Manitoba Committee Hansard — 18 February 2016 (Justice Committee, Sitting 1, 40th Legislature, 5th Session)

40-5-ju1

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fifth Session - Fortieth Legislature of th e Legislative Assembly of Manitoba Standing Committee on Justice Chairperson Ms. Jennifer Howard Constituency of Fort Rouge V ol. LXVIII No. 1 - 6 p.m., Thursday, February 18, 2016 ISSN 1708-6671

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Fortieth Legislature Member Constituency Political Affiliation ALLAN, Nancy St. Vital NDP ALLUM, James, Hon. Fort Garry-Riverview NDP ALTEMEYER, Rob Wolseley NDP ASHTON, Steve, Hon. Thompson NDP BLADY, Sharon, Hon. Kirkfield Park NDP BRAUN, Erna, Hon. Rossmere NDP BRIESE, Stuart Agassiz PC CALDWELL, Drew, Hon. Brandon East NDP CHIEF, Kevin, Hon. Point Douglas NDP CHOMIAK, Dave, Hon. Kildonan NDP CROTHERS, Deanne, Hon. St. James NDP CULLEN, Cliff Spruce Woods PC DEWAR, Greg, Hon.

Selkirk NDP DRIEDGER, Myrna Charleswood PC EICHLER, Ralph Lakeside PC EWASKO, Wayne Lac du Bonnet PC FRIESEN, Cameron Morden-Winkler PC GAUDREAU, Dave St. Norbert NDP GERRARD, Jon, Hon. River Heights Liberal GOERTZEN, Kelvin Steinbach PC GRAYDON, Cliff Emerson PC HELWER, Reg Brandon West PC HOWARD, Jennifer Fort Rouge NDP IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri, Hon. Fort Richmond NDP JHA, Bidhu Radisson NDP KOSTYSHYN, Ron, Hon. Swan River NDP LATHLIN, Amanda The Pas NDP LEMIEUX, Ron, Hon. Dawson Trail NDP MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. St. Johns NDP MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NDP MARCELINO, Flor, Hon.

Logan NDP MARCELINO, Ted Tyndall Park NDP MARTIN, Shannon Morris PC MELNICK, Christine Riel NDP MITCHELSON, Bonnie River East PC NEVAKSHONOFF, Thomas, Hon. Interlake NDP OSWALD, Theresa Seine River NDP PALLISTER, Brian Fort Whyte PC PEDERSEN, Blaine Midland PC PETTERSEN, Clarence Flin Flon NDP PIWNIUK, Doyle Arthur-Virden PC REID, Daryl, Hon. Transcona NDP ROBINSON, Eric, Hon. Kewatinook NDP RONDEAU, Jim Assiniboia NDP ROWAT, Leanne Riding Mountain PC SARAN, Mohinder, Hon. The Maples NDP SCHULER, Ron St. Paul PC SELINGER, Greg, Hon. St.

Boniface NDP SMOOK, Dennis La Verendrye PC STEFANSON, Heather Tuxedo PC STRUTHERS, Stan Dauphin NDP SWAN, Andrew Minto NDP WIEBE, Matt Concordia NDP WIGHT, Melanie, Hon. Burrows NDP WISHART, Ian Portage la Prairie PC Vacant Gimli – Vacant Southdale –

1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE Thursday, February 18, 2016 TIME – 6 p.m. LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba CHAIRPERSON – Ms. Jennifer Howard (Fort Rouge) VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park) ATTENDANCE – 11 QUORUM – 6 Members of the Committee present: Hon. Ms. Braun, Hon. Messrs. Chomiak, Mackintosh, Hon. Ms. Marcelino Messrs. Goertzen, Graydon, Ms. Howard, Messrs. Marcelino, Smook, Swan, Wishart APPEARING: Hon. Jon Gerrard, MLA for River Heights Mr. David Wright, Legislative Counsel PUBLIC PRESENTERS: Bill 300 –The Mount Carmel Clinic Amendment Act Mr.

Chad Smith, Mount Carmel Clinic Bill 8 –The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act (Leave for Victims of Domestic Violence, Leave for Serious Injury or Illness and Extension of Compassionate Care Leave) Mr. Kevin Rebeck, Manitoba Federation of Labour Ms. Charlene Matheson, private citizen Ms. Barbara Byers, Canadian Labour Congress Ms. Michelle Gawronsky, Manitoba Government and General Employees Union Mr. William Gardner, Manitoba Employers Council Ms. Gloria Kelly, Public Service Alliance of Canada Mr. Dave Sauer, private citizen Ms. Charlotte Cameron, Winnipeg Labour Council Ms.

Carmen Neufeld, private citizen Ms. Gina Smoke, Unifor Ms. Leanne Sookram, private citizen Ms. Carmen LeDarney, private citizen Ms. Pamela McLeod, Willow Place Ms. Beatrice Bruske, United Food and Commercial Workers Bill 11 –The Domestic Violence and Stalking Amendment Act Ms. Jane Ursel, private citizen Ms. Kim Storeshaw, A Woman's Place , Norwest Co-op Community Health Centre Bill 33 –The Family Law Reform Act (Putting Children First) Mr. Lawrence Pinsky, Manitoba Bar Association Mr.

Trent Tait, private citizen WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: Bill 11 –The Domestic Violence and Stalking Amendment Act Maddie Laberge, private citizen Trudy L. Lavallee, Ikwe Widdjiitiwin, Inc.

Bill 33 –The Family Law Reform Act (Putting Children First) Nicholas Bala, Faculty of Law, Queen's University MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION: Bill 8 –The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act (Leave for Victims of Domestic Violence, Leave for Serious Injury or Illness and Extension of Compassionate Care Leave) Bill 11 –The Domestic Violence and Stalking Amendment Act Bill 33 –The Family Law Reform Act (Putting Children First) Bill 300 –The Mount Carmel Clinic Amendment Act * * * Clerk Assistant (Mr. Andrea Signorelli): Good evening. Will the Stan ding Committee of Justice please come to order.

Before the committee can proceed with the business before it, it must elect a new Chairperson. Are there any nominations for this position?

2 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): I'd like to nominate Ms. Howard. Clerk Assistant: Ms. Howard has been nominated. Are there any other nominations? Hearing no other nominations, Ms. Howard, will you please take the Chair. Madam Chairperson: Our next item of business is the election of a Vice- Chairperson. Are there any nominations? Mr. Swan: I nominate Mr. Marcelino from Tyndall Park. Madam Chairperson: Mr. Marcelino has been nominated. Are there any other nominations? Hearing no other nominations, Mr. Marcelino is elected Vice-Chairperson.

This meeting has been called t o consider the following bills: Bill 8, The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act (Leave for Victims of Domestic Violence, Leave for Serious Injury or Illness and Extension of Compassionate Care Leave); Bill 11, The Domestic Violence and Stalking Amendment Act; Bill 33 , The Family Law Reform Act (Putting Children First) ; and Bill 300 , The Mount Carmel Clinic Amendment Act. I would like to inform all in attendance of the provisions in our rules regarding the hour of adjournment.

Except by unanimous consent, a standing committee meeting to consider a bill in the evening must not sit past midnight to hear presentations, unless fewer than 20 presenters are registered to speak to all bills being considered when the committee meets at 6 p.m. As of 6 o'clock this evening, there were 22 persons registered to speak, as noted on the list of presenters before you. Therefore, according t o our rules, this committee may not sit past midnight to hear presentations.

I would also add that it was previously announced that the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development would meet, if necessary, on Monday, February 22nd and on Tuesday, February 23rd, 2016 at 6 p.m. to continue consideration of the bills on tonight's agenda. Therefore, how late does the committee wish to sit this evening? Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Madam Chairperson, I'd suggest we review at 11:30 p.m. Madam Chairperson: It's been suggested that we review at 11:30.

Is that acceptable to the committee? [Agreed] On the topic of determining the order of public presentations, I will note that we have out -of-town presenters in attendance, marked with an asterisk on your list. With that consideration in mind, in what order does the committee wish to hear the presentations? Mr. Swan: Yes, I would agree hearing the out -of- town presenters first with one exception. I note there's only one presenter for Bill 300, The Mount Carmel Clinic Amendment Act who I see is present right now. I'd ask that that one person be allowed to present and the n we move on to the out -of-town guests.

Madam Chairperson: So it's been suggested that we start with the one presenter to Bill 300, and then we move through the list with out-of-town presenters going first. Is that acceptable to the committee? [Agreed] Written submissions from the following persons have been received and distributed to committee members: Maddie Laberge on Bill 11; Trudy L. Lavallee from Ikwe Widdjiitiwin, Inc. on Bill 11 ; and Nicholas Bala from the Faculty of Law, Queen's University, on Bill 33.

Does the committee agree to receive these documents and have them appear in the Hansard transcript of this meeting? [Agreed] So we have agreed to have those documents appear in the Hansard transcript. This just in. We have another presenter, Pamela McLeod, Willow –is that correct? From Willow Place. We're going to add her to the list for Bill 8, and Kevin Rebeck has let us know that he's from out of town, so he will be considered an out -of-town presenter. Before we proceed with presentations , we do have a number of other items and points of information to consider.

First of all, if there's anyone else in the audience who would like to make a presentation this evening, please register with the staff at the entrance to the room at the back of t he room. Also, for the information of all presenters, while written versions of your presentations are not required, if you are going to accompany your presentation with written materials, we ask that you provide 20 copies. If you need help with

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3 photocopying, please speak with our staff at the back of the room. As well, in accordance with our rules, a time limit of 10 minutes has been allotted for presentations, with another five minutes allowed for questions from committee members. If a presenter is not in attendance when their name is called, they will be dropped to the bottom of the list, and if the presenter is not in attendance when their name is called a second time, they will be removed from the presenters' list.

Prior to proceeding with public presentations, I'd like to advise members of the public regarding the process for speaking in committee. The proceedings of our meetings are recorded in order to provide a verbatim transcript. Each time someone wishes to speak, whether it be an MLA or a prese nter, I first have to say the person's name. This is the signal for the Hansard recorder to turn the mics on and off. Thank you for your patience and we will now proceed with public presentations.

Bill 300–The Mount Carmel Clinic Amendment Act Madam Chairperson: So, as previously agreed, I will now call on Chad Smith, board chair of the Mount Carmel Clinic, to present to Bill 300. Welcome, Chad. Do you have a written presentation? Mr. Chad Smith (Mount Carmel Clinic) : No, just an oral presentation. Madam Chairperson: Great. Please proceed. Mr. Smith : Thank you. Thank you, everyone, for taking the time to consider the changes that we are requesting. Mount Carmel Clinic is the oldest community health clinic in Canada, as well as the largest in Winnipeg.

Our mission statement is that Mount Carmel Clinic is a unique community health centre, and we exist to work together with people, families, and communities to enhance lifelong health and well -being. Our vision statement is seeing healthy, strong children, youth, adults, elders and communities. We operate from a harm -reduction, non-judgmental approach to work to serve the clients, patients and the different communities that we are part of and that access our services. * (18:10) This year, we are approaching our 90th anniversary of service delivery, and Mount Carmel Clinic first started operations in 1926.

Over the past 90 years, we've changed and responded to the needs of our clients, patients and the community, and we continue t o do so. We have connections with over 100,000 clients and community members and participants every year through a variety of services that includes primary health, dental, chiropractic, counselling, outreach work with social work services, X -ray, the Anne Ross Day Nursery, midwifery, foot care, teen clinics, the Multicultural Wellness program, the Mothering Project, Sage House.

We deliver responsible and ethical pharmacy services, diabetes care and provide HOUSINGFirst and working with the homeless populat ion through the Assertive Community Treatment program, to name just a few if the programs and the services that we offer. Currently, The Mount Carmel Clinic Act requires the clinic to have a board of directors of 25 individuals. When the clinic was first formed this would've been standard practice and made sense at that time.

Nowadays, best practice informs us that a board size of 12 to 15 is appropriate for the board to be best able to work with the executive director in an accountable, responsible and et hical engagement way. With this in mind, we're pleased that we are at this stage and we're appreciative of the support of all the members of this committee for your support in the revision. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thanks very much, Chad. Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): Well, Mr. Smith, thank you for coming down. I understand you're the chairman of –chairperson of the board, and I thank you for taking on that role.

I know you've been involved in a number of good works in the city and the province, and may be this is a bit of a new challenge. It's been a real pleasure for me to get to know more about what Mount Carmel Clinic does. I've always known where it existed on Main Street. I've always known some of the programs, but it's been a great experience to l earn more about the work that's being done, and, hopefully, with these common - sense changes we'll pave the way for at least another 90 successful years for Mount Carmel Clinic. Thank you.

4 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Thank you for coming down. And I was at one of your recent annual meetings and appreciate all the work that you do on behalf of many people, so thank you. Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Thank you as well for spending a little bit of time here this evening, maybe not as long as ever ybody else will be, but we certainly have every reason to believe this bill will pass in the upcoming session in the next couple of weeks, and thank you for your good work. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much. Thank you for coming.

Bill 8–The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act (Leave for Victims of Domestic Violence, Leave for Serious Injury or Illness and Extension of Compassionate Care Leave) Madam Chairperson: We will now proceed to Bill 8, The Employment Standards Code Amend- ment Act (Leave for Victims of Domestic Violence, Leave for Serious Injury or Illness and Extension of Compassionate Care Leave). And we will start with Kevin Rebeck from the Manitoba Federation of Labour. Welcome, Mr. Rebeck. Do you have written presentations? Mr. Kevin Rebeck (Manitoba Federation of Labour): I do, and they're being distributed.

Madam Chairperson: Okay. Thank you very much. I see them behind you. You can start whenever you're ready. Mr. Rebeck: Great. Thank you, and good evening, committee Chair, Minister Braun, members of the Legislative Assembly, sisters and brothers. I'm Kevin Rebeck, president of the Manitoba Federation of Labour. The MFL is Manitoba's central labour body. We're chartered by the Canadian Labour Congress to represent the interests of affiliated unions representing over a 100,000 working men and women in Manitoba.

I'm very pleased to be here tonight to put on the record our strong support for Bill 8 and the creation of domestic-violence employment leave in Manitoba. Before I begin, I want to mention that there are a number of Federation of Labour executive council members and MFL women's committee members here in the room tonight, and I want to thank them for their commitment and advocacy on this very important issue. On behalf of the Federation of Labour, I also want to recognize and say thank you to Sister Barb Byers of the Canadian Labour Congress, who is also with us in Winnipeg tonight.

Sister Byers has led much of the charge on this issue in Ottawa, both for more research into the impacts of domestic violence in the workplace and, of course, for more action to prevent violence and protect victims, including innovative workplace solutions like guaranteed employment leave. We're thrilled that she could be here this evening to sha re more about the results of the CLC's groundbreaking research in this area.

I also want to acknowledge and commend the pioneering work of unions within Canada and internationally in winning collective agreements that guarantee job leave for victims of domestic violence, and in so doing it helped to change the political landscape to normalize these gains and to set the stage for legislation like Bill 8 to extend these important protections to all workers.

We're proud that Manitoba is the first province to be taking this kind of significant legislative action to help put an end to domestic violence, and we hope Bill 8 meets with the unanimous support of our Legislature and that other provinces are quick to follow suit. I know this standing committee wil l be discussing other bills tonight that also aim to strengthen protection for the victims of domestic violence. Domestic violence has often been overlooked as a workplace issue, but we know that people in crisis don't leave their abusive situations at home when they shut the door and leave for work each day.

The profound impact of domestic violence travels beyond the home, following people to their jobs and impacting their ability to work and earn a decent living. These facts are proven out in their – proven out in the research undertaken by the CLC in a first -of-its-kind, pan- Canadian survey into the effects of domestic violence in the workplace.

Not surprisingly, the research confirms that domestic violence remains stubbornly prevalent in our society, that both women and men experience domestic violence, but women far more frequently; that vulnerable groups experience much higher rates of domestic violence; that domestic violence is often

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 5 experienced at or near the workplace, victimizing targets and impact ing co- workers and the entire workplace; and that domestic violence interferes with job performance, reduces income and threatens financial security. Bill 8 recognizes these workplace realities and creates provisions for victims to take time away from work, including a limited number of days with pay when it's necessary, whether it's to get help from family, seek legal support, make reports to the police or make plans to relocate for protection.

Bill 8's groundbreaking legislation, a Canadian first in pro viding job protection specifically for victims of domestic violence and a Manitoba first in providing paid employment leave in recognition of the importance of income security to empowering victims to break free of domestic violence. Specifically, the bill provides for up to 10 days for victims to use, intermittently or consecutively, including five days paid and an additional 17 weeks to be used consecutively for longer term requirements. Having access to paid employment leave will take some pressure off of victims.

It'll mean one less thing to worry about during an already stressful and trying time. There are already so many other barriers to escaping domestic violence; fearing for your job shouldn't be another one.

We do acknowledge that paid leave protection may result in a modest cost for employers, but it's important to understand that employers already bear significant costs as a result of domestic violence: increased absenteeism, higher replacement, recruitment and training costs, reduced productivity, higher employer health expenses, lower employee morale and strained co -worker relations – relationships and potential harm when violent abusers approach or enter the workplace. Justice Canada has put those costs as high as $78 million annually.

Many empl oyers already try hard to provide meaningful support to employees affected by domestic violence. Paid leave provides another tool to help build healthier workplaces. I would note as well that Bill 8 includes two updates to The Employment Standards Code t o align Manitoba leave provisions with benefits already available under the Canadian employment insurance system. Bill 8 extends compassionate care leave from eight to 28 weeks and establishes leave protection for workers who are seriously injured or ill, for up to 17 weeks.

Without these amendments, a worker could find herself in the preserve –perverse situation of qualifying for EI benefits to be away from work but not being permitted to take leave from her job in Manitoba. Job protection is a necessary companion of income protection if such benefits are to have their intended value. These are positive updates and alignments with federal law. I note that the bill specifies an April 1st coming into force for two of these provisions but the rest of the act is to come into force upon proclamation.

We understand that it's government's intention to consult on regulations, particularly related to what sort of documentation will be required in order to access the new leaves prior to proclaiming the act. We think it's really important that domestic violence victims and service providers and others are consulted carefully to ensure that the requirements to access these leaves are workable and don't create further obstacles. We are a bit concerned, however, about a t otally open- ended proclamation time frame.

Given how important the provisions of this bill are, it's important that we operationalize these new leaves promptly. We wonder if it might not be more prudent to fix a specific coming -into-force date in legislation, ensuring it's one that allows for proper consultation to take place. Before I conclude I also want to make a remark about the process leading up to the introduction on the bill, and on this point I believe the government could and should have done it better, and I hope will do so in the future.

There's a long- standing tradition in Manitoba of having the Labour Management Review Committee, or LMRC, review and provide advice on any and all proposed amendments or changes to labour -related legislation, suc h as The Employment Standards Code we're discussing tonight. * (18:20) The committee is composed of an equal number of labour and employer representatives and is co- chaired by Mr. Gardner and myself. I'm proud to say, with the exception of advice on annual minimum wage increases, the LMRC has provided government with consensus recommendations on all issues we've been asked to examine.

An LMRC review is a constructive process, one in which labour and employer representatives roll up their sleeves and work together to find positive ground. In the case of Bill 8, the LMRC was only given a single brief opportunity to discuss the intent of the bill, insufficient time for careful review and discussion. So we –while the Manitoba Federation of Labour strongly supports this bill, we'd urge the government to ensure that regular time frames and processes for

6 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 LMRC review and recommendations are respected and followed prior to introducing bills. Before I conclude, I'd like to share two personal stories, and they aren't in the written submission. And when I entered the workforce as a young man and started working, I had a co- worker who was a good friend of mine, and we had a lot of fun at work and talked about everything together, one of my best friends. And I was home one evening and my phone rang, and she called me in tears, and she said, Kevin, can you come get me?

And my answer, of course, was yes, and I asked if she wanted to talk a bit more, and she didn't. So I got in my car and I went to her house, and she was at her door with her two infant children and a couple of suitcases, and we loaded them into the car. And she told me she couldn't take him hitting her anymore and that she was fearful for her children. And I drove her to her cousin's, and we spent a long time talking and a long time crying.

And she had been saving up secretly, because she couldn't save up openly, so that she could have a first and last month's down payment to be able to leave him and have a place to go that was safe. And she was worried and planning and figuring out how she would make new child-care arrangements and worried and planning on how she'd figure out how to go to work because I drove her across town to her cousin's place. And I seriously believe a bill like the one we're talking about tonight would have made a serious difference in her life and allowed her to leave sooner. And then I have another friend.

Her name's Shannon. I met Shannon at a union school. She was taking a course, introduction to shop stewarding. She was bright and keen, inquisitive, and she was very passionate about learning to stand up and give voice to people who had trouble finding their voice. And I was excited about her being involved in the labour movement, and she was excited about coming to her first conven tion in a month's time. And at that convention I was chairing the convention, and I was looking for her in the hall as things came to order. I didn't spot her, but it's a large crowd and I hoped to find her later.

And she wasn't at convention, and at noon I learned why. It's because the night before she and her live-in boyfriend got in an argument. And he ended the argument like he usually did, we found out later, through violence; only this time he picked up a hammer and he took her life. So she never made it to her first convention. And I can't help but wonder if there was a law like this in place –was she saving up to leave? And how close did she get before she was ready to make that move? A law like this will save lives.

No one should have to live in te rror at home, and no one should have to die at the hands of a loved one. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the bill. I think that now is a critical time for political leaders to take a stand on this important issue because whether we're directly affected or not, everyone is hurt by domestic violence. I urge you to pass this bill. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Rebeck. Hon.

Erna Braun (Minister of Labour and Immigration): Thank you very much, Kevin, for your passionate pres entation, and the items that you've indicated to us, we'll certainly be looking at and taking under advisement. So I appreciate your advocacy and the work that your membership does. Thank you. Mr. Dennis Smook (La Verendrye) : Thank you, Mr. Rebeck, for y our presentation. I'm sure we all – everybody in this room would like to do as much as we can to get rid of domestic violence, and it's an important issue. You had mentioned about the LMRC.

Is it something that–is it still possible for the LMRC to help with the rest of this bill? Mr. Rebeck: I'm sure the LMRC could continue some discussions to provide some further guidance. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I just want to say thank you for coming in and presenting and telling the moving stories that you did. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Seeing no other questions, thank you very much, Mr. Rebeck. Next, I'll call Charlene Matheson. Thank you very much, you can proceed. Ms.

