Thank you, Speaker. I’ll be dividing my time with my parliamentary assistants, the member for Mississauga–Malton and the member for Scarborough Centre.

Before we speak about the proposals included in this bill that will make the lives of so many Ontario workers better, I want to thank those workers for their advice—the stakeholders, the associations, the unions, the employers, the first responders, and so many more.

Speaker, this bill that we have before us today straddles two members of this Legislature, and I’d like to acknowledge and thank my predecessor, the former minister Monte McNaughton, for the work that he, his team and the incredible team we currently have at labour, immigration, training and skills development—the entire ministry—did, and especially, my gratitude to Premier Ford for his leadership and unwavering support of Bill 149 and our ongoing efforts to support the lives of workers across Ontario. Under his leadership, we will always, of course, work for workers and have their backs.

I stand here today to discuss this piece of legislation that is crucial for the welfare and prosperity of our province: Bill 149, the Working for Workers Four Act, 2024. We’re taking decisive action to promote opportunities and good jobs for workers, address labour shortages and fuel economic growth across the province of Ontario. This bill, the proposed Working for Workers Four Act, builds on the successes of its predecessors, acts passed in 2021, 2022 and 2023. Together, they form a comprehensive strategy to strengthen workers’ rights and to support economic competitiveness and foster a fair and thriving job market. It’s part of our commitment to create a stronger Ontario that reflects the values of fairness, opportunity and prosperity for all.

Under the leadership of the Premier, we’ve made significant strides in reducing the critical labour shortage that has loomed over our economy. We often hear about jobs without people, people without jobs. From a peak of 377,000 job vacancies in April 2022, we’ve made significant progress in filling job openings, with more than 100,000 more people securing good jobs today.

But we’re not sitting on our laurels. There are still 250,000 estimated jobs going unfilled across the province of Ontario.

The Working for Workers Four Act is designed to address the evolving landscape of work and more while addressing the impact of emerging technologies such as apps and artificial intelligence. This legislation focuses on four key areas:

—clarifying rules and safeguarding employees’ income in the hospitality sector;

—boosting fairness in hiring and employment procedures;

—strengthening protections for workers and first responders; and

—removing barriers for newcomers and foreign-trained individuals during the licensing process.

These changes are rooted in one fundamental principle, putting workers first, because an economy that doesn’t work for workers does not work at all. Our proposed measures are practical, common-sense changes that are designed to help people succeed, ensuring Ontario is a place of opportunity, of good jobs, where one can thrive and grow.

Before I elaborate on this bill, Speaker, I want to take a moment to reflect on the journey that’s brought us here, the journey of working for workers that has brought us to today.

Our first Working for Workers Act introduced measures to ensure our labour laws kept pace with new technology, automation and changes in how and where we work. It addressed changes in our economy and society that have been under way for some time but whose pace of change dramatically accelerated. With changes happening faster and faster, we had to ensure protections for workers kept up. Notably, it streamlined processes to make it easier for internationally trained workers to practise their regulated professions in Ontario.

For too long, we’ve heard the story that your cab driver is a doctor or that someone delivering your food is an engineer. We understand that we have to do more to address foreign credential recognition, and this government is taking action. And it’s already working, Speaker. We’ve had a record number of nurses enter the profession this past year, doctors—and so much more.

The bills of the past recognized the importance of personal and family time, and the Employment Standards Act now requires larger employers to have a written policy on disconnecting from work. That legislation passed by this House also gave delivery workers the basic human dignity of accessing restrooms at businesses that they’re serving.

Working for Workers Act, 2022, introduced the measures to protect the privacy of employees by mandating disclosure of electronic monitoring. It enhanced worker safety by increasing fines for workplace safety violations to among the highest in Canada.

To protect workers and make sure workplaces are prepared to respond quickly to cases of an opioid overdose, at-risk workplaces must now have life-saving naloxone kits on site and workers trained for their use. I’m pleased to say, today, tens of thousands more Ontarians are now trained to administer those naloxone kits. It’s an important step in saving the lives of Ontario residents.

Last year, the Working for Workers Act, 2023, increased the maximum fine for corporations convicted of Occupational Health and Safety Act violations. This is now the highest in Canada. We’ll always put worker safety first. This sent a clear signal. Previous governments could have raised these fines to send a clear message to those violating that it’s not okay. They didn’t. We did. That act also established the highest maximum fines in Canada for employers and recruiters convicted of retaining a foreign national’s passport or work permit.

Speaker, I’m from rural Ontario, and I’ve met a number of farmers. I think of fond trips out to Wilmot Orchards, where temporary workers—I see you nodding; I know you know this well in your own community, where foreign nationals are vital to putting food on the table. Farmers quite literally feed cities, and those foreign nationals do such an incredible job. But we know from stories in the GTHA and beyond that there are instances of unscrupulous recruiters seizing foreign nationals’ passports. That’s never okay, Speaker. We’re the first province in Canada to take meaningful action to crack down on that.

The Employment Standards Act was amended to ensure employees who work solely remotely are counted for mass termination provisions. This means that those employees would receive the same notice and protections as their in-office counterparts.

Additionally, as a part of Working for Workers 3, regulatory changes stepped up protections for construction workers, who help build our province. We did simple things, like requiring well-lit and properly enclosed washrooms on all construction sites, woman-specific washrooms on larger sites and properly fitting personal protective equipment that properly fits one’s body so that they can be protected on the job site. This makes construction work safer and enables more women to get into the skilled trades.

I look beside me here and I see Minister Williams, who’s been a champion for these very women. We just had a skilled trades round table to hear anecdotal stories of how this has protected women on the job site. We know we have more to do to address the culture to ensure that all job sites are places where women can thrive and achieve their full potential in the skilled trades. But facts do matter, and the facts are that 30% is the increase in women registration in apprenticeships. This is the largest in Ontario’s history. And I’m proud to say, Speaker, a 116% increase in women in the building trades. So what we are doing is working.

