining Ontario’s world-class licensing and exam requirements.

Also, our government is proposing several changes that would help the over 400,000 people in the restaurant and hospitality industry by updating the province’s Employment Standards Act, including by banning unpaid trial shifts and making clear employers can never deduct an employee’s wages in the event of a dine and dash, gas and dash or any other stolen property. No worker should have their pay deducted or see themselves put in harm’s way because someone else is breaking the law.

Dine and dash is more common than we might think it to be. Studies have found that one in 20 customers have dined at a restaurant and left without paying. Recent media coverage has shown that many restaurant owners in Ontario are unaware that they are not allowed to deduct employees’ wages for unpaid meals. While Ontario’s laws generally require employees to be paid for all hours worked and prohibit pay deductions, unpaid trial shifts and punitive deductions are still common in the restaurant and service industries.

While employees are generally prohibited from deducting wages, too many workers are unaware of their rights. This change would amend the Employment Standards Act, 2000, to send a clear message that deductions from wages for property stolen by customers, like in dining and dashing, are prohibited.

Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development, along with his two parliamentary assistants, for their remarks last week on this great bill that reiterates our government’s commitment to working for workers.

I want to thank my colleague from Newmarket–Aurora for her very significant speech on this. She covered all of those important changes. This bill builds upon Working for Workers 1, 2 and 3, and now we have Working for Workers Four. It’s no surprise, I say to my colleague, that labour all across this province is migrating to us, as the party that understands and represents and wants to deal with their needs. It’s a tremendous victory for workers in Ontario that they’re now joining with us. Unfortunately, the opposition continues to crow about something that didn’t happen five years ago.

But I do want to ask on the issue of our brave firefighters and the presumptive illness section on esophageal cancer, and the changes and how that is going to affect our brave first responders here in the province of Ontario.

It’s my pleasure to rise and speak to Bill 149, which is the government’s fourth kick at the can at bringing forward legislation when it comes to workers in the province of Ontario. What’s interesting is, there are some things in this bill that the NDP were talking about before the government drafted the first bill. One can only draw the conclusion that had the government actually consulted labour, consulted the workers and the unions in this province before even the first bill, we wouldn’t be to the point where there’s now a fourth bill—we wouldn’t have needed a second bill; we wouldn’t have needed a third. If they had just actually consulted with labour—we heard from workers and unions around this province that this government didn’t do that. They didn’t actually talk to the workers in this province to find out what was needed.

Speaker, I’m going to start by briefly talking about anti-scab labour legislation, which is glaringly missing from this fourth bill. It’s something that we, as New Democrats, passed during an NDP government and that the next Conservative government immediately ripped up. We have had 16 attempts now, through successive Liberal and Conservative governments, to bring back anti-scab legislation, and every single one of those times the Conservatives voted against it. They’ll have another opportunity tomorrow to support our bill, when it’s debated, and I would hope they would do that, because that would be working for workers.

The member for Glengarry–Prescott–Russell and the member for Newmarket–Aurora talked a lot about firefighters and presumptive legislation, the important work the firefighters do, the life-saving work firefighters do, and I don’t think anybody in this House is going to argue with those facts. Nobody is going to argue with those facts. But what I don’t hear the government talking about and what is not in this bill is women workers who are in abusive partnerships, intimate partner violence and the lack of supports for women and their children to be able to leave that abusive situation and to have financial stability, to have the mental health supports that they need in a connected and timely manner, to have access to a shelter bed while they wait for transitional or permanent housing.

They were talking about closing the gender pay gap, but the workers that work within the women’s shelters—those shelters are so underfunded, so incredibly underfunded, and they need very specialized, highly trained people to work with the women and children that come through their doors seeking help. The barriers and the issues that women who are fleeing intimate partner violence or children—their needs are incredibly complex, and the workers that are supposed to be there to support them need very highly specialized training. But these shelters don’t receive enough funding from the government, and so they can’t pay these workers the wage that they deserve. In my community, they don’t even make a living wage.

It is a revolving door of workers because the work is intense and it’s difficult physically, mentally, emotionally. So it’s a revolving door of workers. They have trouble recruiting and retaining workers because you can’t even live off of $17 an hour. You can’t. You certainly can’t buy a home, and good luck finding a place that you can rent because this government cut rent control. You can’t pay for a place to live and feed yourself and your family, so many of these workers end up at a food bank. Imagine that: These are people who dedicate their lives because they love what they do, supporting these women and children, and this government doesn’t think they’re worth even a living wage—not even a living wage.

We have a repair backlog in our not-for-profit affordable social housing in Windsor. Five per cent of social housing in Windsor is uninhabitable because this government won’t fund it—5%. Those are housing units that women and children fleeing domestic violence would be placed in—a home of their own. Can’t use those units. In a housing crisis, this government will not fund the repairs of those units. Last year alone, 31 of the non-profits that run these non-profit affordable social housing units needed more than $26 million just to do repairs for that year. This government gave them less than one sixth of that.

So when we’re talking about working for workers and they want to stand over there—and the member from Newmarket–Aurora talked about non-disclosure agreements for workplace harassment—what are you doing in this bill or anywhere else to actually support women to get out of abusive situations? Speaker, this year, in the last 12 months alone, we have had two women murdered by their spouses, one just within the last two weeks, because there was nowhere for them to go.

These shelters are over capacity. They have done everything that they possibly can. They’re putting women and children in hotel rooms—which they are not funded for, by the way—and are expected to then go and provide food and give them access to these workers that will help try and connect them to the other supports and services they need: the mental health supports that they need, the housing and the food supports that they need. The children, if they have learning disabilities or developmental disabilities—they’re expected to go in there and help with that, but the province doesn’t fund it.

What the province is doing, what this Conservative government is doing, is downloading more and more expectations and responsibilities onto these shelters. There’s no really relevant protected, paid leave for women workers to acknowledge that when they are in an abusive situation or when they are fleeing domestic violence—either on their own or, if they have children, taking their children with them—there’s nothing in this bill or the previous three that addresses the financial precarity those women are in. There’s nothing. And if they need time off work, there are no permanent paid sick days for them to be able to stay home and take care of their children, and deal with the complex issues that those children will be dealing with fleeing domestic violence. There is nothing to ensure that the people who need it the most, the most vulnerable, will actually get the supports and services they need. There’s nothing.

We often talk—the government side does too—about, “You have to recognize intimate partner violence. You need to seek help. We’ve got these different organizations that will help you.” But they don’t fund it. They don’t fund it adequately. And when you’re not paying the highly specialized workers that work at these domestic abuse shelters, when you’re not paying them a living wage, how do you expect them to be able to support the women who are fleeing domestic violence? How do you expect them to do that?

So while I had said earlier—the members opposite were talking about firefighters and the incredibly difficult, physically, mentally, emotionally demanding jobs that they do, and how they save lives. Recognize that the women that work within the sector that support women and children fleeing domestic violence—recognize that their work is physically, emotionally and mentally demanding, and the work they do also saves lives.

Speaker, it’s getting really—it’s so incredibly frustrating that we hear the government constantly talking about supporting workers, supporting women. The reality is that it is 2023—nearly 2024—and women are still having debates about their value: their value to society, their value in the workforce. What is it going to take for this government to actually take it seriously, to actually do something, to actually give a damn?

Because in the meantime, they are continuing, perpetuating, a cycle of women living in poverty, women staying in abusive situations because they feel they have no other option, because they can’t take time off of work to deal with the complexities of the situation that they’re trying to flee. They can’t stay home and support their children. They can’t get access to affordable housing, so if they leave their partner, they could be living on the street.

So I’m going to ask: At what point do the lives of women actually matter to the government? When do they actually matter? There have been 55 femicides in the last two years; 55 women have died as a result of intimate partner violence, because they didn’t have the resources, thanks to the government, to be able to flee the situation—