Social Services Committee — Department of Labour — 3 April 2001

2001-04-03

Newfoundland and Labrador — Committees

April

3, 2001 SOCIAL SERVICES

COMMITTEE No. 4

The Committee met at 6:30 p.m. in the House of

Assembly Chamber.

CHAIR (Mr. Sweeney): Order, please!

(Inaudible). First of all, I would like to thank the

minister for a wonderful meal. We have a little bit of housekeeping. Before we

go any further, I guess I should have the Committee minutes passed from this

morning. Can I have a motion to adopt them - and there is an error - to adopt

them as amended?

MS S. OSBORNE: As amended.

CHAIR: As amended, yes, and the area there - Tom

Rideout was showing.

On motion, minutes, as amended, adopted.

CHAIR: Just a reminder to the minister and her

officials - and I think we all know each other, so we will dispense with that -

when you speak, press talk. You don't have to (inaudible) press and watch your

light for the purpose of recording.

How we will start off is, we will call a subhead, ask

the minister to give her

preamble, and we will continue on from there.

CLERK: Head 1.1.01.

CHAIR: Head 1.1.01.

Minister?

MS THISTLE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Oh, do I have to have this on?

CHAIR: Yes, get your light. There you go.

MS THISTLE: Actually, this is a new addition since

the last time I have been in this room. We had all of the other ones before.

Good evening. I am just looking around, and it is

still light out for this time of the evening. It is wonderful. As you have said,

Mr. Chair, you already know my officials here. I do not know if I need to

introduce them, but for the record probably: Joe O'Neill, Deputy Minister;

George Joyce, Assistant Deputy Minister of Labour. We are missing one Assistant

Deputy Minister tonight; that would be Kim Dunphy. She is on the occupational

health and safety side. I must say, it has been a pleasure to have a few minutes

with you prior to being here.

I want to tell you a little bit about our new

Department of Labour. With the new Grimes government, the Premier has decided to

set up a new Department of Labour. He realizes, and I think the labour movement

in general realize - and, in fact, they have talked to me about it - that we

need to improve the labour relations, the labour climate in this Province. The

labour movement have come up to me since being appointed as Cabinet minister to

this department and told me how pleased they were that Labour was going to be

separate again. I believe it has been about ten years since the Department of

Labour has been a separate department. They are looking forward to what we want

to do as a government in developing a new climate here in this Province, because

labour relations in the Province is so key to us as a government and as a

Province in attracting new business to this Province; because, if you have

labour unrest, economically speaking, you have a problem on your hands.

I am tasked with the responsibility of improving the

labour situation in this Province and I believe that in doing so both the social

and economic development of this Province will change. I am excited about the

challenge. Every new task you have brings a new challenge, and I must say that I

am excited about this one.

I want to tell you about the new Department of Labour,

how it is set up. It is in two divisions, actually. One is labour and the other

one is workplace health and safety. Also, in addition to that, I have the

responsibility of the Workers' Compensation Commission.

The labour branch - these are the labour people,

really, here beside me tonight - provides mediation services to unions and

employers engaged in collective bargaining. These two individuals on both sides

of me have been very busy now for about twelve straight days, is it? At least

twelve days. This is just one facet of what they do in a regular day's work,

because whenever there are labour disruptions anywhere in the Province and

companies and so on call the Department of Labour, we are there at a moment's

notice ready to get involved and see how we can resolve issues.

Mediators, I must say, in the department, have a good

batting average. They have a 90 per cent settlement rate. You do a good job, I

am sure. I know how hard they work, because all over the past weekend I have

been receiving calls morning, noon, and night from Joe, and I know that George

has been involved just as much, and Cyril Colford. You might have seen him on

television, if you have seen the interview Glenn Deir did with him down at the

Fairmont, from CBC. Glenn was about seven feet tall, and Cyril was about four. I

know there was a big comparison. Cyril has been around a long time and does a

great job as well.

Through the Labour Standards Division, our department

assists non-union employees and employers with working conditions under the

Labour Standards Act. Those areas would include such things as vacation pay,

termination of employment, minimum wage; whatever employees or employers might

have as a complaint or an inquiry. I would not hazard to guess how many phone

calls might come in the run of a year. Would you have any idea, Joe?

MR. O'NEILL: At labour standards?

MS THISTLE: Yes.

MR. O'NEILL: Last year they received 31,000 calls,

and that was tracked by Newfoundland Telephone.

MS THISTLE: Amazing, isn't it?

Of course, the Labour Relations Board deals with

certification of trade unions, certification applications, revoked certification

applications, unfair labour practice, complaints and requests for imposition of

first collective agreements. All the organizing that you hear taking place

around the Province, the Department of Labour is totally involved with all of

those issues.

In fact, the caseload of the Labour Relations Board

has increased so much in recent years, recently I appointed Mr. Morgan Cooper as

permanent Chair of the Labour Relations Board. That appointment took place April

1, and it is a five-year term.

You may recall Morgan Cooper. There was a report

written, authored by Morgan Cooper, recently. It was about the dispute mechanism

for solving and settling labour disputes, in particular to Bull Arm. Many of you

will recall that during the issues out there with the Terra Nova Project - I am

sure Mary Hodder might remember those, too - there was an issue out there and

there was labour disruption in regard to union labeling and so on. There was an

interest in Marystown, of course, acquiring some of that work. He wrote a report

to government which he gave to us, when was it, about a month ago, or six weeks?

MR. O'NEILL: Yes, back in January.

MS THISTLE: January, was it? Time passes so

quickly.

The thing that was different about this report was

that the whole theme throughout his report was that parties themselves - both

the employers and union - have the best mechanism for settling and stabilizing

the labour atmosphere. You really cannot legislate labour harmony. The best

chance of doing of doing it is having the employers and the unions work

together. That particular report had how many recommendations?

MR. O'NEILL: Seventeen.

MS THISTLE: Seventeen. Those recommendations have

received stakeholder endorsement and the report is now before government. We are

reviewing it. Some of the recommendations will be ones that will be brought to

the Legislature, and other ones will be ones that can happen by the employers

themselves and so on, the parties themselves. That would be nice.

I want to tell you about the other part of the

Department of Labour, which is workplace health and safety. That division is

responsible for enforcing the Occupational Health and Safety Act, ensuring that

workers/employers are exercising their responsibility to maintain safe and

healthy workplaces throughout the Province. The workplace health and safety

branch looks after roughly 14,500 businesses in the Province, ensuring that

people are using the right safety methods, the right safety precautions, and

whenever there is an infraction or something done wrong, the inspectors

routinely visit those workplaces and issue directions to ensure that workplaces

are kept free from hazards. They have a large job to do as well. They are

situated both here in St. John's, Grand Falls-Windsor, Corner Brook, Labrador

City. I think there are eighteen inspectors in total, are there? They are

constantly on the move; they are traveling all over the Province and they have a

big task ahead of them as well.

Lastly, I want to tell you about the Workers'

Compensation Commission. Recently, you might have heard of a task force review

as well by workers' compensation. That was initiated by my colleague, the hon.

Oliver Langdon, and he as well initiated the study by Morgan Cooper. That

particular report is now before government as well, and the stakeholders that

were involved in that review endorsed the report as well. That matter is now

before government for consideration and a decision. Some of the recommendations

coming out of that particular review will involve legislation changes as well.

I had no idea, I think, when I look back now, when I

looked at the Department of Labour as being combined with the Department of

Environment. We always heard an awful lot about environmental over this past

five years because there are so many environmental issues as well. Once settled

into the department, I had no idea that you guys were so busy and there was so

much demand for Department of Labour services. I must say, it is an interesting

department and it will play a large

part in our economy in the future, in

stabilizing labour conditions in the Province.

That is it, as an introduction to the Department of

Labour. If you would like to ask me any questions, or my officials, we would

welcome the opportunity.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you, Minister.

I guess we will start at the first subhead, 1.1.01.,

and continue on from there.

MS S. OSBORNE: I guess, under 1.1.01. and 1.2.01.,

the difference between the 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 budget is because of the

setting up of the new department, is it?

MS THISTLE: Yes, Mr. Chair, that is exactly what

it was. Prior to this year, it was combined with the Department of Environment,

so what we have done now, the Director of Financial Planning has indicated what

portion would belong to Labour, and has estimated what it would cost to actually

run this department in the next year.

MS S. OSBORNE: I have skipped right over to

2.1.01.05., the difference between 2000-2001 and then again 2001-2002, the

budget for Professional Services. There is quite a difference there between

those three figures.

MS THISTLE: Yes, I know what it is.

MR. O'NEILL: (Inaudible).

MS THISTLE: Yes, sure.

MR. O'NEILL: That is the $180,000 last year to the

$95,000 this year, is it, Ms. Osborne?

MS S. OSBORNE: And the $198,000 that was used. The

revised was $198,000.

MR. O'NEILL: The extra funding there was to cover

the cost of extra consulting fees. We had a labour standards review report that

was done as part of the $180,000. The $180,000 was really made up of the fish

price settlement mechanism and the labour standards review report. The

difference in the $95,000 from the $180,000 - it is a fair drop - what has

happened is that we have a full-time facilitator who now does the fish price

mechanism facilitation. He is hired full time now in the department, and we have

transferred - you will notice in line 1 - his salary, $55,000, from that subhead

into Salaries.

MS S. OSBORNE: Okay.

