Main menu:

History of RPE Thought

Posts by Tag

RSS New from the CCPA

  • Boom, Bust and Consolidation November 9, 2018
    The five largest bitumen-extractive corporations in Canada control 79.3 per cent of Canada’s productive capacity of bitumen. The Big Five—Suncor Energy, Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL), Cenovus Energy, Imperial Oil and Husky Energy—collectively control 90 per cent of existing bitumen upgrading capacity and are positioned to dominate Canada’s future oil sands development. In a sense they […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • A new Director for CCPA's BC Office: Message from Mary Childs, Board Chair October 24, 2018
    The CCPA-BC Board of Directors is delighted to share the news that Shannon Daub will be the next BC Director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Last spring, Seth Klein announced that, after 22 years, he would be stepping down as founding Director of the CCPA-BC at the end of 2018. The CCPA-BC’s board […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Who Owns Canada’s Fossil-Fuel Sector? October 15, 2018
    The major investors in Canada’s fossil-fuel sector have high stakes in maintaining business as usual rather than addressing the industry’s serious climate issues, says a new Corporate Mapping Project study.  And as alarms ring over our continued dependence on natural gas, coal and oil, these investors have both an interest in the continued growth of […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Pharmacare consensus principles released today September 24, 2018
    A diverse coalition representing health care providers, non-profit organizations, workers, seniors, patients and academics has come together to issue a statement of consensus principles for the establishment of National Pharmacare in Canada. Our coalition believes that National Pharmacare should be a seamless extension of the existing universal health care system in Canada, which covers medically […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Kate McInturff Fellowship in Gender Justice September 19, 2018
    The CCPA is pleased to announce the creation of the Kate McInturff Fellowship in Gender Justice.This Fellowship is created to honour the legacy of senior researcher Kate McInturff who passed away in July 2018. Kate was a feminist trailblazer in public policy and gender-based research and achieved national acclaim for researching, writing, and producing CCPA’s […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Progressive Bloggers

Meta

Recent Blog Posts

Posts by Author

Recent Blog Comments

The Progressive Economics Forum

Stingy EI Benefits

This morning, Statistics Canada released Employment Insurance (EI) figures for February. These figures show slightly more recipients nationally, but somewhat fewer recipients among provinces. Statistics Canada confirms that this apparent discrepancy reflects the fact that each province is seasonally adjusted separately from the national total.

When seasonal adjustment is tipping the balance between an increase and a decrease, one must conclude that the numbers were “virtually unchanged from the previous month.” That is not surprising since neither total employment nor unemployment changed dramatically in February.

But no news is not necessarily good news. The status quo is that more than 1.5 million Canadians are officially unemployed, but that fewer than 700,000 receive EI benefits. Continuing that state of affairs is a poor outcome.

In addition to releasing figures on the number of EI recipients, Statistics Canada also updated its figures on the dollar value of benefits. In 2009, the average regular benefit was $348.42 per week. That corresponds to an annual income of $18,118.

Therefore, the average EI benefit falls below the Low Income Cut-Off for an individual living in a city with 30,000 or more people. It falls below the Cut-Off for a couple or family living in either rural or urban Canada.

EI benefits are currently only 55% of insurable earnings, up to a maximum of $457 per week. The labour movement has long proposed increasing benefits to a larger percentage of insurable earnings.

UPDATE (April 23): Quoted in The Hamilton Spectator

Enjoy and share:

Comments

Comment from Paul Tulloch
Time: April 22, 2010, 9:23 am

We should be quite ashamed of ourselves, imagine having a social safety net that comes in below LICO, and then Social assistance even further down. Why not just get rid of them all instead of pretending to have a social safety net.

Social security now is nothing but a shoe horn for companies to make workers accept precarious work until that one day “when a good job comes along”.

We could have increased benefits and came up with a huge retraining program for those displaced. Combined with a feasible ubiquitous industrial green strategy and we would be so much further down the road to prosperity. Instead we have people serving their time, many with great skills, in underemployed, precarious work, fending off the winds of poverty.

Sad.

I am so glad Erin you keep us all on top of these issues. I wish I could help you, but I am not allowed to comment on statcan data for the rest of my life.

Besides you do a great job!

Write a comment





Related articles