Now, I’d like to speak first to the bill before us today to an area that’s really close to my heart and very important for me. I’d like to speak about the everyday heroes who work in fire departments across our province. At any given time, firefighters may receive a call to rush to an emergency. It could be a house consumed by flames. It could be any number of emergencies, and they’re there for us, these firefighters. Firefighters perform brave tasks that most would shy away from: entering smoke-filled buildings to rescue individuals, using the jaws of life, which I’ve had the opportunity to see first-hand, to free motorists from mangled wrecks. Speaker, they run into fires as we run from them. When they aren’t responding to emergencies, they’re actively engaging to prevent fires in their communities, educating the public on fire safety and doing so much more—conducting inspections.

I value, and I know I speak on behalf of all members of this place—we value their work they do. Their work affects each and every one of us in Ontario. With courage and valour, they step into uncertainty, into emergencies that are both unpredictable and perilous. Without hesitation, they put their lives on the line to rescue others. We owe them an immense debt of gratitude, and in moments of our greatest need, they are there for us.

Today, Speaker, I’d really like to pause and have this entire Legislature acknowledge the presence of the Bowman family: Alisen Bowman, who is here today; her daughter, Alexis Bowman; Colin Bowman; Adam Whalen; Joe Bowman; Johnny Bowman; Matt Braun; and I believe Greg Horton is here. If you could just stand up for the Legislature—Megan and Donald as well, please.

Applause.

Good morning. Let us pray.

Prières / Prayers.

Mr. Piccini moved third reading of the following bill:

Bill 149, An Act to amend various statutes with respect to employment and labour and other matters / Projet de loi 149, Loi modifiant diverses lois en ce qui concerne l’emploi, le travail et d’autres questions.

Speaker, this is the face of Ontarians, why we serve in this place. The Bowman family—I didn’t know when I became labour minister, but I recall walking home one night and having a conversation with Alisen Bowman, and I’d like to thank that family for being here today. She told me the story of her husband. Captain Craig, affectionately known as Opie Bowman, who served at the Welland fire department with courage, skill and professionalism. He was a true hero who went into harm’s way to save others. He was a husband, he was a father, he was a brother and a brother to the men and women who served the Welland fire department. He tragically passed away after a battle with cancer at the far-too-young age of 47.

Speaker, cancer is the scourge that has affected many in this place I’m sure, but why did Craig get cancer? We know that firefighters are at far greater risk of occupational exposures. In fact, in fighting one fire they could be exposed to chemicals that we wouldn’t be exposed to in a lifetime.

To help firefighters and their families like the Bowmans, we’ve expanded cancer coverage for firefighters, assuming any thyroid or pancreatic cancer is related to their jobs. That means they get faster access to benefits and supports, and we made our changes retroactive to January 1, 1960, in this legislation. We’ll always work to support firefighters, Speaker.

When I spoke to Alisen and her daughter, who’s been a remarkable advocate for the well-being of firefighters now across Ontario—I remember I went down with Megan, who is standing up there, who has worked very hard for this Ministry of Labour for a number of years. We went down to the Welland fire department, and I had an opportunity to meet and speak with the family whom I had spoken with on the phone. I think when we all kiss our loved ones goodbye in the morning, we expect that they’ll return home healthy at the end of the day. As I said, we know firefighters are exposed to greater perils on the job than many of us and, I would say, than any of us here in this place.

Speaker, what was cruel and what was wrong about Craig’s case was that the esophageal cancer that he passed away from—you had a requirement previously to serve for a minimum of 25 years before that would be a presumptive exposure and therefore be guaranteed WSIB benefits. He served 24-plus years, just shy. He was so close to that mark.

In the spirit of non-partisanship, I know from conversations I’ve had with MPP Burch and others—Sandy Shaw, who’s across the way. We’ve had conversations about this. I think we all recognize that we can and must do more. I’m really glad to say, in that spirit, that we all stand behind the Bowman family in making these changes.

We will never get that hero back. We won’t get Craig back, sadly, tragically. But what he leaves behind is a legacy. He leaves behind a legacy that will affect firefighters and their families across Ontario forevermore. I don’t think there can be any greater purpose in life than leaving behind a legacy that will touch the lives of all firefighters in this great province.

This bill, if passed, would make changes that would be retroactive to 1960. The Workplace Safety and Insurance Board would be required to re-adjudicate those denied claims in accordance with the proposed changes and to consider new claims that meet the shortened employment duration that I mentioned. The employment service time before diagnosis would now be reduced to 15 years, down from the current requirement of 25 years of service. As I said, that will be retroactive to January 1, 1960.

We owe it to our province’s firefighters and their families to make this right, and that’s exactly what our government intends to do. This legislation builds on past measures.

But I have to, again, thank the Bowman family. Thank you for your advocacy. Thank you for keeping Craig alive in this place, in this province. His spirit lives on, and his advocacy and the advocacy of this family are ensuring that firefighters and their families will be protected across Ontario. Thank you.

Speaker, we’re incredibly grateful, and I look forward to a prolonged relationship with the Ontario Professional Fire Fighters Association: Greg, Bob, Gavin—I don’t know if Gavin is here as well—and the team. They have been incredible to work with and such strong advocates for firefighters. I’m very grateful for the relationship that all members of this place have with the OPFFA. My door will always remain open for those firefighters who serve on the front lines, who keep our communities safe. We’re grateful for them.

Speaker, this bill also takes measures to protect service employees. Today, we’re building on our government’s Working for Workers momentum and continuing to put workers first. Service employees are essential to many businesses, and the work they do makes all of our lives better and easier. Recent data show that Ontario’s restaurant and service industry is made up of more than 400,000 employees, more than 6% of the province’s workforce.

But often, these same people, the ones who do so much to make sure we have a good time with family and friends—we’re on the heels of Family Day weekend, and I’m sure many in this place enjoyed time with family and friends at one of many restaurants across Ontario. We know that when they’re out, those men and women who work in the service sector are falling behind, and it’s through no fault of their own. Dining and dashing can be a big cost to businesses. Gas-and-dash thefts cost Ontario businesses over $3 million in 2022 alone. I know my colleague from Mississauga–Malton has been a champion on this issue. He has been an advocate on Ontario drawing attention to this theft, and we’re taking action.

While Ontario’s Employment Standards Act generally requires employees to be paid at least minimum wage for all hours worked and prohibits pay deductions for stolen property, the fact is unpaid trial shifts and punitive deductions for stolen property are still all too common in the restaurant and service industries. The fear of wages being withheld has led to tragic consequences while trying to stop someone from running out on their meal or not paying at the pump.

No employee should have to forfeit part of their paycheque when a bad customer dines and dashes. We’re making it explicit in the Employment Standards Act that no employee should be asked to work for free in an unpaid trial shift. These situations are unacceptable, and they must not continue. That’s why we’re proposing changes to the Employment Standards Act to better protect restaurant employees and other employees in the service industry, to clarify that employees must be paid for work performed during trial shifts, and make clear that employers can never deduct an employee’s wages in the event of a dine-and-dash, gas-and-dash, haircut-and-dash, or in any other situation where a customer leaves without paying for goods or services.

Speaker, these employees do much to ensure we are looked after when we go out for an evening on the town or when we get gas. We need to ensure they are paid for their work. It’s the right thing to do. This legislation would, if passed, provide that work performed during trial periods must be paid. I spoke to some workers in the restaurant sector, just the other day, about this, Speaker, and I know clarity from this place, clarity from this government is welcome in that sector. When someone steals from a store or runs from a restaurant or gas pump, that’s a matter for the police.

But we’re not stopping there. Speaker, many service industries operate at a fast pace. Employees can be required to work long hours and endure gruelling physical demands, like being on their feet all day. On top of this, they obviously deal with the occasional difficult customer, but no matter what, these employees must smile and put on a positive attitude because tips can significantly impact the success of their shift. The last thing they need to do is to deal with the added stress of worrying about unjust treatment affecting their tips.

If passed, this legislation does some important things. It will require employers to post in the workplace a copy of any existing policy related to an employer, a director or shareholder of an employer sharing in pooled tips. Many good employers already do this, but we’re ensuring that this happens across Ontario. These people can only share in a tip pool if they regularly perform, to a substantial degree, the same work as their staff. Again, in many small businesses, owners do do this, and this is a practice that they gladly post and share to their employees. This would help everyone know how tips are divided. As well, this legislation would, if passed, require employers to post the policy in a prominent spot in the workplace, in a place where every worker can see it. Everyone from the newest hire to the seasoned pro would see exactly how things work, empowering them with this information.

But that’s not all, Speaker. Tips and gratuities would need to be paid using cash, cheque or direct deposit. We know artificial intelligence is affecting the workplace. Speaker, I’ve met a number of service workers who have told me that apps, things on your phone now, are being used to pay out tips. Those apps deduct and charge a fee for every time you deduct your tips. Speaker, that’s not fair. We’re proposing common-sense changes in response to the rise of digital payment platforms on phones and in the service industry, which include fees for those employees to access their tips—again, it’s unjust—as well as potential technical and security issues.

Workers in the service industry should not have to pay to access their own hard-earned money for going above and beyond in the service of their work. The proposed changes would require employers who pay tips through direct deposit to allow their employees to select which account they want them to be deposited into. This would help employees avoid fees that they did not agree to. This would also help employees manage their money by choosing the account that works best for them.

Speaker, it’s all about fairness, clarity and giving employees control over how they receive their well-deserved tips if their employer pays them by direct deposit. We want employees to be able to focus on their work, not on possible unfair treatment involving their tips and wages.

Far too often, those who put in an honest shift, those who save every day to build a better life for their family, who deliver services to make our lives better and help drive our economy, are struggling to get ahead. We see them. We hear them. That’s why we’re also proposing changes to put them in the driver’s seat. How many times have we spoken to someone—in the first few months of being labour minister, speaking to people who are working hard? I spoke with a single mother, a newcomer, the other day, working very hard to provide for her family, her two beautiful children. That better job, that elusive bigger paycheque, requires you to apply to another job. You go through those hurdles. It’s sometimes like an Olympic marathon race just to get to that finish line—the job offer—just to find out that the salary and compensation is nowhere near what you had thought.

That awkward conversation about salaries and wages—if you do it and ask those questions too soon, you may be viewed in ill light by your employer; if you wait too late, you might not know and you go through all that process. But we’re saying, Speaker, especially for those working jobs in the middle class, that we recognize those challenges. We’re recognizing that employees are facing other challenges as the workplace evolves, so we need all hands on deck to solve these challenges.

So we’re proposing legislation here, Speaker, that would require employers to disclose salary ranges of these jobs, putting these workers in the driver’s seat so that they can know before they apply if the salary range of that job they’re applying for is the job that they’re looking for and is in the compensation range that they want and that they feel they deserve.

Despite 250,000 jobs in Ontario going unfilled recently, job seekers face that discouraging cycle, as I mentioned, applying for that job just to find out at the end that that job is less than you earn today. And, Speaker, as an added by-product of this, we know from feedback and round tables that I’ve had as minister that this also is an important step in tackling the gender pay gap. It’s not a silver bullet, Speaker, and I’ll say that right now, but it is an important step.

Providing transparency for job seekers helps enable them to make better decisions about their future and about job moves. To put it simply, giving out this information about jobs right at the beginning is a win-win for everyone involved.

In addition, Speaker, I would like to talk a bit about non-disclosure agreements—another initiative we’re bringing forward. Sometimes, workers, through no fault of their own, are sexually harassed or subjected to mistreatment or violence in the workplace. Unfortunately, seven in 10 report experiencing some form of harassment or violence in the workplace. To help end workplace misconduct and hold abusers to account, we’re proposing to consult on ending the use of non-disclosure agreements in the settlement of cases of workplace sexual harassment or violence.