Charlene Matheson (Private Citizen): Good evening, committee Chair, Minister Braun, members of the Legislative Assembly, sisters and brothers. My name is Charlene Matheson. I'm a Unifor member and I'm co -chair of the women's committee on the Federation of Labour. It is my pleasure to be here this evening along with the MFL's president Kevin Rebeck and several members of our women's committee behind me to

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 7 express our strong support for Bill 8, The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act (Leave for Victims of Domestic Violence, Leave for Serious Injury or Illness and Extension of Compassionate Care Leave). The labour movement has advocated for this type of guaranteed job and income protection for victims of domestic violence for some tim e, and we're very proud that Manitoba is the first jurisdiction in Canada to bring this forward.

I also want to thank sister Barb Byers, secretary treasurer of the Canadian Labour Congress, a dear friend of the MFL women's committee, who had made a special trip in from Ottawa today just to present to this committee. Barb was one of the driving forces behind the CLC's groundbreaking research into the effects of domestic violence in the workplace, which has helped to shape innovative policy responses like those reflected in Bill 8.

We believe that passing Bill 8 will significantly improve the health, safety and well-being of working families who are affected by domestic violence both at home and in the workplace. This is especially true for working women as women continue to make up the majority of domestic violence victims and are also more likely than men to be the victims of severe forms of abuse. Bill 8 will help put a stop to the domestic violence by affording workers greater flexibility to take time awa y from work when they need to do in–need to be in order to take –deal with– to deal with their abusive situations.

This bill is about keeping workers safe at home and at work and about promoting gender equality, fairness and compassion. We commend the gover nment for taking a principled stand on these critical issues and bringing forward this important legislation. We hope this committee will send a strong message in opposition to domestic violence and support this bill unanimously.

The CLC's research has helped to confirm that workers and unions have long known that the severe impacts of domestic violence follow people to work and can hurt their job performance, impact their co - workers and make their jobs and income more precarious. We know that women trappe d in domestic-violence situations tend to have more disrupted work histories due to their injuries and other challenges straining their incomes and creating more financial insecurity.

These are important consequences to consider because having a job and a decent income are essential foundations for women to be able to leave an abusive situation and maintain a decent standard of living for themselves and their children. That's why the MFL women's committee is proud to support Bill 8 because it provides for a suite of leave protections that will address a broad range of circumstances, both short and long term. That may require victims of domestic violence to take time off work to deal with their situations.

Job protection will make it easier for victims of do mestic violence to take time away to seek medical treatment or counselling, apply for a protection order or appear before court, speak with police or legal counsel, relocate to a new home or move into a shelter. In doing so, Bill 8 will open more doors for victims of domestic violence to escape abuse. Of particular importance is the bill's provision for up to five days of paid leave, which will allow victims to take time off without leaving –without having to sacrifice their income.

Financial stability is a critical, empowering consideration for victims of domestic violence and can make the difference between leaving a violent relationship or staying. This is especially true when children are involved and need to be provided for. The value of job protection is seriously undermined without commensurate income protection, so these –so this feature of the legislation is absolutely essential. We also note and commend Bill 8's attention to confidentiality of information and restrictions on further disclosure of information related to a victim's abuse or circumstances.

It is critically important that victims are assured that their disclosure of domestic violence circumstances to access leave protection will be kept confidential and not to be used in any way that cou ld worsen their situation or serve as a deterrent from taking steps to escape abuse. * (18:30) Bill 8 proposes that regulations will be developed to specify the types of verification that may be used to access domestic violence leave, and this is reasona ble. We encourage government to consult broadly with victims of domestic violence, caregivers and service providers to determine appropriate forms of verification.

It will be important to ensure that verification documentation is easily accessible to victims and does not add to their stress and hardship. Regulations should be enabling and empowering, not restrictive.

8 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 Lastly, we would note that while Bill 8 represents a major step forward in the fight against domestic violence, much more remains to be done , and we encourage government to also take steps to provide more support for shelters as safe refuges for victims of violence and their families, including better facilities and more training and fair wages for support workers to provide quality family violence services and to promote gender equality and fighting homophobia as a key component of violence protection and strengthen processes around protection orders, prevention orders and peace bonds for victims of stalking and domestic violence and to invest in specialized programming for vulnerable populations, including transgendered, Aboriginal and the LGBTQ individuals, as well as persons with disabilities, and to ensure legal aid services are available for family law matters and invest in broader social issues affecting victims such as housing, child care and addictions services.

In conclusion, I want to reiterate our appreciation to Erna Braun, Minister of Labour, for sponsoring this bill, Kerri Irvin -Ross, Minister responsible for the Status of Women, who has also championed this effort, and Jennifer Howard, the MLA for Fort Rouge, who initiated this bill and didn't give up until it became a reality. Thank you very much for allowing me to speak. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much, Charlene. Ms. Braun: Thank you for coming this evening and sharing your insights and the work that you do on behalf of women. Thank you. Mr.

Smook : Thank you very much, Charlene, for coming out tonight and giving us your views on this bill. It's greatly appreciated fo r your time to come out. Thank you. Ms. Matheson: Thank you. Mr. Gerrard: I just want to thank you for your advocacy and your work on behalf of people who are victims of domestic violence and all the recommendations you've got in terms of how we can do better to improve the situation and prevent domestic violence. Thank you. Ms. Matheson: Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Seeing no other questions, thank you very much, Ms. Matheson. Next I'll call Barbara Byers, Canadian Labour Congress.

I can see your written material being distributed, so I'll let you begin whenever you're ready. Ms. Barbara Byers (Canadian Labour Congress): Thank you very much for the opportunity to be here. My name is Barbara Byers. I'm the secretary - treasurer of the Canadian Labour Congress. Bonjour and merci beaucoup. The Canadian Labour Congress is a national voice of 3.3 million workers in Canada.

We bring together Canada's national and international unions, along with provincial and territorial federations of labour and 130 district labour councils whose members work in virtually all sectors of the Canadian economy, in all occupations and in all parts of Canada. We are here tonight to strongly support Bill 8, The Employment Standards Code Amend- ment Act, and in particular the provisions for paid domestic violence leave.

This legislation, when passed, w ill be a model for other jurisdictions in Canada, and it's an important component of ensuring that workers who experience violence at home are safe and supported at work. In 2014, the CLC and Western University Centre for Research & Education on Violence Against Women & Children conducted the first ever pan- Canadian survey on the impact of domestic violence at work. We got the idea, by the way, from Australia, which I'm going to be referring to later, but we went pan-Canadian in ours. The online survey launched on December 6, 2013, and was open for six months until June 6, 2014.

The survey was open to women and men 15 years of age and older, whether or not they had directly experienced domestic violence or knew someone who had. Participants were recruited via the networks of the labour movement and through a broad reach in communities across the country. You did not have to be a union member to participate. The survey consisted of over 60 questions focused on people's experiences with domestic violence and the workplace, including questions about whether they were personally experiencing domestic violence.

Those with personal experience were asked additional questions, such as how the domestic violence impacted their work and co- workers, whether they disc ussed the violence with anyone at work and what types of workplace supports they received.

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 9 The questions were reviewed and approved by Western University's Research Ethics Board, and Western University was the group that received all the survey results. The first results of the survey were released on December 6, 2014, and you have copies of those initial findings: 8,429 people across Canada responded to our survey. And you'll see many highlights in that report, but I want to touch on a few of them. We identified one in three workers who had experienced domestic violence, and one in three know of co- workers who have.

This is even when you look at the idea that 60 per cent of people don't talk to anyone at work about the violence that they're experiencing. We also confirmed domestic violence follows people to work. Over half of the respondents who said they had experienced violence indicated that the violence occurred at or near their workplace, and 82 per cent stated it affected their productivity; 38 per cent reported that they'd been prevented from going to work; and more than 8 per cent lost a job.

You'll see in the survey that 75 per cent of the people that responded support paid leaves and safety policies on the issues of domestic violence. So all of those results should be a wake -up call for unions, for employers and for governments. Clearly, domestic violence is a significant issue for Canadian workers, and it affects everyone. As you've heard, security of employment is a key pathway to leaving a violent relationship.

By providing paid leave and job protection, this legislation would ensure that people who experience violence at home are able to do what they need to do to keep themselves and their children safe without worrying about their job, w hether that's seeking counselling, dealing with law enforcement, seeking legal advice or making safety or relocation arrangements. Now, while the notion of domestic violence leave is relatively new in Canada, it has become a standard collective agreement provision in Australia, where almost 2 million workers have access to domestic violence provisions.

A recent survey of Australian employers' experiences with paid domestic leave in the workplace has revealed overwhelmingly positive results for companies a nd their employees. The research has shown that paid domestic leave requests are modest, and leave can be delivered at minimal cost and inconvenience. The survey conducted by the Gendered Violence Research Network and the University of New South Wales found that one third of respondents reported at least one domestic violence leave request in the past 12 months. Of those employees who requested domestic leave, 92 per cent were women.

The typical amount of leave taken was two to three days. One quarter of e mployers had received requests for alternate work arrangements, such as differing starting times, alternate car parking and change in phone numbers to improve their safety. Employers reported highly positive outcomes with raised workplace morale and employ ees feeling safe, supported and free from losing their jobs. And I should say that initially employers in Australia were hesitant to do this. They thought that maybe the leaves would be, as they said, abused. What they found was that that was not the cas e.

The leaves that were taken were the ones that were necessary. * (18:40) So, although the experience in Australia shows that the average leave taken is short and certainly within the five days paid leave proposed in Manitoba's Bill 8, we support the additional possibility of longer, unpaid leave if an individual's situation warrants it. We must realize that each case is different and workers who may be in extremely difficult or risky situations may need additional time.

The job protection this legislation affords is fundamental to their security and their safety and, unfortunately, as we've done our work since we started this survey, that the stories that you heard from Kevin Rebeck earlier are the stories that people come up regularly and tell us about, either publicly in conventions and meetings or out in the hallway, saying, this is my experience as well. We've asked the federal government to convene a round table of employers in the federal sector, unions, governments and service providers to continue this discussion and get work moving at the federal level.

And we know that improving the workplace response to domestic violence will require a multi -pronged approach by legislators such as yourselves, employers, unions and advocates to protect and support victims and assist perpetrators in changing their behaviour.

10 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 Ultimately, preventing violence and its consequences is a collective social challenge, so one place where that can–change can happen for victims, offenders and employers is the workplace. This legislation provides an important source of support and protect ion for workers in Manitoba. The Canadian Labour Congress encourages members of this Legislative Assembly to support the bill. I've also provided to you a small leaflet about a resource centre that we've just recently launched on our website that provide s some resources.

It is a living website in the sense that it provides ideas, new information coming in about leave provisions. Certainly we're highlighting Manitoba as well, and I do want to close by saying that next month in New York there is the United Nations commission on status of women, which is held every year around that time, and they deal with a variety of topics. The question of violence against women and girls is always a piece of the discussion we have there.

The Canadian government will be hosting an official side event on the question of the effects of domestic violence and work, and you have three people here from the trade union movement in Manitoba that are going to be at the UNCSW. You also have a lot of community allies that are in your community-based organizations that will be there. I know that if you could pass this legislation before we get there, they would be jubilant.

But I'm sure that they would be jubilant if we were all in New York and they heard that the Manitoba government had passed this legislation and we could celebrate it with people not just from across Canada but around the world about the groundbreaking work that you are doing here. Thanks very much. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much, Ms. Byers. Ms. Braun: Thank you very much, Barbara, for sharing the information. I've had the opportunity to hear your presentation before and the work that was done to bring this research to our attention.

So I really appreciate this and thank you for coming from a distance to be here this evening. Ms. Byers : It's always good to be home on the prairies. I'm a Saskatchewan gal. Ms. Braun: I'll just note that for the record that Ms. Byers is from Saskatchewan. We would not want that to go unnoted. Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): From Saskatchewan but cheering for the Bombers, I'm sure. Ms. Byers: Okay, we're not going there. Mr. Goertzen: We'll be here all night. On the –thank you very much for sharing the statistics and the experience from Australia.

Has this–have any of t he provisions within the bill been collectively bargained within Canada that we could have some experience of what that has been like, if it's been part of collective agreements within Canada? [interjection] Madam Chairperson: Ms. Byers. Ms. Byers: Oh, sorry. Madam Chairperson: That's okay. Ms. Byers: Sorry. I was ready to jump in– Madam Chairperson: I know. Ms. Byers: There is one place in Canada that does have collective bargaining language, which is the Yukon. The Yukon Teachers' Association has fi ve days of paid leave and, again, with some provisions to expand that where required.

There is a –since we've started doing this work there are other unions that are taking this to the bargaining table. There is one post-secondary centre in Ontario that has taken it and bargained leave with their employers. So it's certainly gathering steam as we go along in terms of that experience. But they –we relied a lot on our friends in Australia and the work that was done there, but they're also relying on us, because the Canadian labour movement and our allies in the community have really taken up the issue of the education that needs to be done.

We're looking at doing–developing programs that every workplace can offer: a one- hour presentation to all employees. We're looking at developing specialized education for people to be able to deal with this issue. We're calling on all employers to have –and that includes, by the way, unions as employers –to have safety provisions in their workplaces and not just when an incident is known about. So, in terms of collective bargaining, we're actually doing a lot of catch -up right now, but we're moving at a very fast speed.

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 11 Mr. Gerrard: Thank you for your presentation and for the important findings that you've brought forward. Are there any other countries beside Australia which have moved in this direction? [interjection] Madam Chairperson: Ms. Byers. Ms. Byers: Oops, sorry. Madam Chairperson: That's okay. It's an awkward thing and we'll all get used to it as the night goes on. Ms. Byers: We are part of a international domestic violence at work gathering that –so there are some other countries that are moving on this as well.

There are some in Europe that are–have moved on it, again, in different ways, but Australia is probably our closest c omparison of what we're doing. But there are some, certainly as part of our network, not as far advanced as Australia is, and once Manitoba passes this, not as far advanced as Manitoba's going to be. Madam Chairperson: Thank you, Ms. Byers. Thank you for your presentation. I do just want to let the committee know that we've had another person register to speak on Bill 8, John Callahan, from the Amalgamated Transit Union. So he's been added to the list.

Now we'll move to Michelle Gawronsky from the MGEU–president of the MGEU. Do you have a written presentation? Ms. Michelle Gawronsky (Manitoba Government and General Employees' Union): I do. Madam Chairperson: Okay. You can start whenever you're ready. Ms. Gawronsky: Thank you very much. Good evening, everyone. My name, again, is Michelle Gawronsky and I’m the president of the Manitoba Government and General Employees' Union, MGEU.

It is truly my pleasure to be here to speak on this in support of Bill 8, The Employme nt Standards Code Amendment Act (Leave for Victims of Domestic Violence, Leave for Serious Injury or Illness and Extension of Compassionate Care Leave). This legislation embodies the key factor that is so desperately missing in a respectful and compas - sionate workplace. Victims of domestic violence struggle with its effect in every aspect of their life, and those issues follow victims to their jobs every single day.

As president of the MGEU, I've sadly seen first - hand how domestic violence affects our members in their workplaces. I've dealt with issues where employers are docking someone's pay because they didn't show up for work again today. Meanwhile, that employee was too scared to go back to work with a black eye or other physical injuries and have their co -workers know what is really going on at home. Or, when that employee had to pick everything up and fled to a shelter to seek refuge.

Going to work the next day, trying to bottle up those emotions, that is not something any domestic violence survivor should ever have to do. The only way to heal properly is to talk about those emotions and those feelings. But right now, in the current workplace climate, we don't have that level of understanding. We are victimizing the victims. Getting out of an abusive relationship isn't even remotely easy, and when you are fearing for your job on top of that because you've had to miss a day of work, that only adds to the stress and makes leaving even harder.

Throughout the course of this evening, I have no doubt that y ou have heard –and you're going to hear some more –very startling statistics and facts about the effects of domestic violence in the workplace, how it affects other employees or what it does to the company's bottom line. But what I'm here to talk about tonight, on behalf of working families and all our MGEU members, is how domestic violence affects a working parent. This story is very personal but it's one that I want to share. It's one that I want you all to remember when you consider your vote on this legis lation.

This is a story of two women and their struggles as domestic violence victims. * (18:50) The first woman I want to tell you about is Kathy. Kathy was one heck of a hard worker. She was a devoted loving mother of 10 –yes, I said 10. She was a farmer's wife and took care of everything in the house from meals to household chores and also helped out on the farm. On top of that, Kathy worked in the public school system. She helped care for special-needs children, which is something she was extremely proud of. She loved telling stories of how she helped different children.

She loved making them smile, and little did she know the kids helped her as much as she helped them. Kathy had a secret. Kathy's husband was very abusive, both physically and mentally. The beatings happened regularly, and many of the couple's

12 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 children witnessed these brutal acts of violence. One day, though, Kathy worked up the strength and left. At the time, five of the 10 children were still of school age, living at home. The youngest was only eight. She gathered up her kids with just the clothes on their backs and fled for safety to a women's shelter in Winnipeg. That night, the first night in the shelter away from her home, Kathy was scared. But she also felt so liberated at that ti me.

She was unsure of what the future meant for herself and her children, but she knew that the path she had chosen was the right one and she vowed to never go back to that violent life ever again. Kathy knew she had to call her boss and reveal her deepest secret about the violence in her home. She had to tell him why she wouldn't be at work for the next few days as she tried to sort out her life and where her and her kids would go.

It wasn't an easy call by any means, and what made it even harder is after Kathy told her boss what had happened, he responded to her with, well, you'd better be back at work in 48 hours or you will be terminated. Needless to say, Kathy chose her family's safety and she lost her job because of it. The next woman I want to talk a bout is one of Kathy's daughters. We all know it's very common for the cycle of abuse to follow victims and their families throughout their lives, and that's exactly what happened to Kathy's daughter.

This woman worked in health- care industry, and for year s and years, like her mother, she suffered physical and mental abuse from her husband. But one day, just like her mother, she stood up to the man that continued to knock her down. She stood up for her safety and her children's safety and she, too, grabbed her kids and headed to Winnipeg. Fortunately, when she told her employer about the situation, her boss was understanding and compassionate. She told her to take as many days as she needed and to come back when it was safe for her and her family.

Kathy's daughter did exactly that, using up sick time to take care of legal matters, arranging counselling and just coming to terms with the new path ahead. This woman was able to put her family back together again. Everyone, including her husband and four children, went through years of counselling, and because of their love for their children and one another, they were able to rebuild a foundation of trust and love for one another. It's a shame that I've heard so many people say how lucky Kathy's daughter was in that her employer understood her situation. It shouldn't be like this.

Employers shouldn't question a domestic violence victim, further demoralizing them and thus leaving their jobs hanging in the balance. Employers need to be leaders in helping their empl oyees who are victims of domestic violence, and collectively we all need to advocate for this. Kathy and her daughter lived through many of the same challenges, but their outcomes were far different. I know these two women too very well. Kathy was my moth er, and I am her daughter. And it's for these reasons I stand here today, strongly urging all MLAs to support this legislation unanimously.

Let's send a powerful message to all victims of domestic violence that we are on their side. I commend this government for taking on this issue and putting this legislation together. Let's act as leaders for the rest of this country. Please join me in supporting this bill. Survivors have so much to contribute to society. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very muc h, Ms. Gawronsky. Ms. Braun: Thank you for sharing your story, Michelle. Ms. Gawronsky: Thank you. Ms. Braun: I–enough was said. Thank you. Mr. Smook : Thank you, Michelle. It's a very difficult situation to tell a story like that.

I want to give you credit for coming out and being able to speak about it. Thank you. Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): I'd also like to thank you, Michelle. As I was your mom's neighbour, I'm well aware that this story is very accurate. Madam Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Graydon. Mr. Gerrard: I just want to say thank you for having the courage to come forward and talk about it, and it was very timely. Madam Chairperson: Any other questions? Thank you very much, Ms. Gawronsky. Thank you for being here tonight. I think that's it f or out-of-town presenters, if I'm right.

Okay, so next we will proceed to William Gardner from the Manitoba –chair of the Manitoba Employers Council. Welcome, Mr. Gardner. Do you have a written presentation?

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 13 Mr. William Gardner (Manitoba Employers Council): Strictly oral, Madam Chairperson. Madam Chairperson: All right, that's the way we like it. Okay. You can proceed whenever you're ready. Mr. Gardner: Thank you Madam Chairperson, honourable members. As indicated, I'm here on behalf of the Manitoba Employers Council, which is the largest collective of individual employers and employer organizations in the province.

And I want to say, by way of introduction, that the members of MEC understand that domestic violence is a serious societal problem and we join with the rest of society and the members of this House in strongly condemning the perpetrators of domestic violence. I get that. What I don't get is legislation that treats employers as the offender. I understand that domestic violence result s in costs to employers. I'm not sure I understand why that justifies legislation to increase those costs. I get that domestic violence leads to absenteeism.

I don't understand why that justifies legislation to enshrine it, but more on that later. My pre sentation to you tonight can be divided into two broad categories, terms of our concerns. One is procedural and the other is substantive. With respect to our procedural concerns, I echo what my friend and fellow LMRC member Kevin Rebeck had to say to you, and I note that Kevin recalled advice that I got many years ago, which is to always say nice things about speakers who are going to come after you.

So I'll say this in return: Kevin and I disagree on the odd thing from time to time, particularly in our ope ning positions but, more often than not, as he said, we have succeeded on LMRC in reaching consensus. And, in fact, when you talk about legislated leaves, we've succeeded spec- tacularly. We've succeeded on every single potential leave that this legislatu re has given to us when we had a full chance. We agreed to family leave and sick leave and bereavement leave. If you want to hear the full story about that, go take Nancy Allan out to lunch.

Then we agreed to establishing compassionate care leave, which fit in with what the federal government was doing at the time. Later, and I may not get this list in its entirety, we agreed to reservist leave; we agreed to organ donor leave; we agreed to citizenship ceremony leave; we agreed to leave for the parents of critically ill or missing and murdered children and, most recently–and these are part of Bill 8 –we agreed to extended compassionate care leave and long -term leave for serious illness or injury.

Now, that is starting to be a big list, and one of our concern s is that it tends to have, at least potentially, a cumulative effect. However meritorious on an individual basis the reasons for these leaves are, they can seriously affect employers, particularly the smaller employers, if the number of the leaves, or a number of employees on one of these leaves coincide. Regardless of that, however, LMRC did not have a fair chance to consider this particular legislation on domestic violence leave.

And that's probably the one individual situation where we should have had t he biggest chance, because it is breaking new ground. * (19:00) We didn't have that chance, and so we've lost all of the advantages that would have come from a consensus had it been reached. The fact that proposed legislation has been vetted through stakeholders who, after all of the speeches and the very genuinely sympathetic sentiments are done, have to put things into actual effect in the workplace. And we've lost the buy -in that you get when there is a consensus behind legislation.

Now, over on to t he area of substantive concerns, as you might imagine, I have a major concern about legislation which requires employers to pay as if they're the source of the problem. I don't get that. But I also note that the balance of the leave after five days is unpa id. And I don't really understand that either. Why should a victim have to lose any wages or suffer any costs as a result of domestic violence?

And I say this to you tonight clearly: If you really want to reduce the incidence of domestic violence in the pr ovince, you will focus on legislation that makes it easy for the victim to make the offender pay. Find a way that's easier than the court process that exists now so that a victim can recover, from the offender, lost wages, other costs, damages. If you do that, if you hit the offender in the pocketbook, you will get results fast. But, as soon as you go to a legislative leave that has pay, you're introducing the possibility of adverse effects.

And it's for no small reason that every single leave that we have dealt with through LMRC is unpaid. As a result, it tends, at least on a broad-brush

14 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 approach, to be self-regulating. As soon as you bring in paid leave, you bring in the possibility of abuse. And I'm not talking about the genuine situations where someone really needs to take some time off. There are always going to be people who will try to game the system. And as soon as the leave is paid, you bring that possibility in, which is a segue to my next point. There's no evidence of any mischief that needs to be cured by legislation.

There's no evidence of any Manitoba employer not responding appropriately to a genuine need for time off for someone who's been the victim of domestic violence. No one will suggest that legislation is capable of reproducing the individualized, fact-based, realistic solutions that are possible between a wil ling employee and a sympathetic employer. This legislation, by definition, is aimed at employers who would not do this voluntarily. And no one can tell me that they exist in Manitoba because no research has been done, which leads me to my next point.

One of the principles that has worked so well for LMRC is to try and position Manitoba in the mainstream when it comes to employment and labour legislation, neither lagging behind nor leading. That allows us to learn from the efforts of other jurisdictions and their mistakes. In this case, we're the ones w ho are sticking our necks out, a nd that segues back into my point about procedure. This is the time when LMRC really should have had a chance to take a look at this. So, because we are delving into the unknow n, we've got the risk of unintended adverse consequences.

And no one knows whether this legislation may end up costing more jobs than it saves, because there's no experience to go by. Madam Chairperson: I'll have to ask you to wrap up, Mr. Gardner. Mr. Gardner: Right, I understand.

So, in conclusion, the process is flawed, the legislation is ill conceived, it targets the wrong persons and it may actually harm the individuals that it is designed to protect because focusing on time off work goes against an e merging body of occupational health thought which suggests that the reverse is best for employees: Stay at work as much as possible; reduce absences to the greatest extent possible. And those are my respectful submissions. Madam Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Gardner. Ms.

Braun: Thank you, Bill, for coming this evening and sharing your perspectives, and thank you for the work you do with the Employers Council and LMRC. Thank you. Mr. Goertzen: I just want to make sure that I get the point. You made the point well, but I want to make sure I got it because sometimes I miss the point.

The–you're saying that the issue is not money, the issue is –sorry, the issue is not time, the issue is money, so that employers aren't concerned with providing time, but how that c ompensation happens in terms of money is the issue, and if there was another way –and I'll just use it as an example, we have something called the proceeds of crime legislation, we have compensation for victims of crime, if there was another fund that could be used to ensure that those who are victims of domestic violence would be able to have the time off, that the money would be provided from another source, would that alleviate some of the issues?

Mr. Gardner: Yes, that would help. Although, I–my main poi nt is don't dip into a fund, dip into the offender's pocket. Mr. Gerrard: Yes, I hear your message, and –but I– you said one thing which I'm not sure that I followed, and that was right at the very end. You said that your impression was that when somebody gets into a domestic violence situation that they're better off staying at work instead of having a break and sorting out the –what the issues are with the domestic violence. Is that right? Mr. Gardner: Yes, that's exactly right.

And there's an emerging body of occupational health thought that suggests that time off work can be detrimental to employees, and that the best approach is to eliminate or minimize time off work. And this legislation, which seems to suggest that the solution is to be away from work, may go a hundred and eighty degrees in the wrong direction. And I can provide you with details of this literature if you'd like. Madam Chairperson: Any other questions? Thank you very much, Mr. Gardner. Next I'll call on Beatrice Bruske from the United Food and Commercial Workers.

I know that she was potentially going to be late, so we'll drop her to the bottom of the list. And then next I'll call on Gloria Kelly from the Public Service Alliance of Canada.

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 15 I see you have provided your written submission. It's being distributed, so you can start whenever you're ready. * (19:10) Ms. Gloria Kelly (Public Service Alliance of Canada): Good evening, Madam Chair, Minister Braun, members of committee. On behalf of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, the prairie region, I'm pleased to speak to this committee this evening in support of Bill 8, The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act (Leave for Victims of Domestic Violence, Leave for Serious Injury or Illness and Extension of Compassionate Care Leave).

It is our belief that Bill 8 represents another important step forward in Manitoba's Multi -Year Domestic Violence Prevention Strategy, which I believe was first introduced in 2012. Now, you may wonder why PSAC is appearing here before you this evening. Most people consider us a federal government union. In fact, our union represents a growing number of private sector non- government workers, some of whom may well benefit significantly from this progressive piece of legislation.

PSAC takes the position that domestic violence in all its forms is a threat to the health, safety, and well -being of all persons, male and female. We view domestic violence as a societal issue. Although we readi ly recognize the vast majority of victims are women, domestic violence affects everyone in all communities. But Aboriginal women, women living with a disability, and transgender women are particularly vulnerable.

We consider Bill 8 to be progressive, ground- breaking legislation, with Manitoba the first Canadian jurisdiction to move forward, providing employment protection for victims of domestic violence. By providing paid leave, this legislation recognizes the importance of income security, a critical f actor in supporting many victims to break free of their current circumstances and move forward to a safer and more stable life for they and their children. When broken down to its bare bones, this bill is about the fundamental right of working Manitobans to be safe at home and in the workplace.

It is also about gender equality and about plain old- fashioned compassion. PSAC commends the government of Manitoba for its stand on the issue of domestic violence and encourages this committee to move the legislation forward with the most possible speed. Make no mistake, domestic violence spills outside the home and impacts employers, their workplaces and their other employees. For far too long, the attitude has been what happens at home should stay at home.

I would suggest to you a progressive workplace with progressive management would look with favour on this legislation and understand the benefits it can have and will bring to them. Before I joined the federal public service, I worked for many years in the pr ivate sector as a middle manager. I have seen first -hand how domestic violence can impact the workplace. My employer at the time was not what one would consider progressive. Thus, the means I used to support my staff member were more or less covert, although by necessity, had to involve the support of the other members of our team.

Had this legislation been in place in that jurisdiction at the time, I would have had a tool at my disposal to actively support that individual and their family. A big plus would have been the knowledge to the person that the support that was forthcoming was enshrined in legislation and not something that could be denied or snatched away by another manager should I have left the position that I was in. Often you will find the th reat of loss of income is one of the biggest factors in delaying an individual from leaving a domestic violence situation. Income security can never be downplayed.

It is, in fact, critical to continued health and safety once one decides to leave a violent situation. There is a significant lack of research into the impact of domestic violence on the workplace. The two resources that speak to this are estimates compiled by Justice Canada and a ground- breaking study done by the Canadian Labour Congress in conjunction with researchers at the University of Western Ontario that you have heard about already this evening.

Justice Canada has estimated that Canadian employers lose $77.9 million each year as a result of the direct and indirect impacts of domestic v iolence on employees in the workplace. That's through lost days of work, reduced productivity, administrative costs. This is a significant cost that one would think employers would be looking to reduce. The Public Service Alliance believes Bill 8 will provide a tool to

16 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 help reduce Manitoba's share of this abysmal number. The CLC did not undertake its ground- breaking study simply for something to do. They set out to validate what everyone suspected but really had no factual data to support. They recognized that there had to be significant financial costs of domestic violence to employers but that those costs paled in comparison to the price being paid by individuals, primarily women and families caught up in a cycle of domestic violence.

The CLC study confirmed what I would suggest many of us already knew: that significant numbers of workers experience violence, that violence comes along with them to work, and there is a negative spillover to co -workers. Among the findings of the CLC survey were that women and men both reported experienced domestic violence but women in much larger numbers.

Many workers suffer from domestic violence, with one third of the survey respondents reported experienced domestic violence at some point in their lives, and more than a third reported having at least one co -worker they knew or believed was experiencing or previously experienced domestic violence. According to the survey, 37.6 experienced domestic violence at least once in their lives, and every year, 7 per cent are vict ims of domestic violence. That's every year.

Different groups are especially 'vuneral.' Domestic violence was reported to be significantly more prevalent among transgender, Aboriginal and LGBT respondents as well as respondents with disabilities. Domestic violence interferes with work and job security. Of those who reported experienced domestic violence, 38 per cent indicated that it impacted their ability to go to work and arrive on time, and 8.5 per cent reported losing their job because of it.

Additionally, more than half of domestic violence victims reported some form of abusive act occurred at or near the workplace, while 37 per cent reported spillover effects on their co -workers, especially stressing concern for their welfare. If you have a co -worker who is a victim of domestic violence, whether you suspect or whether you know, there is going to be an impact. Believe me, I've lived with it for a long time, and I'm dealing with it in my own workplace right now. Perpetrators who extend their abuse to the work setting are increasing the number of domains in which they control their partners.

By harassing, stalking and threatening the target at work, offenders may succeed in getting the victim fired and thereby increasing the victim's dependence. The CLC f indings suggest it's time to look for innovative solutions, recognizing the workplace has a role to play in stopping domestic violence. It's not hard to determine that individuals trapped in domestic violence situations have work histories that are interrupted, and I would suggest, for managers, disruptive to their work environment as they strive to deal with everything from injury to psychological abuse.

The US advocacy group, Legal Momentum, suggests victims of domestic violence miss an average of 137 hours of work a year. That's about 17 full-time days. As a result of interrupted work, victims of domestic violence tend to have lower personal incomes, to change jobs more frequently, losing benefits and seniority, and are more likely to hold precarious casual and part -time jobs than women who live in stable home situations. The job protection envisioned in this legislation will make it easier for victims of violence to take time away from work they need, to quite simply, get their life in order.

Being emplo yed is a key pathway for women to leave a violent relationship. The financial security that employment offers helps prevent women becoming trapped in isolated and violent and abusive relationships, and it helps them to maintain their home and standard of l iving. In short, Bill 8 will help victims escape abuse. Of particular importance is the bill's provision for up to five days of paid leave available for intermittent use that will allow victims to take time off without having to sacrifice their income.

As I referenced before, this financial stability is a critical, empowering consideration for victims of domestic violence. It could actually determine if one stays or one goes. Now, we all recognize this legislation will have a cost to employers, but when that cost is weighed against the cost employers are already bearing as a result of domestic violence, the balance sheet should come out close to neutral. The provisions of this legislation give employers a positive tool to use in supporting all their employe es.

In Bill 8, there is a proposal that regulations to accompany the legislation will be developed to determine what verification will be necessary to access domestic violence leave. PSAC strongly encourages the government of Manitoba to consult broadly when developing these regulations and to not make verification so stringent as to create an additional

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 17 burden or level of stress on a victim so that she or he do not make a move. The last piece of this legislation I would like to speak to–excuse me–involves the 17 weeks of unpaid leave that may be required for those needing a longer period to undertake life-altering changes. * (19:20) Madam Chairperson: I'm sorry, Ms. Kelly. I just have to ask you to wrap up. Ms. Kelly: Okay. In conclusion, when all is said and done, this legislation benefits both victims of domestic violence and their employers.

It provides for job security for those who are victims of domestic violence, and it provides employers with a tool, if used properly, should enhance their workplace. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you this evening on behalf of the Public Service Alliance. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much, Ms. Kelly. Ms. Braun: Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts and your perspectives today. We really appreciate your presentation today. Mr. Smook: Yes, thank you very much for coming out tonight and sharing your thoughts and your views on domestic violence with us.

It's greatly appreciated and we thank you for coming out. Mr. Gerrard: Thank you for coming. Now the presenter who presented before you, Mr. William Gardner, said that it was better for people to stay working instead of to take the leave, which would be paid leave or unpaid leave if it was longer. I would like your comments and your views on that from your own experience or from research that you're aware of. Ms.

Kelly: Yes, I do not disagree that it is better to stay at work and work as one can, but in ma ny situations of domestic violence, the victim needs a few days–sometimes it's just a few hours; sometimes it's a few days –to actually get their life in order so that they can work as a productive member of society and as a productive member of their workforce. They need the time to get their children settled, to get police reports done, to get whatever orders that may be necessary, and we all know that government agencies basically work 9 to 5.

So if you're working during those work hours, you cannot get t hat documentation and that support that you need. So this short a period of time, and it says intermittently, it doesn't mean that someone will take five days at once. It could just be a day that somebody needs. But, yes, I agree if you can go to work and continue to work, by far it supports your family, yes. Mr. Goertzen: Thank you for your presentation.

Do you know, has PSAC been involved with bargaining with anything like this in any of the different employers that it deals with, and particularly on the issue of when the leave is granted, if leave is granted? You're right, sometimes people just need a few hours to sort of get their life together, but sometimes they return and not much has changed. And what can happen in the interim to ensure that somebody is getting actual support so that if they're away for a day or two –it's just not being away for a day or two but something is positively happening in a victim's life. Ms.

Kelly: We are just starting to get into this realm in bargaining, but in our feder al collective agreement, we now have paid time off to deal with legal issues. We have–in my collective agreement, I have one of my five family days that I can use specifically for dealing with legal or health issues to deal with the family, and we don't ha ve to explain out in long detail why we need that day, but we are beginning to look more and more at the whole issue, especially in our –the people we represent who are not federal public servants, and they are a growing number. Madam Chairperson: Thank you.

Seeing no further questions, thank you very much, Ms. Kelly. Next, I'll call Elliot Sims from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. Seeing Mr. Sims is not here, his name will drop to the bottom of the list. Next, I'll call on Dave Sauer. Do you have a written presentation for us, Mr. Sauer? Mr. Dave Sauer (Private Citizen): No, I don't, just oral. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much. You can begin now whenever you're ready. Mr.

Sauer: So first I'd like to offer my thanks to the members of the committee for the opportunity to speak on Bill 8, The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act (Leave for Victims of Domestic Violence, Leave for Serious Injury or Illness and Extension of Compassionate Care Leave).

18 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 As a private citizen, I'm here to speak in favour of this legislation. I'd like to begin by sharing a story with the committee. This is a story about two individuals, Johnny and Rose [phonetic] Niesner. Johnny was born in 1923 in St. Paul, Minnesota. As a young boy, he and his family moved around a lot as their father, Andrew Niesner, searched for work. Life was hard for Johnny growing up as his father was an abusive alcoholic who took his anger out on his wife and children. As the eldest son, Johnny took the bulk of this abuse.

When he was seven, his mother took the children and moved back to be with her family in Canada. At the age of 10, Johnny was kidnapped by his father and taken back to the United States where the abuse continued. After numerous attempts to flee and reunite with his mother, Andrew finally allowed his son to return home. Johnny's new life in southern Saskatchewan was not much better. He grew up on a farm in poverty and had an unhealthy relationship with his new stepfather. He worked on the cattle farm, was reputed to have taken

part in bootlegging and, at one time, was a rodeo rider who was featured on the front page of the Regina Leader-Post. But Johnny was lost. He drifted a lot and rode the rail lines on–across Western Canada. In 1944, he joined the Canadian ar my and served one day in World War II as his unit landed in England a day after Nazi Germany had surrendered. Back in Canada, he continued to drift and worked odd jobs where he could find them. While working on the development of an aluminum smelter in Ki timat, BC, he met Rose [phonetic].

Rose [phonetic] was born in 1935 and was the–was a farm girl who descended from the first homesteaders in northern BC around Moricetown. Shortly after their encounter, they were married in 1954. The young couple moved around a lot and eventually settled in Terrace, BC. Their first child was born in 1955. They went on to have five more children. Rose [phonetic] took care of the children while Johnny worked odd jobs as a carpenter, a mechanic, a logging truck driver and even tually became the owner of a trailer park near Terrace, BC.

Despite these positive developments, Johnny always battled with the demons of his childhood. He suffered from serious mental health issues and frequently turned to alcohol. At the age of 55, Johnny began to display the symptoms –or the early symptoms of onset –early symptoms of early onset Alzheimer's disease: moodiness, extreme anger, depression, melancholy and, at times, violence against Rose [phonetic] . He forgot how to use a screwdriver or a ha mmer, things that he had known through his work as a carpenter.

He would wander the rural roads in bare feet, unaware of his surroundings, usually in the middle of the night. He sometimes wouldn't recognize his own adult children or any interactions he had with them. Family life became very difficult for Rose [phonetic]. She would worry about where he was when she was working at her own job. She would come home to a house of violence and destruction. She kept him home or away from friends, family and the community on his bad days. On the good days, she would take him to town or host friends at their home. They lived a life of uncertainty, instability and violence.

The domestic situation was kept hidden from other members of the community. There were no evi dent community supports, and even if there were, Rose [phonetic] likely wouldn't have accessed them because mental illness was a taboo issue at that time. In 1981, while Johnny and Rose [phonetic] were repairing the water system on one of their rental homes, one of his violent outbursts occurred and he struck Rose [phonetic] repeatedly with a hammer and killed her. When he emerged from his rage, he may have realized what he had done. He placed her body beneath the rental home.

He then left the property, drove to the Skeena River near their home and committed suicide by jumping off a bridge. Rose's [phonetic] body was discovered a few days later after an extensive search by police. Johnny's body was recovered three months later in the river. Johnny and Ros e [phonetic] Niesner are–were– my maternal grandparents. I never knew them. They both died before I was born. My mother was 26 years old when she lost her parents to domestic violence. I'm certain this story is hard to hear. It's even harder to share. The good news is we're here today.

We're talking about positive solutions for the future. I have two nieces and two –and a nephew, and I really hope one day I can come here and tell you a wonderful story about my family. I remember a few years ago I was here talking about the PST and people were throwing the word communism around, and I felt it necessary to share the stories of my dad's family, who'd had great-uncles executed in the Great Purge under Stalin. But we see there's a problem; we needed to deal with it.

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 19 In speaking with my mother about this tragedy – and she fully encouraged me to come here tonight and share this story –she had these words to share: protective measures and appropriate education and information made available for families in these kinds of situations can make a difference. * (19:30) When we educate people through supportive measures, they see hope; they see options for their future; they see opportunities for change in their lives. Domestic violence affects families for generations.

For most of my life I've had to work at using appropriate strategies in dealing with my anger. I will always need to be aware of these consequences of what violence does to families. I've also needed to model appropriate behaviours for my children so they do not fall into these kinds of situations as well. Truth telling, telling the stories, also releases the anxiety of what we've experienced. It helps us make different decisions about how our –how to lead our lives, but it also helps us develop a better sense of who we are so that our identity is not all w rapped up in a story of domestic violence.

In closing, I hope this bill can be passed unanimously in the Legislature so that all victims of domestic violence can seek help and support before it's too late. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very muc h, Mr. Sauer. Ms. Braun: Thank you for coming this evening, Dave, and sharing your very personal story. That was not easy, and thank you for being here. Mr. Smook : Thank you, Dave, for coming out tonight. Again, too, we –these stories are difficult to share with other people, so we want to thank you very much for being able to share it with us. And thank you for coming out tonight. Mr.

Gerrard: Thank you for– Madam Chairperson: Dr. Gerrard, sorry, I didn't turn the mic on. So, Dr. Gerrard. Mr. Gerrard: Oh, okay, thank you. Thank you for coming, and thank you for having the courage to come forward and to share your family story in this venue. I think it is a story which will have a significant impact. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Sauer. Next I'll call Charlotte Cameron, Winnipeg, from the Winnipeg Labour Council. Do you have a written presentation, Ms. Cameron? Ms. Charlotte Cameron (Winnipeg Labour Council): I do not. Madam Chairperson: Okay, proceed when you're ready. Ms.

Cameron: I was just saying I don't want to follow Dave, so thank you very much. My name is Charlotte Cameron, and it is my pleasure to be here as second vice -president of the Winnipeg Labour Council to speak on behalf of Bill 8, The Employment Standards Code Ame nd- ment Act , leave for victims of domestic violence, serious injury or illness and extension of compassionate care leave. Now, I wrote this whole presentation and I realized I'm not terribly comfortable with the term victim–definitely, people living with domestic violence, instead of victims.

I think we often lose sight of the fact that people who are being victimized every day at home where they should be safe exhibit incredible strength just in getting out of bed and going through their day. Just putting that out there. I am proud to stand here, though, and say that I've been an active part of this city's labour movement for almost 15 years now. And I'd like to talk a little bit about why these social justice issues are so near and dear to my heart. Now, I grew up in Manitoba Housing in the suburbs here in Winnipeg. As a child, some of my friends would disappear for a few days, a couple weeks.

And I didn't know what apprehended meant, but I did understand that there were some friends whose homes I was not allowed to go play in. As I look back on it as an adult, I can understand that it was anger and hurt and the possibility that we could witness violence as young, impressionable children. The kids I spent my time with would whisper about how important it was to avoid the one who lived behind me because his dad beat up his mom and now she beats him up, and that was just part of our normal childhood mantra. It was something that we lived with every day and we were just aware of.

We didn't play with him very often for fear he would

20 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 lash out. Walking to school one day with a neighbour, he jumped out from behind a tree, pulled her to the ground and kicked and punched her for as long as it took me, scared little eight -year-old, to run to the school and get a teacher for help. These are situations that could have been avoided. The last time I saw this former neighbour, 1996, I think, he was panhandling in Osborne Village. What types of supports could his mother have accessed if she could have had this kind o f leave as an option to support her in her journey forward?

There are things that we just didn't talk about, and as an adult I'm here because I understand this is a very dangerous silence for us to be maintaining. My son was three when he was assaulted b y his father. He should have been perfectly safe but he was not. I wasn't a union member yet. I wasn't an activist, although I was a little bit loud; I can't even try and deny it; I'm not going to try and deny it. But I was a 21-year-old single parent working shift work and I was so scared. I took maybe three days unpaid from work to deal with this one isolated incident. I took him to a child psychologist.

He was checked by our family doctor. I spoke to my lawyer because I was fighting for custody at the ti me. This leave would have been amazingly helpful, because let me tell you, scared 21-year-old single parents don't make so much money that they can afford to take three or four days unpaid. That just does not happen in the real world, or at least not my real world. The labour movement has been talking about domestic violence, and violence against women, for years–for decades, let's be honest. We've created informational pamphlets, we've 'pashed' –passed motions for increased funding to community support.

Every year, we honour and remember the women who have died violently in our province. With these kinds of supports in place, we could look at a future where, one year, we may have to change our annual memorial luncheon because in the 12- month period leading up to it, no women in Manitoba died. That would be an amazing gift, and it would be directly because of choices made here today. I'd like to urge the committee to pass this unanimously and continue with our province's proud progressive history of supporting. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much, Ms. Cameron. Ms.

Braun: Charlotte, thank you very much for being here. I'm very proud of you. Mr. Smook : Thank you, Ms. Cameron, for being here tonight and sharing your stories with us. It's great to have you come out tonight. Thank you. Mr. Gerrard: Thank you for coming and talking about your situation. You know, we've had a little bit of discussion on the one hand that it's better for somebody to be working and on the other hand that it's vital that single mothers in these circumstances need a break from work. Maybe you could comment and help us see the situation more clearly. Ms.

Cameron: Well, without wa nting to speak on behalf of every single scared 21 -year-old single parent in the province, definitely I found that both were beneficial. But having the time to go to lawyers' appointments, to meet with the lawyer, who was intimidating enough as it was, to take him to appointments. My doctor is 8 'til 4, Monday to Friday. I worked all over the week, so some appointments just cannot be made during working hours–or outside of working hours, pardon me.

So I think that it needs to be a mixture but also that communication with your manager and trusting that they will have something to back them up if they want to support you but can't for some reason. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much, Ms. Cameron. Thank you. Next, I'll call Carmen Neufeld. Welcom e. Do you have any written presentations? Ms. Carmen Neufeld (Private Citizen): I don't. Just an oral presentation. Madam Chairperson: Okay. Just proceed whenever you're ready. Ms. Neufeld: My name is Carmen Neufeld, and I speak to you today as a business owner of 27 years.

I have been a member of the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce for 25, the founding chair of the Women's Enterprise Centre of Manitoba and the former president of Women Business Owners of Manitoba. I consider myself a successful entrepreneur , a mentor to other business owners and a community activist for a number of charities. I'm also a former board member of Child and Family Services of eastern Manitoba, a former board member of Osborne House and someone who has witnessed first-hand the horror of domestic violence.

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 21 I have known, and know presently, of family and friends, both male and female, who've faced varying degrees of physical or emotional abuse at the hands or manipulative minds of their partners.

I also speak to you today as someone who is very much in support of this new legislation and the fact that this will be one more life preserver for women and men who are in domestic violence situations, one more building block to help them transition to a new life and a tool to encourage the m when they have very little hope, when they feel locked into their situation because of their financial need. Individuals in abusive situations have often been isolated from their friends and families and look to their workplace as a safe haven, even if for a few hours each day.

While they may not openly share the horror that they face at home, they do need to know that there is a safe place to land if and when they are able to take the first step in escaping the abuse. They can also be so distracted by t heir life situation that it becomes a workplace health and safety issue for themselves and for their coworkers. What they need is support, guidance and help. They don't need to be further victimized by an unsympathetic employer who cares little for anything except the bottom line or getting the job done at all costs. It's incredibly difficult to admit that you're being abused.

It is embarrassing to face others and say that you have stayed in the situation. It's a monumental task to walk away from the abus er because that is the life you have known for so long, and without a financial safety net, it's terrifying to think of what awaits you. * (19:40) Study after study has shown that the first few days after leaving the abusive situation are the most critical, where the victims and ofte n their children feel compelled to return to the abuser because they have no money, no independence and no support system to help them through.

So the cycle of abuse and victimization continues over and over and over again. With this legislation, not only are we as employers supporting our employees in escaping and rebuilding their lives, but we are confirming with them that we value them and the work they do for us each and every day. We're confirming that they and their children have a place in our organization and they are valued greatly.

Think about this: If an employee is a victim of a car accident, a violent break -in at their homes or a slip and fall of any kind or any kind of medical emergency, we as employers are compassionate, understanding, supportive and concerned. So why should we be any less so if an employee comes forward with the courage to share their story of domestic violence? If anything, we should be even more compassionate and supportive because domestic violence affects all of us. The children who grow up in an abusive environment often go on to be abusers themselves.

Victims may turn to drugs, alcohol, self -injury when the pain becomes just too great. The longer the abuse continues, the deeper the l ifelong impact for the individuals, the family and society as a whole. The financial implications and stress on an already overtaxed system grows daily as the victims of domestic violence can turn to violence themselves because they're so broken and hopeless.

Have we as a society become so selfish that we cannot consider giving the victim and his or her children the peace of mind to know that while they rebuild their lives they have no fear of losing their jobs which may be their only source of income? Is five days of paid leave too great a price for us as employers to pay to help a valued employee get into a safe place, find peace of mind and begin rebuilding their lives? I would hope not. These brave women and men who find the courage to come forward are not looking for a handout. They may not even want a hand up.

They want the peace of mind to know that while they have taken the first step towards a much better way of life, they'll have no fear of losing their jobs, their income, their independence and their security. Manitoba has often been a leader in employment standards, and it makes me very proud to know that this proposed first -in-Canada legislation would ensure that victims of domestic violence have financial security, job protection and flexibili ty to take time away from work to recover from violence.

I would encourage all members of the Legislature and all business owners in this province to get behind this bill and give it your full support. Is it not incumbent on all of us to help those who are in the least position to help themselves? Is it not incumbent on all of us to say to these victims, let me help you; to say, know that you are a valued employee, and your safety and the safety of your children is important to me; and to say, take the tim e

22 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 you need to begin rebuilding your security and we will welcome your return. And in closing, I want to say I'm a survivor. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much, Ms. Neufeld. Thank you for your presentation. Ms. Braun: Thank you very much, Carmen, for sharing your perspective as an employer and your personal story as well. Thank you. Mr. Smook: Thank you, Ms. Neufeld. It –I know it must be difficult for you to get up there and speak to us. But one question I'd like to ask is: Is there–is five days enough?

Should we be looking at some other way of providing a longer benefit, like whether it be through the government or through unemployment insurance because, really, if a person wants to leave somebody like that, is five days enough? [interjection] Madam Chairperson: Ms. Neufeld. Ms. Neufeld: Sorry. It's a really good start compared to not having anything at all, and I would like to think that a compassionate employer would look at that as a minimum but not necessarily what they would be prepared to offer to that employer.

So I think there's, you know, lots of different systematic changes that perhaps could help, you know, being able to get individuals help outside of the workplace as well as inside of the workplace, but I think this is a really good start. And my understanding is that this does fall in also with unemployment insurance. But it–for me, it would be knowing that you can take 17 weeks, or however many weeks you'd be allowed, and know your job is there, you know, to come back for that and not have to worry about that.

So in answer, no, five days isn't enough, but it's a pretty good sta rt compared to the fact that there really is nothing in place across Canada like this. Mr. Gerrard: Now, I –you said something that I think is quite important. You mentioned women and men who've been abused. And you're an employer – the preponderance, clearly, is women who are being abused, but the fact that there are some who are men who are being abused. But the people who have come to me have basically faced situations where people say, well, you're a man; we don't believe you, right?

I mean, as an employe r, how do you deal effectively with situation –who are men in this situation. Ms. Neufeld: First time I've actually appeared before a committee in this format, so I'm –have to be reminded of the rules. I've seen firsthand where a male family member of my f amily was being abused at the hands of his spouse. And, you know, fortunately, on his third visit to the emergency room with a very lame explanation, the doctor in charge said to him, I just don't believe anymore that this –these are just accidents that are happening. I think you happen to be in an abusive situation.

And it was that ability to identify which led him to leave –it was actually my sister who was the abuser. So for him to find the strength–and I think that, again, you know, your coworkers and an employer should always be on the lookout for the health and safety of their employees, not just in, you know, on the day-to-day, because you can tell. When you work with people for a long time, you can start to tell if there's issues that are weighing hea vy on them. And I think if you give them the opportunity to know that they do have a safe place to land at work, that they may be more willing to come forward.

But I –it is much more difficult, I believe, for men to come forward, because, like you said, it 's perceived that it's women that are always being abused and not men, and men have a –there's a different kind of pride level, I guess, that disallows them to come forward and feel safe to do that, so, yes. An Honourable Member: Thank you. Ms. Neufeld: You're welcome. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much, Ms. Neufeld. Next I'll call Gina Smoke from Unifor. Welcome, Ms. Smoke. Do you have a written presentation for us? Ms. Gina Smoke (Unifor): I do. Madam Chairperson: Oh, great.

We'll make sure those get distributed and you can begin whenever you're ready. Ms. Smoke: Hi, I'm Gina Smoke from Unifor and I thank you for the opportunity to provide input into Bill 8, amendments to The Employment Standards

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 23 Code including lea ve for victims of domestic violence. This submission is being made on behalf of Unifor. Unifor is Canada's largest private sector union with over 310,000 members across Canada. Our members work in every sector of the economy and include over 100,000 women. We have a long history of activism on the issue of gender-based violence. Our work has resulted in a ground-breaking program called Women's Advocate. We bargained our first Women's Advocate in 1993, and today we have over 300 advocates across the country.

A Woman's Advocate is a workplace representative that assists women in dealing with domestic violence. Unifor runs a 40- hour training program for new advocates and a 3- day update for experienced advocates. The advocate is support and referral resource i n the workplace and helps women across the community services they require. She works with the employer on safety planning when necessary. Women have this–women who have helped have this to say: She was like a snowplow clearing the way. I still had to dri ve my car in a storm, but she moved barriers to help keep the vehicle moving.

Because of the support and quick referral to counselling, I was strong enough to carry on in a hard time of my life. Being at work was the only place of sanity and safety. After what happened, I wanted to curl into a little ball and die. The advocate at my work site was supportive and linked me to someone trained to help. She was a lifesaver. Our work has been recognized at the United Nations including the International Labour Organization.

Through this program, we've gained a great understanding of the practical supports needed by workers dealing with intimate partner violence. * (19:50) We welcome the introduction of a workplace leave for workers who are experiencing domestic violence. The rates of violence against women remain shockingly high. We know that domestic violence occurs across all ages, cultures and socioeconomic groups, but we also know some women are more vulnerable and less able to leave violent relationships b ased on factors such as age, immigration status, location, disability, ethnicity and English language ability.

We are particularly sensitive to the vulnerability experienced by Aboriginal women and girls. Employment and financial autonomy are key indicators to whether a worker will be successful in leaving a violent partner. We will be using the pronoun she in this submission to describe workers able to take this leave; although we know that men experience domestic violence as well, the statistics confirm that it is women who are overwhelmingly the victims of male violence. Key features of this

section are the under - standing that leave needs to be available in intermittent and continuous periods. We support the bill's coverage of both physical and psychological injuries. There are many common features to situations of domestic violence, but many different individual impacts and needs. Allowing for flexibility around when leave time is taken is vital to success. In Australia, where domestic leave provisions have been in many collective agreements for a while now, the average time off is two to three days. This is not a large burden on the employer.

We also want to stress that the provisions around confidentiality are crucial. There is still a high stigma and shame that surrounds domestic violence. Having a guarantee of confidentiality and no reprisal for seeking a leave are extremely important features of this bill. While we are pleased that this bill is a step in the right direction, we have some sugges tions on improvements.

(1) The legislation should make the leave an addition to bargain benefit. For example, many of our collective agreements already have a leave provision for attending court. Another example is sick leave; many of our collective agreements contain a sick -leave provision that would cover an injury-related absence. These new leave provisions should be in addition to these existing rights.

(2) For non- union workers, there should be a clear and simple adjudication route if leave is denied.

(3) The legislation deemed part of a day to equal a full day. Many employers are able to provide for part-day leaves. It should be up to the worker to decide whether a full- or half-day is required.

(4) We submit that the legislation would be greatly improved by providing mandatory training for managers, supervisors and workers on domestic violence in the workplace.

(5) Under this bill, a worker must verify the necessity of the leave. The acceptable verification

24 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 will be specified in regulations. We urge the government to engage in–engage workers in domestic violence and shelter movement to assist in drafting these regulations. Without understanding the situation of women in violent relationships, the legislation could put unnecessary barriers in the way of using this helpful new leave provision. And, in conclusion, intimate partner violence has been in the news more often than ever. Public consciousness is being raised about its prevalence and the need for action at all levels.

We commend the Manitoba government for taking concrete steps to assist workers in freeing themselves from violent relationships and we hope this will spread to other jurisdictions. Ms. Braun: Thank you very much for coming this evening. I appreciate your presentation. The Women's Advocate

section was of great interest. And I also appreciate the improvements that you're suggesting, and we'll certainly look at those. Thank you. Mr. Smook : Thank you, Ms. Smoke, for your presentation. It's very interesting, some of the things you brought up, but hopefully everybody can take it in and get something better done with it. Thank you. Mr. Gerrard: Yes, thank you for contributing to the discussion we've had today. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much, Ms. Smoke. Next I'll call on Leanne Sookram. Is Leanne Sookram here? Oh, yes, thank you. Do you have a written presentation for us? Ms.

Leanne Sookram (Private Citizen): Just oral, these are my notes. Madam Chairperson: Okay, thank you ve ry much. You can proceed when you're ready. Ms. Sookram: Good evening. I'd like to thank you all for allowing me to come and speak this evening. My name is Leanne Sookram. I'm an employee of Air Canada. I've been there for going on 22 years, which also me ans that I am a Unifor member, formerly known as CAW, now Unifor Local 2002. More importantly, I am a survivor of domestic violence.

I think that we, as a society –sometimes we stereotype what a victim of domestic violence looks like and what an abuser looks like, their history, their lifestyles, their jobs, race, culture, et cetera. But domestic violence doesn't discriminate. It can be anyone at any time. This is me, and my abuser was an educated male who actually worked for the province in Corrections. You don't know who's going to be abusing who and who is being abused. It was a difficult 10 years of my life trying to cope and understand what was happening to me and why, all that time trying to go to work and care for two small children.

There were days that I was up all night and I could make it to work, and then there were days when I just couldn't take anymore and I couldn't function, but I needed money to keep caring for my children and I always –couldn't always find the strength to go to work and pr etend that I was okay. Some days it was better to be there, to be surrounded by your friends and know that you're doing something that you're good at, and some days you just couldn't do it anymore.

I knew my employer was not happy with my absenteeism and I–couldn't understand why I was calling in sick frequently, so one day I decided that I needed to come out with the truth, and I brought him a letter from a counsellor from a sexual assault program that I was attending. I sat in his office while I read it , embarrassed, humiliated, and scared. His response was, I am so sorry this happened to you. I have two young daughters. How are we going to stop this violence from going on? Thankfully, my union believed in domestic violence and making everyone aware of it.

They believed that it was a very serious issue and they worked hard to get Air Canada on board with this view. Finally, one women's advocate was negotiated for my local and I felt like I was no longer alone –I had support. Domestic violence was recogni zed by my union, by my employer, and more people were becoming aware and educated. It helped a great deal knowing that my job was protected. However, understanding that, it wasn't enough to pay the bills and to support my children while trying to help myself.

I wasn't paid for any of the missed time, nor could I afford to take a leave to try to get the help to leave the situation safely. I, eventually, had to declare personal bankruptcy. I did eventually get free. I survived and I realized that I needed t he help of others –sorry–I got free and I realized I needed to help others in similar situations. When the opportunity arose Unifor negotiated five women's advocates across the

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 25 country and I was appointed the women's advocate for Western Region. I work hard every day to help men and women who request my assistance and I work hard to educate my managers and my colleagues about the effects of domestic violence and how it affects in one's ability to work and cope. It doesn't end here. We have to continue educating everyone more and more on this matter, but in the meantime we have to help the victims maintain their jobs, their self -respect and support them. I strongly urge you to please pass this bill unanimously. Thank you.

Madam Chairperson: Thank you very m uch, Ms. Sookram. Thank you for being here. Ms. Braun: Thank you, indeed, for being here and thank you for sharing your story and for being a woman's advocate and helping others. Thank you very much. Mr. Smook: Yes. We'd like to thank you very much for appearing tonight and sharing your story with us. I know it's very difficult to get up there and do that, but thank you very much for being an advocate for women's rights. Thank you very much. Ms. Sookram: Can I say something? Madam Chairperson: Certainly, go ahead, Ms. Sookram. Ms.

Sookram : Being an advocate has empowered me, and if something bad had to happen in order for me to be able to help other people, then that's what needs to be done, and I feel good doing that. * (20:00) Mr. Gerrard: Thank you for sharing your story and for what you're doing now as an advocate. Question I have for you is this. The bill has got five days of paid leave and up to 17 that would be unpaid. Have we got the balance right in this bill in terms of what's paid and what's unpaid and what's needed in terms of support? Ms. Sookram: No. Five days is a very, very good start.

I don't think five days is going to get someone out of a situation safely. It also depends on the situation. Everyone's situation, their circums tances are different. There's cases with children; there's cases with no children. I think we need to look at different situations. For myself, five days would have been a good start. It might have been able to help me say I don't have to worry about money for right now; let me get the help that I need and go from there. So, like some other speakers have said, I do think it's a good start, but we would have to look at different situations, I believe. Thank you.

Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much. Any other questions? Thank you very much, Ms. Sookram. Next, I'll call on Carmen LeDarney –or LeDarney? Thank you, Carmen. Come forward. Thank you. Welcome. Ms. Carmen LeDarney (Private Citizen) : You're welcome. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Do you have a wr itten presentation? Ms. LeDarney: I do not. It's just oral. Madam Chairperson: Then proceed whenever you're ready. Ms. LeDarney: Thank you. Thank you for listening to me. I'm speaking today as a private citizen. I'm a member of Unifor. I sit on the Prair ie Regional Council Women's Committee on the executive.

I also sit on the executive of my local union. And I'm here just as–just to provide support and stand in support of this legislation. I'm not a direct–I haven't been directly affected by domestic viol ence. However, as a young child, my mother's sister was abused by her husband, and he was actually very open in doing so and did it in front of me at the age of five years old. Forty years later, that vision is still in my head as clear as all of you are h ere to me today. So, the impact that domestic violence will have, even indirectly, will last forever.

This bill will assist–and being in the workplace myself–this bill will assist a lot of the victims in – within the workplace to get the help they need, be able to come forward without any embarrassment, which is a huge factor. Coming to work with bruises and–is something that most of them choose not to do, which affects their absenteeism, which also affects their attendance record which implicates so many different things within the workplace that is happening today: attendance management issues, et cetera. So, this domestic violence language will be huge towards that.

Having said all that, I'm just here to say that this is a great direction that this bill is, and I stand in support of the legislation, and I hope that there's a unanimous vote in getting it in. Thank you.

26 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA February 18, 2016 Madam Chairperson: Thanks very much. Ms. Braun: Thank you so much for coming this evening and showing your support for friends and family. Mr. Smook: Thank you, Ms. LeDarney, for coming out tonight and expressing your views on this bill to us. It's greatly appreciated. Thank you. Mr. Gerrard: Thank you for coming. Thank you for sharing your own family story as well as your feelings about the bill. Thank you. Madam Chairperson: Thank you very much for coming tonight. Next, I'll call Pamela McLeod from Willow Place. [interjection] Pamela McLeod, yes.

She was an addition to the list. Do you have a written presentation for us, Ms. McLeod? Ms. Pamela McLeod (Willow Place): No. Madam Chairperson: Okay. Proceed whenever you're ready. Ms. McLeod: Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee. I'm representing Willow Place Shelter. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you regarding Bill 8. We are in essential agreement with the proposed legislation, and I applaud the government and Minister Braun for bringing this forward for the people of Manitoba and as an example for other jurisdictions.

There are many reasons why victims of domestic violence may need the option of taking a leave of absence in the short or longer term as they and their families recover, and I will try to avoid reviewing details of the bill which have already been described. But we would like to add our voice in support. In the immediate aftermath of domestic violence, victims may need to leave their family home along with children and be temporarily out of their neighbourhoods and out of their usual patterns including going to work every day and often without transportation.

There are challenges to maintaining the daily routine of going to work, but they are probably short term. Victims should be free to take themselves out of unsafe domestic situations without fear that the action will put employment in jeopardy especially at a time when the family's financial situation may already be strained by domestic breakdown. At Willow Place Shelter, for example, clients stay an average of eight days and during that period supports and resources are put in place and a return to the regular routine of work is often possible, even within that time when the client is at the shelter.

However, it is unrealistic to think that no work will be missed, and this legislation acknowledges that reality. Victims may need to find and arrange services and supports during normal working hours, forcing them to choose between attending their own job or accessing services. And up to now this choice may have meant jeopardizing employment or jeopardizing their family's access to resources even thoug h they might only be absent for a day or even half a day for an appointment. This legislation will allow victims to invest time in putting themselves and their families back on track for better lives.

About 50 per cent of Willow Place clients have children. They may have been displaced also and may have been witnesses or been aware of violence in the home. They may be temporarily unable to cope with school or going to child care, and they may need time with their parent during what would otherwise be that parent's normal working day. Ignoring that immediate need may contribute to greater problems later in children's lives.

Parents and children may simply need intense time together in the immediate aftermath of the crisis similar to a period of mourning whe n we all need to draw close to others who share our situation. I appreciate the fact that there is flexibility in this legislation to allow victims to take leave several days at a time or to use it periodically as needed. As their recovery continues, fam ilies may need time to respond to their own or their children's needs, as is the case in –after any family trauma, and they are in the best position to judge what they need and take the time as they see fit.

The protocol to support this legislation will require great insight and sensitivity. I strongly encourage the government to ensure that the process for claiming leave is efficient and simple and clear to employees and employers; that there are no delays for victims who are dealing with so many other challenges at this time –at such a time; that it is not intrusive, that it respects the privacy of the whole family; and simply that it causes no further anxiety and is no more onerous than making use of other types of leave that are available to employees.

February 18, 2016 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 27 I'm confident that the government will want to protect the victim's rights to limit the extent to which they must disclose information to employers. Safeguards for confidentiality should be firmly in place and thoroughly understood by all personnel who may be involved in the administration of the leave at every level. Accessing paid leave and job protection should not be contingent upon the victim making a formal declaration such as by going to a shelter or filling out a police report –filing a police report.

Shelters provide an invaluable service to well over 1,000 people in Manitoba each year. However, there are many people who choose to go to friends or family. Many people access resource centres without ever coming to a shelter. The fact that they acces s supports independently should not inadvertently impact their option to make use of this new provision. And likewise accessing leave should not be contingent upon a police report having been filed. It's

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	40-5-ju1
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	40th 5th hansardpdf ju1.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	16cbe3459aae5bb9fb3e1f9b5b425bf799898697

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