MR. O'NEILL: Of course, the labour standards

report last year was in the vicinity of $30,000, and we will not be doing a

report this year; we did it last year.

MS S. OSBORNE: I guess the same thing applies

under 2.1.02.05., does it? Is that the same explanation?

MR. O'NEILL: Under 2.1.02.05., Labour Relations

Board, Professional Services -

CHAIR: Just a reminder, Joe, when you give your

name - I think Hansard probably knows us - the officials, where they change.

MR. O'NEILL: Under 2.1.02.05., the professional

services fees for the Labour Relations Board is estimated around $200,000; but

in recent years the number of hearings before the Labour Relations Board has

substantially increased. That is resulting in a huge increase in our

professional services fees, the fees that are paid to board members. We are

hoping that will eventually level itself out again over time. One of the reasons

for that, of course, is that the Labour Relations Board has to be very careful

in ensuring that employers and employees are granted hearings when they request

them, because they have had some constitutional challenges where they have

denied requests for hearings.

MS S. OSBORNE: Okay, so you could not have

somebody from the department do it; it has to be a neutral person from outside?

MR. O'NEILL: That is right, Ms. Osborne. The

Labour Relations Board, of course, is made up of, now, a full-time Chair, as the

minister has pointed out. In appointing the full-time Chair, that is one of the

proactive measures that the department has taken to try and address that measure

as well.

MS S. OSBORNE: I am just going to go to workplace,

health and safety, not any of the lines there, but you talked about workplace

safety. One of the concerns that I have, and it has been brought to me by a

couple of people who are employed in bars, is the smoking. If people who are out

in any other field were exposed to the same carcinogens and toxins that these

employees are exposed to, then the workplace health and safety people would be

in on it right away.

I know that it is really contentious in terms of

stopping smoking in bars, and I know that the government has made some moves in

that direction in that the legislation is coming in -

MS THISTLE: In 2002.

MS S. OSBORNE: - in 2002 to stop smoking in

restaurants where children frequent, but I think that a long and serious look

should be made at the smoking in bars, for the employees' sake. Many times the

people who are the servers there, that is the only employment they can get, and

many of them are really concerned about their exposure to that and the side

effects that they suffer as a result when they go home. They have headaches,

asthma, and all the other things that are associated. I know that it is

contentious, but I know that these people are just as important as people who

are working in any other profession and we really should not have them exposed

to the dangers that they are exposed to. Are you making any moves in the

direction to have that corrected? Is there more legislation anticipated that

would cut down on that?

Even in the bars - and this is for the patrons, I

suppose, but then you know when you go into a bar that you are going into smoke.

There are not a lot of teeth in the legislation to have a certain percentage of

the bar outlawed as non-smoking and another part as smoking. There is not much

teeth in that legislation, or there does not appear to be, and it is not being

enforced.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Ms. Osborne.

Being a non-smoker myself, I know exactly what you are

talking about. Government, too, realizes the effects of second-hand smoke and so

on. Of course, being government and setting policy and direction, you have to

look at the issue from all sides: number one, what is it doing to people's

health; and, also, what is it doing to the economic part to the businesses that

are out there?

Your question is a good one, and it is something that

governments right across the country have been working on. I believe out in

British Columbia now it is smoke free in bars. I am sure that the matter is

currently under consideration and, as you already stated, we will be taking

moves next year this time; but, to be fair to people who operate businesses and

so on, an advance notice was necessary and that is the reason why restaurants

next year will be smoke free. Where it will end up after that, I am sure that

there will be improvements to that as well, but you make a very good point.

MS S. OSBORNE: We look forward to that legislation

probably in the fall, directed towards the bars, particularly for the employees,

because people have a choice whether they go there or not. Granted, it is off

limits to a lot of people who do have asthma or emphysema or any of the other

smoking related illnesses, or illnesses that would be affected by exposure to

smoke; but, in fairness to the employees, it might be a good idea to have a look

at that. Even if there were more policing in the bars to ensure that the smoking

regulations that are on the books, the legislation and the regulations that are

on the books, were enforced, it might be a good idea.

I have one other question, and that is on workers'

compensation. I brought this up in the House of Assembly a couple of times and

it is a bit bothersome. It is workers' compensation for respite workers who are

hired by private families. Because there is no workers' compensation available

to them, it has a lot of people at a disadvantage. One is the family of the

person who is seeking the care, in that they cannot get a good respite worker to

come in because it is becoming more and more well known out there now that there

isn't workers' compensation for them. Not only that, but many times because of

the violent tendencies or the physical limitations of the client, the worker is

exposed to danger to themselves physically in terms of either being injured by

the person because they have a violent outburst, or having a back injury because

of having to lift the person from the wheelchair to the bed to the toilet and

into the bathtub, and things like that. I am concerned for everybody here, for

the worker and for the clients who require the services, because it is getting

harder and harder out there now to get respite workers because they are - well,

first of all, the pay is low; it is only $5.84 an hour; and, second of all,

because of the dangers that they face when they are in the workplace. I know

that government is aware of it and they were working towards having it resolved.

Has any movement been made towards a resolution?

MS THISTLE: As you know, part of the budget this

year was to increase the salaries of home care workers. As you mentioned, the

salary was $5.84. It is going to $6.66 in July and then $7.01 six months later

than that, which has been, I think, a 20 per cent increase overall for home care

workers.

The home care workers who are employed today are

employed in what they call self-managed care. As it stands today, there are no

workers' compensation benefits for them; however, this is a matter that would be

best directed to Health and Community Services. It does not come under the

Department of Labour.

MS S. OSBORNE: Okay, I wasn't sure.

MS THISTLE: Yes, they have the jurisdiction for

that particular matter. The only way I can approach it is, you know, with the

facts that are currently out there; but that particular question as to when or

if a government may make a policy change, you can probably direct it to Health

and Community Services.

MS S. OSBORNE: Okay.

Those are all the questions I have. I put the Chair on

notice that at a couple of these Estimates meetings I have garnered some

questions for Health and Community Services, so be prepared for a long one. Last

night, at Justice, I got some that also came under Health and Community

Services.

Thank you very much, Madam Minister.

CHAIR: We will bring a lunch.

MS S. OSBORNE: Bring a lunch.

Thank you very much. Those are all the questions I

have today.

CHAIR: Thank you, Sheila.

Fabian?

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First of all, I would like to go on record and thank

the minister for a wonderful supper.

MS S. OSBORNE: I do, too.

MR. MANNING: I want to make sure that (inaudible)

the Minister of Justice at a later date, and that is on record.

I only have a couple of issues. I am also pleased to

see a separate Department of Labour. A lot of people in our Province welcome

that news, for sure. There are always labour issues, and sometimes (inaudible)

another entity in government, it gets lost in the shuffle sometimes, so I am

very pleased to see that.

I want to get back, if I could, for a moment, to home

care workers. I have received some calls over the past couple of weeks on the

increase. My understanding is - and correct me if I am wrong; it is an

opportunity, I guess, to clear it up for myself - that we are going from $5.84

to $6.66 in July, and $7.01. Now, that is on self-managed care workers. I have

gotten calls over the past couple of weeks from well over a dozen people who

work in personal care homes, and those who are out there working for an agency,

I guess, in the homes, but they are being paid by an agency. This increase does

not relate to them, does it?

MS THISTLE: No, it does not. The increase was just

for the home care support workers who are in self-managed care. It does not

apply to the personal care homes or the agencies that you described.

MR. MANNING: Again, I know, a personal care home

or an agency is, I guess, a private company, a private employer. Maybe you can

answer: How many home care workers, percentage wise, fall under self-managed

care versus home care workers who are with personal care homes and/or agencies?

MS THISTLE: I do not have the numbers but I

understand, though, it is the majority of home care workers.

MS S. OSBORNE: Are in self-managed care?

MS THISTLE: Self-managed care.

MR. MANNING: The majority are in self-managed

care?

MS THISTLE: My understanding is that we can

probably request Health and Community Services to give you those numbers. I do

not know, Joe, if you would know?

MR. O'NEILL: (Inaudible) question.

MS THISTLE: No, that is a health question.

MR. MANNING: A health question? Okay. Again,

sometimes it is difficult to know which department.

MS THISTLE: There is a crossover, yes.

MR. MANNING: With that in mind, that issue, I want

to go to another issue which is the minimum wage. In 1995, I believe, if memory

serves me correctly - somewhere around there - we saw an increase in the minimum

wage: $4.75 to $5.25 up to $5.50 now. Is there any consideration being given by

the department and by government, I guess, to increase the minimum wage in the

foreseeable future?

MS THISTLE: It is interesting that you brought up

that question because it is a question that is out there, particularly as you

approach the tourism season. In the summer, that question seems to surface.

There was a panel struck, a committee, awhile ago, as

part of the labour standards review, and all the key stakeholders are involved

in that panel . One of the items under review is the minimum wage itself, as

part of the labour standards review. We are expecting, I think probably next

fall, is it, to be able to report on that particular review. I have not doubt -

in fact, I am certain - that the minimum wage will be part of that review. That

question has come up in that.

MR. MANNING: Minister, when did you say the report

was due on that?

MS THISTLE: Actually, what has happened, the

report has been done and it is gone to the stakeholders for a response.

MR. MANNING: Okay.

MS THISTLE: As the responses come forward, then it

will be presented to government for consideration. We expect by the time there

would probably be any changes or any firm decisions, it would probably be early

next fall.

MR. MANNING: Moving on to another issue, on the

Workers' Compensation Appeal Board, can you give us some round figures on the

amount of appeals that have been heard, the amount of workload there. With that,

I have a couple of other questions but with that one first.

MS THISTLE: Well, I do not know if I can give you

the exact numbers but I know there are a tremendous number of appeals. Of

course, anyone who has been following the Workers' Compensation Commission

recently have probably heard in the media that, of course, they are in serious

financial difficulty. Particularly last year there was an excessive amount of

what we call soft tissue injuries related to sitting at a computer, and other

back injuries classified as soft tissue injuries. I think last year alone, I do

not have the figures here, something like $87 million or something, last year;

do you recall, in claims last year, Joe?

MR. O'NEILL: The total number of claims in terms

of appeals to the Workers' Compensation Review Division, there were

approximately 400 appeals.

MR. MANNING: This is in the last year, is it, Joe,

in the last fiscal year?

MR. O'NEILL: I do not have an exact number.

MR. MANNING: No, I know.

MS THISTLE: The key recommendation that came out

of that workers' compensation was, I guess, that prevention is the key to

injury, and that might involve - I do not know if you have seen the task force

review that came out of workers' compensation. A lot of it calls, especially for

soft tissue injuries, for ergonomics regulations.

MR. MANNING: In regard to, just using a round

ballpark figure of 400 appeals, of that number - I use the word successful in

relation to a person being considered for workers' compensation. Out of the 400

appeals, percentage wise again, or a ballpark figure again, how many people are

successful in receiving compensation out of those appeals?

MS THISTLE: Do you have those numbers, Joe?

MR. O'NEILL: I do not have the numbers in front of

me, Mr. Manning, but we did a review about a year ago and the number of cases

that were successful on appeal was in the area of 16 per cent to 18 per cent. I

understand that recently that number has been going down a bit, but the number

of successful cases were around that average.

MR. MANNING: That is what I wanted to get at,

because I had heard it was hovering around the 20 per cent figure. The costs

associated with the appeals - and everybody has the right to appeal - and the

re-appeal, I call it, this follow-up, if we are touching on 80 per cent of

people who are turned down, most of these people take another avenue after that.

It seems to be a large number of people who are going to the board or going to

the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board to come out, you know, with two out of

ten or less who are receiving compensation at the end of the day. Is there a

better mechanism that we could be using? Has the department given any

consideration or any thought to, again, some way of addressing that concern? It

seems to me, with an 80 per cent refusal - I use the word refusal but maybe it

is not the proper word to use, but an 80 per cent turndown - it seems like there

is an awful lot of work goes in here by a lot of people, including the people

within your department, at the end of the day, not to have a successful appeal.

MR. O'NEILL: One of the key components of the task

force review report has been the whole process of appeal, both the internal

appeal at the commission itself and also the independent appeal at the Workers'

Compensation Review Division. One of the recommendations in the task force

review report, in fact, is to abolish the internal appeal at the commission so

that if an injured worker reports to the commission and after the case is

reviewed by a case manager and the decision is made to reject their application,

they will be able to go straight to the Workers' Compensation Review Division;

so it basically eliminates one level of appeal. You are right; they appeal

internally to the commission itself and then, if they are unsuccessful, they go

over to the review division for another appeal. The task force report has also

recommended a number of changes at the review division itself that hopefully

will streamline the process and make the decision-making more effective.

MR. MANNING: That is all I have, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Thank you, Fabian.

Anybody from -

MR. MERCER: Yes, just a couple of questions. Joe,

in your labour relations, how are you structured? How does your division or your

department structure (inaudible)? How do you go about doing (inaudible)?

MR. G. JOYCE: I terms of the labour branch, we

have, of course, the Labour Relations Board, the Labour Relations Board being a

quasi-judicial board, an independent board, made up of equal representation of

employees represented by unions in the Province and employers. I guess, for

administrative purposes only, they are housed in the Department of Labour

because it is a quasi-judicial board.

The second component of the labour branch, you have

the Labour Standards Division, and they administer labour standards offices in

the Labour Standards Division. They administer the Labour Standards Act, and

non-unionized workforce in the Province.

The third component is the Labour Relations Division,

and in the Labour Relations Division we have six conciliators: five in St.

John's, one in Corner Brook. The Director of Labour Relations and what their

involvement is, is that before any union can legally strike in the Province

their employer can lock out; either party must make a request to the Minister of

Labour for the appointment of a conciliation board and the minister then will

appoint a conciliator in the division to convene meetings between the parties

with a view of trying to find a resolution. That is basically our involvement.

We also provide what we call a preventive mediation service, and that is taking

a proactive approach during the life of a collective agreement in assisting

employers and employees represented by unions resolving disputes themselves, to

get ready for the new workforce for the future, so we take a proactive approach

in that area.

Another service that we provide is arbitration. In the

event the parties out there - every collective agreement in this Province, and

there are approximately 500, must contain a dispute resolution mechanism, and

the final recourse is through arbitration. At the end of the day, if the parties

agree to disagree and cannot even agree on an arbitrator, then our minister is

vested with the legislative authority to appoint an arbitrator, and we appoint

that directly from the Labour Relations Division under the minister's authority.

That is the structure of the labour branch.

MR. MERCER: The bulk of your staff, then, is in

St. John's?

MR. G. JOYCE: That is correct.

MR. MERCER: You have five conciliators in St.

John's and one in Corner Brook?

MR. G. JOYCE: That is correct.

MR. MERCER: Why not one in Grand Falls, Goose Bay,

you know?

MR. G. JOYCE: In terms of Labrador, I think the

caseload in Labrador, in our experience, we have never had a conciliator in

Labrador. If we receive, say, ninety conciliation cases in the run of a year, we

probably receive between five and ten a year in Labrador. What our big clientele

in Labrador would be over time, of course, would be IOC, Wabush Mines, and we

have seen in the past three or four years, not in the last couple of years, some

more activity related to Voisey's Bay. In terms of having a full-time

conciliator in Labrador, it would not be cost-effective for us. It would be

cost-effective for government to provide that service either from Corner Brook

or St. John's.

MR. MERCER: It still begs the question, why five

in St. John's and only one outside?

MR. G. JOYCE: I guess, as I said, there are

approximately 500 collective agreements. In terms of the cluster of collective

agreements, it would be a rough guess, 75 per cent of all cases would be east of

Gander.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Mercer, I was going to say, this

minister is very keen on relocation and regionalization, so it might be

something we can look at, at a later date for certain.

MR. MERCER: I ask because I know the individual in

the Corner Brook office and he is never there. He is always out on mediation and

conciliation. He is never in Corner Brook. He is either involved in a labour

dispute in Stephenville or maybe in Grand Falls, but he is never home. It seems

to be a fairly heavy workload. If you have five people, all in St. John's and

one fellow out there to handle the rest of the Province, it seems to be an

unfair distribution of the workload.

MR. O'NEILL: You are quite right. There was a time

when we actually had two mediators in Corner Brook. When the downturn in the

economy started back in the eighties - remember the recession in the early

eighties? - we had a severe downturn in the number of activities. When the

second mediator retired in Corner Brook, we did not fill that position for a

long while. As things started to progress again, we filled the positions in St.

John's, out of St. John's, but you are absolutely right. As things improve and

we get more activity, as George has indicated, our mediator in Corner Brook

generally looks after the Labrador region as well. So it is something that we

can certainly look at in terms of - if you have the activity level high enough

on the West Coast, maybe that is something. In fact, we had a conciliator in

Grand Falls as well, Jack Stanley. He used to be a conciliator there for many

years. So we did at one time have two in Corner Brook, one in Grand Falls, and

four in St. John's. It is certainly something we can take a look at.

MR. MERCER: I notice your used the words mediator

and facilitator. Of course, the individual in Corner Brook is not that per se,

is he?

MR. O'NEILL: Minister Thistle asked me the same

question. A couple of weeks ago she said: Why do you used the term, mediator and

conciliator? I guess the term conciliator, as you probably know, is an old

The terms mediator and conciliator are really interchangeable. The notion of a

conciliator is somebody who meets with the parties and basically facilitates the

process. He makes sure the parties have their positions on the table, that they

work back and forth between the parties. That has been the traditional role of a

conciliator.

A mediator - it is more contemporary now in North

America, to use the term mediator. The notion of the mediator - really they are

the same - is that a mediator is somebody who can take the parties, as we say,

out to the woodshed every now and then and have a little chat with them if they

feel they are being unreasonable. So it seems to have a little more force and

authority, but certainly the terms are interchangeable.

MR. MERCER: So these six people are, in fact,

what: conciliators, mediators, industrial relations specialists? What are they?

MR. O'NEILL: Their official title is industrial

relations specialists. I had the benefit of experiencing them in action, and

some of the newer ones as well, at the Hotel Newfoundland for the last week. I

can certainly say they are mediators, because they have no hesitation in taking

certain people to the woodshed, if they have to every now and then, and have a

little chat with them. They really work in a mediation role.

MR. MERCER: I think we will follow up with the

minister on the specifics on that a little later perhaps.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Eddie, would you like to -

MR. E. JOYCE: I would just like to, Minister and

staff, in my involvement with the government in the last twelve years, I would

just like to pat the department on the back, because I know the work that they

do on the West Coast mainly. I know a lot of the disputes that the person from

Corner Brook, Cliff, got involved with, and the staff in St. John's, and I know

the positive effects that it has on a lot of disputes in the Province. Sometimes

you go unnoticed, but I know many times, in my dealings with the disputes, that

your party usually comes to save it and get things back on track.. I know you

have dealt with a lot of issues on the West Coast, so I just want to be on

record to acknowledge the work of the department and the staff, West Coast and

St. John's, and say that you do provide a very valuable service and one that we

need. I am glad that the Department of Labour is standing as their own

department now, where now you can say yes, you are independent and you can work

for both sides.

MS THISTLE: Thank you very much.

MS M. HODDER: Minister, I have one question and

that is on 3.2.01., Assistance to St. Lawrence Miners' Dependents. I was just

wondering if that figure there under 09. Allowances and Assistance, $66,000,

does that represent the pensions that are being received right now?

MS THISTLE: Yes, it does. That was an agreement

between -

MS M. HODDER: I am aware of the agreement and

everything, fully aware of it. I just wondered if that was just pensions

included in that figure.

MS THISTLE: Yes.

MS M. HODDER: I think they get something in the

vicinity of about a $1,000 a month, most of them, wouldn't they, or does it

vary?

MS THISTLE: I am not sure of the amount per

person. In fact, I was just wondering how many -

MS M. HODDER: About $1,000 a month, about $12,000

a year, I think, would be -

MS THISTLE: In fact, I am not certain how many

that looks after.

MS M. HODDER: I was thinking maybe about 550, from

that amount, if that was all that was included. I was wondering, in the case of

settlements, if that would be included in that figure too; because I know over

the last couple of years I represented three widows whose husbands had never

received a benefit prior to their death. We did the case afterwards, and that

had been years back when they worked in the mines, and all three got settlements

like, I think, over $80,000, and then a pension as well. I think the pension

runs somewhere around $12,000, about $1,000 a month.

MS THISTLE: This was funding that was - I remember

the success of your involvement.

MS M. HODDER: I did one right back to 1955.

MS THISTLE: Yes, and I remember that. I have been

in government now for five years and I remember that particular occasion. You

were telling us of the success you had with representing a deceased - was it a

deceased worker?

MS M. HODDER: A deceased miner.

MS THISTLE: The money that is provided there was

an agreement that was made in 1973 between the Aluminum Company of Canada

Limited and the Government of Newfoundland to pay special assistance to victims

and to widows and dependents of miners who died as a result of diseases

developed when working in the fluorspar mines in St. Lawrence. I guess that will

diminish after awhile, because a lot of those -

MS M. HODDER: That is what I was thinking. It will

begin to diminish now because there are not too many cases left that could come

on stream; and even for the widows, they are starting to diminish as well.

One more thing, Minister. I wanted to compliment the

staff especially the workers' compensation here in St. John's, because I have a

lot of dealings with them, appealing cases, and a lot of times we get things

straightened out before it gets to that stage. I have to speak really highly for

the people that I have had dealings with over there.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, very much. I know their

work is complex and complicated when dealing with - it is serious enough to have

an injury or an illness, but it is nice to know that people are looked after

well. I have heard that from a lot of areas and I do appreciate your compliment

in that regard. I know that the staff - you gain a greater appreciation, I am

sure, when there is a dispute around the Province, particularly on a labour

side.

Before I came to the Department of Labour, I had the

occasion, I did not know these gentlemen at the time, but even in my district

there were occasions when matters arose that the Department of Labour was

involved in mediating settlements. I had no idea of the magnitude of work that

is done from this department; so I certainly compliment the staff for their

efforts and for the wonderful service that they are providing to the residents

of the Province.

Thank you.

CHAIR: I guess nobody else has any comments?

Sheila?

MS S. OSBORNE: I have another couple of questions

which came as a result of Fabian's question. One is the Workers' Compensation

Review Division. I have known of people who have lost their appeal at the

workers' compensation level and then gone in and the judge or the adjudicator or

whatever has ruled in their favor and then workers' compensation - Workplace,

Health and Safety, I think it is called now - has overturned it.

How much teeth or how much latitude does that

adjudicator have, does the judge in there have, Mr. Gullage?

MR. O'NEILL: I guess you are referring to the

internal appeal mechanism at the commission itself?

MS S. OSBORNE: Yes, I guess that is who overturns

it. Before, I had a couple of people whom he ruled in favour of and then they

were overturned. I always thought that the buck sort of stopped there. I just

wondered: What is the process where he can rule in favour of the person? What

would be the point of having him if the internal appeal folks down at workers'

compensation turned it down in the first place, and then it went and he ruled in

their favour, and they just overturned it again? I did not see the point of it

then.

MR. O'NEILL: When the review division, the

commissioners, Mr. Gullage, Mary O'Brien and others, make a decision on a case,

the only provision the commission would have then would be to go back and ask

for a reconsideration. While he made the (inaudible) decision, the option then

that is there for the commission, if the ruling is made against him, is to go

back and ask for a reconsideration. In the first instance, I guess, if you are

the injured worker, you feel you may have gotten the support in the review

division, but then, of course, it goes back to the commission, the decision goes

back, and the commission says: We would like for you to look at it again.

MS S. OSBORNE: Yes.

MR. O'NEILL: Then, it can go back to the review

commissioner for a request for a rehearing. The commissioner then can rehear the

case or refer it to another commissioner to rehear. Then, of course, the final

decision is made. Once that decision is made, then the only recourse, of course,

would be the courts.

MS S. OSBORNE: Okay. I wasn't sure of the process,

because when it went to him - there is another commissioner besides Mr. Gullage,

is there?

MR. O'NEILL: Actually, there are five

commissioners.

MS S. OSBORNE: Okay, because any time that I have

been in I have just struck him. I did not know if he was the only person there.

MR. O'NEILL: Mary O'Brien is another commissioner

here in St. John's, and there are three other commissioners around the Island.

MS S. OSBORNE: Okay.

Another question - this is a workers' compensation

policy - I had a person once who was injured on the job, who went to Canada

Pension and was turned down. Workers' compensation suggested that he get a

lawyer and go back to CPP. He did get a lawyer, went to CPP and won his case,

but the lawyer - I will just throw out round figures now - he got $13,000 from

Canada Pension in back benefits, the lawyer charged him $5,000, but workers'

compensation made him pay back the $13,000, which means that he went to the

lawyer to save workers' compensation money. For the privilege of doing that, he

had to pay $5,000 back to workers' compensation, which means he was really out

money in the end.

WITNESS: He should have stayed home.

MS S. OSBORNE: He really should have stayed on

workers' compensation, but it cost him. He had to pay workers' compensation his

lawyer's fee. Is that policy still in existence? Because that is really bizarre.

MR. O'NEILL: I am not really familiar with the

actual policies of the commission, certainly, because I do not work there on a

regular basis, but I have heard of the case you mentioned. In fact, as you say,

it cost the individual $5,000.

MS S. OSBORNE: To save workers' compensation

money, for the rest of his life.

MR. O'NEILL: That is right, because they recover.

They do a CPP claw back.

MS S. OSBORNE: He was satisfied to do that. He

knew that he was kind of borrowing money from them while he was waiting for CPP

to make the ruling, but then he paid them an extra $5,000, which was totally

bizarre. That is really bizarre.

MR. O'NEILL: It is a case that I have heard about.

MS S. OSBORNE: It might be interesting to look

into it and see if that is a policy they have.

I am finished now, apart from one more question. How

busy are the five mediators or industrial relations people in St. John's?

MR. G. JOYCE: I just came from conciliation

myself. I spent eleven years there. This year, for example, approximately 200

collective agreements are going to expire in the Province. They are very busy.

MS S. OSBORNE: Very busy.

The only reason I asked that was that I did not want

to lose one of them to Corner Brook. You can give them a new one if you like.

WITNESS: Or Grand Falls.

MS S. OSBORNE: Yes, or Grand Falls. You can give

them a new one, but I don't want to lose one..

That is all the questions I have.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you all very much.

I do not generally pass any comments, but I must say

that I am delighted to see that Labour has its own department.

MS S. OSBORNE: Absolutely.

CHAIR: Considering what we are into in the

Province, with hopefully a brand new industry trying to grow, I think it is more

important now than ever before, so I wish you all the very best in your

endeavors in the growth of your department. I am sure you are going to be very

busy.

MS S. OSBORNE: As a matter of fact, last year, I

remember, at Estimates, labour got lost under environment. Really, labour issues

were kind of swallowed up by environment.

MR. O'NEILL: I have attended the Estimates

Committee probably for the last five or six years when we were combined with

Environment and Labour. This is the first Estimates Committee that I have had

the opportunity to reflect on some of the issues in the department. I really

appreciate (inaudible).

MS S. OSBORNE: It was really good.

CHAIR: I have to call the heads.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01. through 4.1.01., carried.

On motion, Department of Labour, total heads, carried.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.

Document details

Collection	Newfoundland and Labrador — Committees
Citation	2001-04-03
Type	committee
Volume / chapter	committees_standingcommittees_socialservices_ga44_2001-04-03_ssc-lab_.htm
Language	en
Format	html
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	10e0bb5bec6cf6ce1ac5e57048b4a754f2270af0

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (html).