I had a woman come into my office who works a job in the city, Speaker, and she said, “You know, when you said that the day for these creeps is over, I wanted to share my story.” So if this consultation does but one thing in enabling them to share their story, it’s a win.

But we’re also recognizing that NDAs are far too often used to silence victims. We know from consultation with the legal community that they support these consultations. We understand and want to empower victims. In the cases where NDAs will support and put the victim first, we, of course, don’t want to remove that ability. But by launching consultations on this and making it clear that corporate executives and senior employers in companies will not be protected—their day is numbered if it comes to harassment, in particular sexual harassment in the workplace—we’re going to empower victims by ensuring they are never muzzled or silenced by a non-disclosure agreement.

Speaker, we recognize, as I mentioned, that we’ll continue to engage the legal community, employers, and above all, survivors, like that remarkable woman who stepped forward and came into my office. We’ll work with them over the coming months and ensure that what we bring forward has the support of all those communities. We’ll continue to listen to survivors, legal experts throughout this consultation process and hold bad actors who want to evade accountability to account.

Speaker, this bill does so many things, and I see from the clock that I’m running out of time, so I just want to pause and say that Ontario is changing. We’re not immune to the broader economic headwinds, but this is a government that has launched the largest Skills Development Fund. This is a government that recognizes that measuring employment services, measuring social assistance supports solely by the metric of the size of a cheque cut to an individual or the number of people being serviced is not a metric to measure success. It’s a metric that was used by previous governments. But what inspires me the most is going to the newcomer centre, talking to an asylum seeker who was callously left on the streets of Toronto by this federal government but who, thanks to our Skills Development Fund, now has the dignity of a job, but more importantly than that, Speaker, has found a sense of purpose, contributing to the Canadian dream, her Canadian dream, contributing to her community.

We’re empowering those people to earn better jobs, bigger paycheques. We’re doing it through enhancing the Employment Standards Act, ensuring health and safety is protected, supporting the front-line heroes that keep our community safe. Yes, we can talk about community safety and have the backs of our front-line officers, our front-line firefighters, our front-line first responders and paramedics.

Speaker, I’m grateful to live in this great province, this country that’s given so many, so many newcomers. But we recognize that artificial intelligence and technology is disrupting the workplace, so we’re taking action. We recognize that for young people trapped in their parents’ basement, the dream of home ownership just too far away—giving them the skill sets, giving them the leg up, giving them access to a better job and a bigger paycheque, having the Skills Development Fund that is targeting the hardest-to-place people, breaking down, bashing the glass ceiling in the skilled trades for women, empowering them on job sites, ensuring that as we build an Ontario that actually builds hospitals, actually builds subways.

You know, the previous government studied stuff to death. We’re actually getting the job done, getting shovels in the ground. We have 50 hospital projects under construction today. We’re empowering men and women on the front line of the building trades, technical trades and so much more. We’re a world-class destination for life sciences and STEM, a world-class destination where people from foreign shores look to Ontario for opportunity and a better future, and this government is giving them that leg up, Speaker. This government is getting shovels in the ground, building an Ontario not for yesterday but an Ontario for tomorrow.

We can’t do it without talking to workers, and I’m grateful for the opportunity on every job site. I’m grateful for the opportunity I’ve had to sit down with educators, to sit down with health care professionals like those nurses I just sat down with at NHH, to sit down with men and women in the skilled trades, to break down barriers for racialized, for marginalized individuals, and then to ensure everyone can achieve their full potential in this great province that is Ontario.

I want to close by once again thanking the Bowman family, thanking the firefighters of this province. This is a big move in this legislation that will forever enshrine Captain Craig Bowman’s legacy. I want to thank them for being here today once again, and for your advocacy. You’re going to continue doing that advocacy, and I know your dad would be incredibly proud looking down on you doing that.

Thank you, Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to speak. I’d like to turn it over to my incredible colleague the member for Mississauga–Malton.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. It’s always a pleasure to see you in that seat.

Today I’m proud to be rising in the House to talk about the third reading of Bill 149, the Working for Workers Four Act, 2024. As always, Madam Speaker, I want to start by thanking the supreme God for giving me the ability to stand in this place. Thank you to the residents of Mississauga–Malton for giving me an opportunity to serve. Thank you to my family and friends for always supporting me. And thank you to the staff; you’re always ahead of us, so that we can stand up and be the voice of our riding and our government.

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to join the Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development—and my fellow parliamentary assistant who will be speaking after me—in highlighting the important measures this bill is going to have in place. We will be talking about AI, improving oversight and helping the newcomer, through my speech.

I want to begin by saying that in a few short months in the new portfolio, our minister has done an incredible job by bringing these policy solutions forward to address the issues facing workers across our province. At the same time, I want to take an opportunity to thank our leader, our Premier, for his support for standing up for the workers. Without his leadership, this is not possible. That is why, Madam Speaker, the changes we’re making under these acts are helping millions of workers in our province, and we’ll continue to support them.

Talking about AI in job postings, Madam Speaker: Our government’s focus has been to help not only workers in our province, but also the job seekers. The Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development spoke earlier and talked about the importance of disclosing salary ranges, but we must also consider that the ways we look for employment have drastically changed.

Once upon a time, I do remember, when I came to Canada on January 15, 2000, we used to have a paper-based résumé. We’d go door-to-door and we’d ask for a job. Things have changed since then, Madam Speaker. We know, in the last few decades, with the changes in technology, there has been a very rapid shift in how people look for and apply for jobs. With the rise of Internet and the modernization of our world, most job ads are now posted online. By the way, back then it was even harder for us as a new job seeker to go and find a computer. Now we have computers everywhere. In fact, we have that power in our phones, as well.

While this makes job postings more accessible, it does come with challenges. More specifically, there have been recent technological developments in the artificial intelligence space. Technology and life have to move on. There are advantages of technology. Yes, there is always trouble and the constraints that comes with it. The use of AI has been skyrocketing in virtually every aspect of our professional lives. In fact, in February 2023—just look at the data: five, 10, 15 years back—it was almost zero; today, almost 7% of all businesses in Ontario were planning to adopt some level of AI assistance over the next 12 months. It may sound as a little bit as 7%, but think about it: If you go back 10 or 15 years, nobody used to do online shopping. Today, online shopping is normal. And that is why, Madam Speaker, rather than waiting for the time to come, we are taking decisive action today. With that, our government is making sure to change our laws and protect the changes in the workplace so that job seekers do not have to go through the trouble.

While the application of AI promises greater efficiency and accuracy, it can also adopt harmful biases and decision-making practices without the employer’s knowledge. That is why the use of AI in recruitment generates high volumes of personal data about job applicants and the employees. For a worker who applies to an online ad, within the fraction of a second of hitting send on their résumé, a recruiter’s AI system can choose the applicant as a preferred candidate and screen out thousands of other applicants. AI systems are able to determine age, sex, race, religion, political affiliation and can even evaluate social media accounts to see if someone’s personal traits could be a fit or not fit for the company’s culture. That level of information is deeply concerning. Everyone should have a fair and equal shot at a job, and things like age, sex, race, religion should not be a barrier for employment.

That is why, Madam Speaker, in response to growing concern about the ethical, legal and privacy implications of AI, our government is also proposing to require employers to disclose in job ads if AI is being used in the recruitment process. If the legislation is passed, it would make Ontario the first jurisdiction in Canada to require businesses to disclose on publicly advertised job ads if AI is used. It is critical that we strike a balance between transparency and also supporting technological innovation, and that is what we’re doing here through this bill.

As I said, I came to Canada on January 15, 2000. Like any other newcomer, I do remember the time when we came here, the jobs were there, but the support structure was not present. Now, Madam Speaker, the government of Ontario, with its open arms, has long been a place where people from all corners of the globe can seek new opportunities and start a fresh life. Immigrants bring a wealth of culture, knowledge and experience, and many of our caucus members are immigrants and we do know that. Many of us could be working in professions and skilled trades we desperately need as engineers, architects and teachers, but at the same time, we continue to face barriers. This is simply unacceptable, especially when we talk about Ontario having a labour shortage with over 200,000 jobs going unfilled.

Madam Speaker, when I came to Canada, I had an undergrad in chemical engineering, but I was not able to find work in exactly what I was doing. Thankfully, by God’s grace, I was able to start my career in a similar industry. But not everybody gets that chance. The data shows only a quarter of internationally trained immigrants in Ontario work in their regulated professions, compared to 50% of those who are domestically trained. What does that mean? It means that with these unfair barriers we are losing a lot of opportunity.

Scotiabank, for example, in a 2021 report, estimates that bringing immigrant unemployment and labour market participation rates in line with the Canadian-born population could increase Ontario’s GDP by $12 billion to $20 billion per year, and if you look at a five-year span, it could be as good as $100 billion. With that what comes is it gives the newcomers and residents of Ontario more prosperity. Plus, at the same time, when we’re increasing the GDP, everyone thrives. The government gets extra revenue; the government can use it to serve more people.

It begins, at the same time, with addressing barriers internationally trained individuals may face when having their qualifications assessed. That is why regulated professions sometimes rely on third parties when conducting assessment of qualifications for newcomers. What are we doing? We’re making sure that with the proposed changes to the Fair Access to Regulated Professions and Compulsory Trades Act our government would have the authority to be able to put rules in place to improve transparency and accountability for the assessment of qualifications by regulated professions, especially when they work with third parties to conduct these assessments. These amendments, if passed, would provide authority to make a regulation to ensure that the regulated professions work transparently with their third-party partners to be able to assess newcomer qualifications with more accountability and stronger oversight. We’re making sure that our system is more efficient and improves the experience for immigrants. It would also help them transition into good jobs right here in Ontario while meeting our province’s labour standards.

Madam Speaker, it’s not just that we’re doing; we’re actually making sure we are going the extra mile to support our newcomers by prohibiting Canadian experience requirements in job postings and application forms. There’s another barrier that newcomers face in recruitment places that screens them out of the job opportunity. When we talk about the chicken or the egg: For anyone to get a job, every time they go to an employer, the employer will ask for Canadian experience, and to get Canadian experience, they need a job. If they don’t have a job, they don’t have Canadian experience, and if they don’t have Canadian experience, they don’t get a job. That is exactly, Madam Speaker—we’re making sure that we are prohibiting Canadian experience requirements in job postings and application forms.

This bill, if passed, would help ensure that newcomers with the right job qualifications are not screened out of job postings before those qualifications are even considered. This new legislation would also make Ontario the first in Canada to prohibit the inclusion of any requirements related to Canadian experience in publicly advertised job postings in employment standards legislation.

Connecting a newcomer with a job that they are qualified for means that it’s not just a paycheque; it is prosperity. It allows them to unleash their full potential in careers that are meaningful and personal to them and allows them to contribute as a community in their new home. It is a win-win situation.

Madam Speaker, in closing, I want to say thank you to the workers of Ontario. You’re the driving force for our province. We’ve seen in our province, when we started as a government in 2018—more than 700,000 new workers are working today. The revenue of government increased from $150 billion to over $202 billion in the last five years. Thank you for all your hard work. Thank you for making sure that we, together, are able to build Ontario, push innovation and contribute to economic growth.

Ontario, as we know today, is leading the way in putting workers first. Our latest Working for Workers bill, if passed, will help workers find good jobs, while helping to build a stronger Ontario that works for all of us.

I call on all members of this House: Let’s join hands. Let’s support our workers. Let’s support Bill 149, the Working for Workers Four Act, 2023, and let’s build a better and a stronger Ontario.

Further debate? I recognize the member for Mississauga–Malton.

Further debate?

I’d like to start by thanking the minister that spoke early on and my PA colleague, Deepak Anand, for his gracious statements.

I’m pleased to rise in the House today for third reading of the Working for Workers Four Act, 2023. It has been an honour to work with the Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development on this bill to further support and protect workers and their families. I would also like to add my thanks to our Premier for his tremendous leadership and support for the Working for Workers acts that have been passed by this House over the last three years.

Madam Speaker, I stand before you today with a strong sense of purpose as I talk about important changes to our employment laws and workplace safety initiatives we are proposing in the Working for Workers Four Act that would further the evolution of workplace health and safety. These proposals embody our commitment to fostering fairness, transparency and support, and to ensuring we keep up with the way work is changing in Ontario and around the world.

Speaker, today I am here to share with you the remaining pieces of Bill 149, as well as some related measures. The first area that I would like to speak on is relating to vacation pay provisions. Too often, employers do not understand the ins and outs of the vacation pay provisions, and employees may lose out because of that. That is why, Madam Speaker, we are proposing to take steps to clearly explain vacation pay provisions, to make sure employers and employees know their rights and responsibilities. We want to ensure that both employers and employees are aware of the rules on vacation pay.

This bill aims to ensure that employees are fully informed about when vacation pay must be paid and that a written agreement is needed in cases where vacation pay is paid in any other way than a lump sum before the employee begins their vacation. This change would protect the interests of both employees and employers. It would help emphasize the importance of clear communication between employers and employees, underlining the need for mutual understanding of the terms governing when vacation pay is paid.

This is about providing a fair and transparent process for everyone involved. By ensuring that everyone is on the same page regarding vacation pay, our goal is to foster transparency and promote fairness in the workplace. We will continue to use every tool in our tool box to ensure Ontario is a province where hard work pays off.

The next area of concern is enabling super-indexation of WSIB benefits. Madam Speaker, our mission is to build a province that leaves no one behind, because every worker deserves to come home safely to their family at the end of their shift and every workplace injury and occupational disease should be preventable.

Our ministry invested $100 million annually in workplace health and safety for this very reason. But we know 134,000 workers rely on the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board for long-term compensation as a result of physical and mental injuries or illnesses they have suffered on the job. Madam Speaker, while our number one goal is always to give these workers the support they need to return to work, to support their families, contribute to Ontario’s economy and to build their communities, we know it is not always possible. That is why this legislation will, if passed and proclaimed into force, support injured workers by enabling additional indexation increases to WSIB benefits over and above the annual indexation, which is based on indicators of the rate of inflation.

Under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, benefits are annually indexed based on change in the Consumer Price Index over a period of 12 months, providing a cost-of-living adjustment. The proposed super-indexing amendment seeks to allow indexation increases beyond the regular annual adjustment. If passed, the amendment would empower our government to set these additional indexation increases and would require the WSIB to apply those increases on the specific dates, responding to economic factors and ensuring fairness during times of rising costs.

This proposal represents a significant step in delivering on our government’s commitment to supporting injured workers. For example, for an injured worker who earns $70,000 a year, if a 2% indexation increase is prescribed, it could mean an additional $900 annually to top up the cost-of-living adjustment, which is 4.4% in 2024. This change is a testament to our government’s dedication to ensuring the well-being of workers and their families in the face of evolving economic conditions.

Regulation for additional three poisonings to the WSIA: Madam Speaker, I am pleased to share with you our government’s continuing commitment to expediting access to compensation and services for injured workers. I want to take a minute to tell you about another measure we have recently taken to help Ontario’s workers that complements our Working for Workers legislation. With new regulations under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, our government has added chlorine, ammonia and hydrogen sulphide poisoning—when associated with related work, such as chlorine poisoning in the pool industry—to the list of presumed work-related occupational diseases. This will make it easier and faster for injured workers and survivors to get access to WSIB support and compensation.

Previously, these claims were adjudicated based on establishing the workplace relatedness of occupational diseases, but the new regulation streamlines the process. This regulation will ensure that if a worker gets sick from contact with chlorine, ammonia, hydrogen sulphide at work, they will get faster access to the support and compensation they need from the WSIB.

By presuming that workers’ illnesses are work-related, we are speeding up the process to make decisions and getting them the benefits they need. This change is not just about efficiency, it is about recognizing the challenges faced by workers in specific industries and providing them with a more straightforward path to compensation and support. The board regulation reflects our government’s commitment to creating a workplace safety and insurance system that reflects the current knowledge about occupational diseases.

Personal critical illness job-protected leave consultations: Madam Speaker, our commitment to the well-being of workers also extends to those facing personal critical illnesses. I would like to bring your attention to the planning consultation that speaks to the needs of this population. Our government understands the challenges that individuals living with critical illnesses face. This planned consultation on unpaid personal critical illness job-protected leave seeks to address a significant issue, potentially leading to legislation that would create a new unpaid job-protected leave for employees facing critical illnesses.

The Employment Standards Act currently provides three days of unpaid sick leave per year for personal illnesses. However, it is falling short when it comes to personal critical illness. We recognize the enormous toll receiving a diagnosis of a critical illness such as cancer can take. In addition to the stress of managing their illness, workers need to deal with the potential need for unexpected time off. While there are financial supports available through the federal government insurance sickness benefits, it should be a given that someone’s job will be waiting for them when they return, which, unfortunately, isn’t always the case.

This consultation is about creating a new unpaid job-protected leave that aligns with the length of federal employment insurance sickness benefits, which is 26 weeks. The federal medical leave that applies to employees working in the federally regulated industries and workplaces covers a wide range of reasons, including personal illness or injury, organ donation or medical appointments during working hours.

Our aim is to ease the burden on those facing critical illness and offer the protection they need during challenging times. Our government consultations would be aimed at exploring a new leave under the ESA for personal critical illness, because nobody should be stuck at home or in the hospital battling cancer or another critical illness and have to worry about losing their livelihood.

As we examine the evolving nature of work, this proposal aligns with our ongoing efforts to support workers facing personal critical illness. It is a realization of our commitment to understanding and responding to the diverse and changing needs of Ontarians. We can all agree that anyone dealing with a personal critical illness should be able to focus on getting better, with the certainty their job will be there for them when they are ready and able to return to work.

Speaker, because of Bill 149 representing our government’s ongoing efforts to shape a future where both employees and employers are supported and successful, if this bill is passed, Ontario would take significant steps to improve clarity around vacation pay.

I want to end—because it seems like my time is running out here. The additional regulation will ensure expedited access to benefits by adding three poisonings to the list of presumed work-related occupational diseases, and the planned consultation would explore a new unpaid leave under the ESA for personal and critical illnesses. Each piece of this bill and related measures is a step toward a more supportive, equitable Ontario.

I call on all members of this House to join me in supporting Bill 149, the Working for Workers Four Act, 2023.

Thank you to my colleagues for their opening debate on third reading of this bill. My question is for the Minister of Labour, Speaker. As he knows, there are three schedules of this bill that are already existing laws. One of them is wage theft. One is work performed through trial shifts, unpaid work. These are both already existing in the Employment Standards Act. The minister is aware of nearly $10 million which has been reported in wage theft that isn’t being followed through on. The other one is Canadian work experience, which is part of the 2013 Ontario Human Rights Code. There are 9,000 people waiting for hearings. If you were to put in a complaint today, there would be a five-year backlog.

My question to the minister is, since we’re putting through these laws that already exist as laws, will you commit to actually following through and collecting the almost $10 million that’s owed to people? And what will you do to address that 9,000-people backlog?

We tried to pass an amendment to have these workers recognized as regular workers so they have Employment Standards Act and Ontario labour relations protection. These workers are making six bucks an hour—that’s before deductions, before they pay for gas, wear and tear on their vehicles and maintenance.

My question is, why is the government standing with billion-dollar companies like Uber and standing against workers who are making less than six bucks an hour?

I also want to recognize as well that the Ontario Superior Court of Justice and the Ontario Ministry of Labour employment standards officer have both indicated that these app workers may be misclassified as independent contractors. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice certified a landmark $400-million class-action lawsuit against Uber that was filed on behalf of Uber drivers. As well, officer Katherine Haire found several violations of the Employment Standards Act. Employment lawyers and advocates say the ruling sends a clear message on the issue of employment status that gig platform workers have long fought for.

The minister is telling these workers—some of them who make nothing because they’re waiting for an app to come in and they don’t get an order. He is telling these workers, and there’s many of them across this province, that they are worth less than minimum wage. Our party, the Ontario NDP, thinks that people should at least make minimum wage. How can he not stand with us and stand up for workers who should be at least making minimum wage?

Well, Speaker, we wouldn’t be strengthening the act and be the first to explicitly reference trial shifts and others if we didn’t think it was already working. That’s why we’re doing this.

When it comes to Canadian work experience as well, I was recently at a federal-provincial-territorial meeting—in fact, that member would speak to their NDP colleagues across Canada who spoke to us about our leadership in this and lauded us for taking steps on Canadian worker experience.

He does raise an important point about enforcement. Yes, we have more enforcement officers coming online today than we did yesterday and are working diligently to hire them.

As for cases on tribunals and quasi-adjudicative bodies, I also recognize that more needs to be done there. We’ve tackled massive backlogs from OLT, the landlord and tenant—you name it. We’re working to address it by bringing on more adjudicators and tackling the backlogs that, quite frankly, the previous Liberal government let fester for decades.

If that member always wants to just absolutely kill ride-share in its entirety, which is putting all of those workers completely out of work, then just come clean and say it in this place. Say you don’t want them. You don’t want them in Ontario. You don’t want them in Toronto. Stand in your place, be clear and say you want them out of a job.

First responders deserve WSIB supports, and we recognize that we need to do more to support that. We’ve strengthened the WSIB, put it in a solid financial position so that we can do more for injured workers, and that’s what we’re doing. Thyroid, pancreatic cancer, esophageal cancer—these are all things previous Liberal governments could have done, but they didn’t. They didn’t because WSIB, under their watch, was a mess, quite frankly. They didn’t because they didn’t prioritize this. We are, and I value the advocacy of the OPFFA. I value the firefighter advocacy to get us to this place, and I thank them for what they’ve done.

Speaker, what we’re doing by banning Canadian work experience—I was in an Uber the other day, and that Uber driver recognized that by banning Canadian work experience requirements, something this bill has done, something that member would have asked about but didn’t because he’s got no leg to stand on—is empowering newcomers, newcomers like Shanny, who we met at the Canadian newcomer centre. That member would rather she live off social assistance than actually have the dignity of a job and to provide for her family. He wants misery. He wants poverty. He wants to push a minimum-wage economy. We here are going to stand for better, because we know Ontarians deserve better. He wants them out of a job, living off government handouts.

It is now time for questions and answers.

I recognize the member for Richmond Hill.

I just want to ask our minister—

Interjections.

People in Ontario want to age at home. They do not want to move into a long-term-care home. We know how to support people in their own homes, where they want to be. We have the knowledge, we have the skills, but frail, elderly Ontarians face a broken home care system. In Ontario, for-profit home care companies are more interested in making a profit than in providing people the care they need in order to stay home safely and respectfully.

A personal support worker was in my office a few days ago asking how he can continue to service the clients in Dowling and Onaping, two northern rural areas of my riding, after Canadian Shield cut his mileage in half, to 25 cents a kilometre. Most home care workers do not get paid between clients. In my riding, they will drive for 30 or 45 minutes between clients, all on their own time, for 25 cents a kilometre. It doesn’t matter how hard they work; it is impossible to make enough money to survive.

