This article was originally published at Fightback.
Strict new changes to Canada’s Employment Insurance (EI) program took
effect across the country on Jan. 6. The Conservatives’ plans to
“reform” EI have been public knowledge since the Harper government
tabled its last federal budget in March. Minister of Human Resources and
Skills Development Diane Finley claimed the new changes merely clarify
what is expected from EI claimants and help better connect job
applicants to available work. In reality, they represent the latest
attempt by the Canadian bourgeoisie to make workers pay for the ongoing
capitalist crisis through austerity and a reduction of the social wage.
Henceforth, EI claimants will be divided into three categories.
“Long-tenured workers” have paid 30 per cent of their maximum annual EI
premiums for seven of the last ten years, and collected benefits for
less than 35 weeks during the past five years. “Frequent claimants” have
filed more than three claims and collected more than 60 weeks’ benefits
over the previous five years. Anyone else is classified as an
“occasional claimant.” The net effect is to divide EI claimants between
those who pay into the program but never or rarely collect benefits and
those who make more frequent claims.
The revamped EI program will also introduce more stringent
definitions of “suitable employment” and what constitutes a “reasonable
job search” (in other words, preparing resumes, attending job fairs, and
applying for jobs and job banks). Under the new regulations, the
government will consider several factors when considering whether an EI
claimant is suited for a particular job, including wages, type of work,
commuting time, working conditions, hours of work and personal
circumstances such as family obligations. As an example of what is
considered “suitable,” the regulations define an acceptable commuting
time as one hour each way — although, it could also be a figure that
“could be higher taking into account previous commuting history and
community’s average commuting time.”
Particularly hard-hit by the changes will be the Atlantic
provinces, the economies of which are more dependent than the rest of
Canada on seasonal employment such as fishing. During the winter months,
when there is little work to be found in rural areas, many residents
rely on EI payments before returning to their jobs when the season
starts. In the wake of Harper’s restructuring of the program, frequent
claimants may be required to take available work off-season rather than
waiting for their old jobs to start up again — even if the new job pays
30 per cent less and is located an hour’s drive away.
While the government portrays the EI changes as common sense
reforms designed to reduce waste while making it easier for people to
find work, the reality is more complicated. In truth, EI “reform”
represents the latest bourgeois attack on workers as the ruling elite
seeks to make the most vulnerable members of society pay for the crisis
of their system. Seizing on the pretext of a vast increase in the
federal debt caused by corporate tax cuts and bailouts to banks and auto
companies, the bosses are clawing back every historical gain of the
Canadian working class.
As it aims to restore conditions of profitability, one of the
biggest targets of the capitalist class is the social wage, which
consists of benefits paid through the bourgeois state that workers
managed to wrench from the bosses over years of struggle. This includes
pensions, health care, and unemployment benefits. In order to pay off
the debt and restore the rate of profit, capitalists are targeting every
social program they can find as a source of savings. As always, the
human cost of restoring economic equilibrium to the capitalist system is
borne not by those who order the cuts, but by ordinary working people.
Youth and female workers, in particular, stand to lose out, as
they are the most vulnerable to long-term changes in the job market that
have reduced eligibility for EI. In recent decades, demand for
ever-greater “flexibility” in the labour market has created a shift
towards more temporary and part-time employment. This is reflected in
numbers from Statistics Canada, which reported that 78.4 per cent of
Canadians who lost their jobs in 2012 were eligible for EI benefits,
compared to 83.9 per cent in 2010. In an economy that emphasizes the
disposability of the worker, fewer and fewer people are able to reach
the threshold of 420 to 700 working hours (generally only attainable at a
full-time job) that allows them to qualify for benefits. The same
Statistics Canada report noted that among EI contributors, the share
working in full-time jobs decreased from 51 per cent in 2011 to 40 per
cent. Eligibility rates for women and youth both dropped.
By making it harder to qualify for EI benefits and instituting a
sliding scale of benefits that decreases benefits for each week the
recipient is out of work — all while making no effort to reduce premiums
— the Harper government is tightening the screws on the unemployed and
forcing them to accept work in the more precarious short-term, temporary
or part-time positions that increasingly dominate the economic
landscape in advanced capitalist nations. At the same time, cutting
benefits while maintaining premiums will provide the government with an
additional source of funds to pay off the federal debt should EI once
more generate a surplus.
