http://tinyurl.com/8jzgz

A mess Harper could easily fix
Feb. 15, 2006. 01:00 AM
CAROL GOAR

She, of all people, should have been prepared, Ann Evans says.

For eight years she worked as an employment counsellor, coaching clients on
how to find work, helping them manage the financial and emotional stress of
joblessness, listening to their heartbreaking stories.

But when she was laid off last fall, she learned two lessons that no
placement worker could teach. One was how debilitating unemployment is. The
other was how threadbare Canada's safety nets are.

"I'm out of work, living on $413 a week. There is no additional support for
the medication that I have to take every day. I have a very modest
two-bedroom bungalow in Scarborough that I am trying desperately to hang on
to. I'm not sure that I will be able to."

Evans has no dependents. She'd be beside herself if she did.

She was hired in September 2004 by Job Skills, a non-profit agency in York
Region funded by the federal government. Her position, co-ordinator of
employment programs and services, fit perfectly with her qualifications and
experience.

No one informed her at the time that she was filling in for an employee who
was on maternity leave. When her contract came up for renewal in April
2005, she learned the truth. She was slated to leave in December.

The news came as a complete shock. But as a contract worker, Evans had no
legal recourse.

With a raft of programs to manage, a nine-member staff to supervise and a
job-finding club to run, she had no time to send out resumés or go to
interviews. As her termination date approached, her health deteriorated.
The depression she'd fought for years flared up. Her doctor increased her
medication and told her to take early leave. Reluctantly, she did.

The first thing Evans discovered was that even if a person stops working
for medical reasons, there is a two-week waiting period for EI benefits.

It took an additional five weeks for her claim to be processed. She didn't
have much of a financial cushion because she'd only earned $38,000 a year
as an employment counsellor. At one point, she had to ask her parents for
help. "That's very humiliating at 40 years of age."

Since losing her job, she's done everything she taught others to do. She
has applied for every opening posted on the Internet, sent her resumé to
non-profit organizations, colleges and universities, followed up on tips
from friends and acquaintances, explored training opportunities and looked
into a career change.

But it is harder than Evans ever imagined. She has trouble scraping
together money to get to interviews after paying the mortgage, insurance,
hydro, gas, utilities and taxes. She can't afford to pay 25 per cent of the
cost of the training, which the government requires. If she needed daycare,
she'd be sunk.

She managed to find 11 days' work at the University of Toronto, preparing
engineering students for job interviews. She reported it to Human Resources
Canada and had her earnings deducted from her EI cheque before she'd even
been paid.

In the past four months, Evans has had plenty of time to think about what
is wrong with Canada's EI program.

The biggest problem is that benefit levels have been frozen for 10 years.
The maximum weekly payment of $413 was set by long-retired employment
minister Lloyd Axworthy three governments ago when he overhauled the
system. The cost of living has gone up by 20.2 per cent since then.

There's no need for stinginess. The government has collected $48 billion
more in EI premiums than it has paid out in benefits over the past decade.

The second problem — which doesn't apply to Evans — is that the majority of
Canadians who lose their jobs (78 per cent in Toronto) don't qualify for EI
benefits. They either haven't accumulated enough hours of paid employment
or they work in uninsured sectors of the economy.

At a time when casual and contract work is the norm for millions, the EI
system offers them no protection.

The third problem is that job training — trumpeted by Ottawa as the
solution to unemployment — is spotty and underfunded. Availability
fluctuates with the budgetary cycle. People are pushed into programs for
which they are totally unsuited. If their benefits run out midway through a
course, they're on their own. "That, plus the 25 per cent upfront cost is a
pretty strong deterrent," Evans says.

Her plight could be worse, she concedes. She has a supportive family and
generous friends. She has access to public transportation. And she has a
university education.

If she can't make the system work, Evans wonders, who can?

Cleaning up this mess would be a relatively simple task. Employment
insurance falls entirely within federal jurisdiction, unlike most social
programs. There is money in the fund. The deficiencies are glaringly
obvious. And there is no question that Canada needs skilled workers.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper wouldn't face resistance from any of the
opposition parties. He'd have the support of business. He might even make
friends in some unlikely places.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carol Goar's column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday.