Main menu:

History of RPE Thought

Posts by Tag

RSS New from the CCPA

  • A critical look at BC’s new tax breaks and subsidies for LNG May 7, 2019
    The BC government has offered much more to the LNG industry than the previous government. Read the report by senior economist Marc Lee.  
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • The 2019 living wage for Metro Vancouver April 30, 2019
    The 2019 living wage for Metro Vancouver is $19.50/hour. This is the amount needed for a family of four with each of two parents working full-time at this hourly rate to pay for necessities, support the healthy development of their children, escape severe financial stress and participate in the social, civic and cultural lives of […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Time to regulate gas prices in BC and stop industry gouging April 29, 2019
    Drivers in Metro Vancouver are reeling from record high gas prices, and many commentators are blaming taxes. But it’s not taxes causing pain at the pump — it’s industry gouging. Our latest research shows that gas prices have gone up by 55 cents per litre since 2016 — and the vast majority of that increase […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • CCPA welcomes Randy Robinson as new Ontario Director March 27, 2019
    The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives is pleased to announce the appointment of Randy Robinson as the new Director of our Ontario Office.  Randy’s areas of expertise include public sector finance, the gendered rise of precarious work, neoliberalism, and labour rights. He has extensive experience in communications and research, and has been engaged in Ontario’s […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • 2019 Federal Budget Analysis February 27, 2019
    Watch this space for response and analysis of the federal budget from CCPA staff and our Alternative Federal Budget partners. More information will be added as it is available. Commentary and Analysis  Aim high, spend low: Federal budget 2019 by David MacDonald (CCPA) Budget 2019 fiddles while climate crisis looms by Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood (CCPA) Budget hints at priorities for upcoming […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Progressive Bloggers

Meta

Recent Blog Posts

Posts by Author

Recent Blog Comments

The Progressive Economics Forum

EI Premium Freeze Leaves Unemployed Canadians in the Cold

Today, finance minister Jim Flaherty announced a three-year freeze on Employment Insurance (EI) premiums, ostensibly because a stronger job market has alleviated the need for additional premium revenue.

Under the current policy, employee premiums were rising each year by 5 cents per $100 earned. Flaherty had announced this policy on September 30, 2010, when 1.5 million Canadians were officially unemployed. Since then, that figure has edged down to 1.4 million, hardly a breathtaking reduction in unemployment.

The number of Canadians receiving regular EI benefits has declined more sharply, from 709,990 to 512,280 between September 2010 and June 2013 (the most recent EI figures available). But the falling number of EI recipients reflects not only the slight reduction in unemployment but also government policy changes that make benefits less accessible. Freezing premiums effectively locks in those benefit cuts.

The losers from this freeze are unemployed Canadians who are more likely to be left out in the cold without benefits given limited funding for EI. The winners are employers, who will pocket significantly more than their employees.

A worker making up to the year’s maximum insurable earnings will save only a nickel for every $100 earned next year. Meanwhile, employers will pocket almost $400 million of the $660 million in estimated savings for “job creators and Canadian workers in 2014.” (As Finance Canada highlights in its own release, employers pay 60% of total EI premiums.)

UPDATE (Sept. 10): Quoted in The Globe and Mail (A3), National Post (FP4), Toronto Star (B1) and other newspapers via Canadian Press and Postmedia.

Enjoy and share:

Comments

Comment from Bill Prouten
Time: September 10, 2013, 12:43 pm

Not only does it lock in a “new normal” for the EI budget, making future increases to help people less likely, but the “savings” are practically non-existent to the average worker.
My understanding is that the max EI dues payable to the fund is based on a $48,000 salary. The normally scheduled increase of 5 cents per $100 earned therefore only works out to $24 a year for someone making $48,000 or more. Peanuts. 6 lattes. A year.
If you’re one of the increasing number of people working minimum wage service industry jobs, say at a generous $12/hour, that regularly scheduled increase amounts to $12.48, assuming you work full time, 5 days/week, with no vacations.
And so, Flaherty has said “I’ll buy you 2 lattes this year, and in exchange you will forego the ability to claim a reasonable amount to live on should you find yourself out of work.”

Nice. Why isn’t anyone publicizing this?

It’s the same stupid ploy the Conservatives used on the daycare issue; they cancelled plans to expand daycare at reasonable rates to working people, and instead gave people something that amounts to about $1200 (?) year…..which amounts to $100 month to spend on childcare…..awesome.

Write a comment





Related articles