Many PSWs love their clients. They are good at what they do, but they have no choice but to leave the home care system in order to feed their kids and pay their rent. Right now, ParaMed, a for-profit home care company, is withholding money that the government sent for PSWs in order to gain concessions from their PSWs. This is happening under this government’s watch. It is a shame.

Further questions?

Third reading debate deemed adjourned.

The things we learn the best are the things we learn by doing. Research shows experiential learning has the highest rate of knowledge retention, at 90%, as it provides an opportunity to see, feel and experience as you’re learning.

Since 1975, the Ontario Legislature Internship Programme has been a distinctive example of how experiential learning prepares graduates to be job-ready. Each year, from September to June, 10 motivated university graduates complete paid internships on all aspects of the Legislature with MPPs from both sides. In the last 48 years, 307 MPPs have hosted 416 non-partisan interns.

OLIP opens the door for its alumni to have distinguished careers in many fields, with former interns becoming architects, academics, lawyers, public servants, public relations, as well as members or even becoming elected officials. For an example, Tim Murphy became an MPP in 1993, became chief of staff to Prime Minister Paul Martin. Here at home, Patrick Sackville, the current chief of staff to Premier Ford, was in OLIP as well.

So I want to say thank you to my OLIP interns, Gurkamal, Habon, Esma and Bridget, for being part of my office, learning by contributing and bringing a new perspective.

As part of our government’s promise to build more transit in Scarborough, the government allocated $1 million to start studies on extending the Sheppard subway line from Don Mills to McCowan. Accordingly, Metrolinx organized public consultations in November 2023.

On December 6, 2023, MPP Raymond Cho, MPP David Smith and I organized a town hall meeting to seek input from community organizations, residents and stakeholders. The town hall participants unanimously spoke in favour of the extension of the Sheppard line to be a subway and not LRT.

The following community organizations—the Sheppard Subway Action Coalition, the Agincourt Village Community Association, the Heathwood Ratepayers Association, C.D. Farquharson, the Pleasant View Community Association, the Federation of Asian Canadians, the MTCC 872 condo board, the Chinese Cultural Centre of Greater Toronto, the Scarborough Rosewood Community Association and the Filipino Centre Toronto—presented their studies and analysis in support of subway extension. During the town hall and in their written submissions, the community organizations made persuasive and well-supported points to extend the subway line on Sheppard Avenue East.

In addition, during the January 20, 2024 pre-budget consultation in Scarborough, a substantial number of Scarborough organizations also advocated for the subway option.

I think we always have to do more for workers in the province of Ontario. We’ve got to do a lot. That’s why we’ve brought these bills before. I don’t know how that member stands in this place, quite frankly, when he slashed residency positions, when they cut nursing positions, when they underfunded rural hospitals like mine, leaving them on life support. That member’s party systemically dismantled health care and then ran off in a minivan and disappeared after. That’s the size of their party today.

You destroyed health care. Quite frankly, as a health care professional, how you even stand as a member of that party is shocking.

My question to the minister: How does he reconcile the stated purpose of this bill against his own track record of attacking health care workers with Bill 124, attacking collective bargaining with Bill 28 and then, of course, explicitly voting against extending WSIB coverage to PSWs and DSWs?

Yesterday I attended the federal-provincial conference simulation in Waterloo. Waterloo region students come together to simulate the annual federal-provincial meetings where they discuss solutions to the problems the country is facing. We are fortunate to have teachers who believe it is imperative for students to truly understand the operations of the Canadian federal and provincial system and step into the shoes of politicians.

In partnership with the University of Waterloo, the first conference was launched in 1965, with Steven Langdon from KCI serving as the Prime Minister. Interestingly enough, Langdon went on to become an NDP member of Parliament.

Since then, Fed-Prov has been a highlight of the academic year for students across Waterloo, and they just celebrated its 59th year. Yesterday was also the inaugural launch at Wilfrid Laurier University, and this is the beginning of a truly progressive partnership with the Waterloo Region District School Board and WLU.

Speaker, this simulation is a unique opportunity for youth to gain deeper understanding of the decision-making process and the complexities of governance, something that we in this room know all too well. It fosters a sense of civic engagement and prepares young people to be informed and active citizens, which we need more than ever.

Thank you to the educators who continue to ensure that Fed-Prov continues year after year. I’m sure the future politicians that you are mentoring and supporting thank you, as do we in this Legislature.

One of the amendments that we tried to move on this act was to bring in anti-scab legislation, which the Conservatives had voted against. We’re aware of many workplaces using scabs already, more than happy to have these workers languish on picket lines.

I want to read this here. It was about workers hit by scabs on picket lines. The article says, “Doug Ford’s Conservative government must ban scabs if there’s any sincerity to his claims of supporting workers....

“Two equipment operators were hit by two different scabs driving a pickup truck through picket lines on Wednesday. These are the second and third incidents of a motor vehicle being weaponized to attack Black River-Matheson’s 14 municipal workers who were, at first, locked out in October ... and have been on legal strike since January” of 2024.

“‘We’ve been locked out or on strike for 124 days. That’s a third of a year,’ said Serge Bouchard, president of CUPE Local 1490. ‘As it stands now, it seems Doug Ford and all of Ontario’s Conservative MPPs are okay with a worker being the victim of a hit-and-run every 41 days.’”

Tell me—

I am pleased to share with my colleagues that $476,000 from the Ontario Trillium Foundation will be directed toward five non-profit organizations in the town of Whitby and other parts of the region of Durham, ensuring safe and accessible programming, activities and spaces for local residents. Whether it’s purchasing the equipment, building new spaces or completing renovations, these grants will have a positive impact on the region of Durham.

Now, the organizations receiving these grants—WindReach Farm, the Sunrise Developmental Support Services group, County Town Singers and the Whitby Curling Club—all play a pivotal role in enriching the lives of Whitby residents and contributing to a strong and prosperous region of Durham.

Speaker, these grants go beyond financial support. It’s about making life better for people in the region of Durham. It’s about creating opportunities for communities to thrive.