Such a manoeuvre would come as no surprise from the
Conservative government, which funnelled $55-billion from the EI surplus
to help pay off the debt in 2008 — a move that then-NDP leader Jack
Layton described as “the biggest theft in Canadian history.” But
Harper’s theft was only the most recent in a series of attacks that have
plagued EI for decades.
Unemployment Insurance was first established as part of Prime
Minister R.B. Bennett’s Employment and Social Insurance Act of 1935, and
was later expanded by the Liberal government of Pierre Trudeau, which
made benefits more generous and easily available. Since 1971, those
benefits have been cut and cut again. The federal government, originally
obliged to make financial contributions to the program along with
employers and employees, gradually reduced its contributions until they
were eliminated completely by 1990.
The Progressive Conservatives cut EI in 1990 and 1993, before
the Liberals took over the hatchet and cut it further in 1994 and 1996.
Amendments made eligibility more difficult by increasing the hours of
work needed to qualify. The Liberals’ role in cutting EI cost them
dearly in lost votes from the Atlantic provinces during the 1997
election. After Harper was elected in 2006, the Conservatives refused to
recognize the existing EI surplus, and in 2008 adopted legislation
freezing the surplus indefinitely and putting EI premiums on a
pay-as-you-go basis. That same year, the Supreme Court of Canada
rejected a court challenge from two Quebec trade unions, the
Confederation des syndicats nationaux (the province’s second largest
union, representing 300,000 workers) and the Syndicat National des
Employes de l’Aluminium, arguing that the government had misappropriated
EI funds.
Now the Conservatives have further escalated their attacks on
EI. The new changes are only the latest manifestation of the austerity
the party has been mandated by the capitalist class with spearheading,
and which is being felt in every area of economic life through cuts,
layoffs, and downsizing. In simple terms, EI “reform” will force the
unemployed to more quickly accept one of the precarious, low-wage jobs
that are the new norm in Canada by making it more difficult for them to
survive.
A larger point must also be considered. In the last analysis,
the welfare state, which includes programs such as Employment Insurance,
is only an attempt by the capitalist state to compensate for the
failings of capitalism itself. Ever-subject to the irrational whims of
the market, the capitalist system relies on what Marx called a “reserve
army of labour” (the unemployed) to help keep wages down. The resulting
waste of human potential is staggering. However, in most capitalist
economies, unemployment has gone way over and above what Marx would
consider a “reserve army”. Persistent, chronic, and endemic unemployment
undermines the system from within. Where the anarchic free market
permits human beings to suffer when their labour is not required, a
rationally-planned economy would allow society to fully utilize all of
the “human resources” at its disposal.
As part of an omnibus budget bill passed by Harper’s
Conservative majority, the EI overhaul will go through as planned unless
stopped in its tracks by a popular mass movement. Canadians have seen
two such movements recently in the forms of the Quebec student strike —
which targeted the tuition hikes of the Charest government — and Idle No
More, which is currently engaged in an all-out battle to stop the
implementation of Bill C-45. At first glance, the unemployed appear only
as a small minority of the general population. But the same could be
said for the Quebec students and First Nations activists who nonetheless
pushed their concerns onto the national agenda, and through their
efforts earned a great deal of support from the wider working class.
The NDP and many union leaders have come out strongly against
the changes to EI. But ultimately, cuts to assistance for the unemployed
are only a symptom of the larger problem: an economic system of which
unemployment is the inevitable by-product. Bourgeois economists that
refer to a so-called “normal” level of unemployment reflect the degree
to which our present society has acclimatized itself to a certain,
seemingly inevitable degree of human suffering. And indeed, so long as
the means of production are privately-owned and geared towards profit, a
certain subset of the population will be condemned to idleness and
deprivation.
Only a planned economy under democratic workers’ control, where
the means of production are publicly-owned and oriented towards the
fulfilment of social needs, will allow society to eliminate the scourge
of unemployment once and for all.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment