We talked about how women are in the workforce and they’re in certain jobs and how we need to support them, but they also need child care. We need to support women who are working and make sure that $10-a-day child care spaces are available. And quite frankly, Speaker, this government has put delays upon delays. Just today we heard that there is a funding formula, but it’s still not going to be available until 2025. It’s been two years for that funding formula to actually kick in so we can support women who are working and actually access affordable child care for $10.

Can I ask the member—you know, parents are saying, “Enough is enough.” What do you think about the delays? And you said, “Let’s get it done faster. Let’s get things going so women could get back to work. Women need child care to get back to work.” Can I ask you, why is it taking so long for this government to actually create a funding formula to create the $10-a-day child care spaces?

Oh, sorry; I didn’t see my friend from Richmond Hill there.

Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to ask a question. I enjoyed the minister’s remarks, and you talked about the importance of getting more women into the workforce. So you mentioned some of those numbers. I think you said one in 10 in some of the trades that you had gone through.

I’m curious; how do you feel that we can progress towards defining that success and that gold standard of having that equal opportunity for women? How will this legislation improve those conditions so more women can get to that gold standard?

I want to thank the minister for her presentation. In this bill, despite eliminating employer requirements for sick notes, there are no more paid sick days. That’s one thing that is really, really important for all workers and, I would say, even mostly women workers, because oftentimes when children are sick, it’s women who are at home taking care of them. Similarly, when it’s our elderly parents, it’s women who need those paid sick days from their job.

But my question really is around clarification. Right now, the elimination of the sick note—is that covered for just the three-day period which currently exists under legislation, or are the sick notes eliminated for any sick day?

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Questions?

I recognize the Associate Minister of Women’s Social and Economic Opportunity.

I recognize the member from Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston.

Further questions?

Further debate?

Speaker, I would like to begin my 10 minutes by expressing that I am in state of complete rage and anger with this government’s behaviour towards women. But I respect you, and I respect this House, and what you’re going to see is me doing my best to contain the rage that not only I feel, but that my constituents and many, many women across the province feel. I wanted to share with you that what you see is me trying, okay? Let’s see how this goes.

When it comes to women and women workers in this province, this government has been an abject failure. There’s no quantifying it any other way. Let’s just talk about how time and time again, this government has not only denied women the workplace entitlements that they deserve, but they have proactively worked against the best interests of women in the workplace. There’s a list as long as my arm; I just have the highlights of that.

First, let’s talk about midwives. These are primarily women workers. They won a judgment against this government to provide them equal pay, and the government was found guilty of systemic discrimination based on sex. What did this government do? Pay them? No. They took midwives to court. That’s crazy, right?

Then there was Bill 124, a bill that suppressed and stole the wages of primarily women workers in this province. It went to court and was found to be unconstitutional, and now the government owes how many billions and billions of dollars to pay these women what they are owed.

Then there was the bill to remove the charter rights from the mostly female workforce of education support workers, and it was a massive, massive anger outcry that forced you to roll that back.

I was reminded by the member from Don Valley East that they voted down extending WSIB coverage to support PSWs working in home care. We know that’s a largely racialized and female workforce. Many at the time were in the gallery to hear the debate, and the government said no. Clean washrooms, great, but these are women who are looking for safety protections in the workforce, and this government completely denied them.

My outrage that I’m sharing with you—and I will say it again—is that this government silenced the voices of women in this province when it came to Lydia’s Law and women who are sexual assault survivors. They didn’t want to hear debate. That’s fine, because we are talking about women in the workplace, but let me explain that while they did not want to hear from sexual assault survivors and didn’t want to hear them tell their stories, what is missing from that debate is the primarily women who work in these gender-based-violence organizations across the province in all of our constituencies. These primarily women who work in interval and transition houses, work in sexual assault centres, work in these organizations—primarily women—have had their wages frozen for 15 years, and they are working in increasingly complex and difficult situations because of the rise of violence against women.

This is a government that chose not to declare intimate partner violence as an epidemic. Despite all of the evidence, despite the Renfrew inquest, despite us asking time and time and time again, despite all of our communities, municipalities, calling it an epidemic, this government chose not to do that. That is completely demoralizing for women who work in these organizations, who work in all of these gender-based-violence organizations, sexual assault centres, across all of our constituencies.

I would just say that the member from Kitchener South–Hespeler came to Hamilton with a big cheque, and believe me, women’s agencies are grateful for any little thing that they can extract from this government. Whatever crumbs this government decides to give to these organizations, they’re happy to take. But that, again, is pinkwashing. Pinkwashing is when you ignore the substance. You come with a big headline like this bill about period products and clean washrooms, and you say that’s you working for women. Arriving in our communities with a cheque for desperate organizations is taking advantage of the fact that they’re desperate for some money from this government, but it’s ignoring the epidemic of violence in our communities against women, and it’s ignoring the conditions that these women actually work in.

Many of these women work overtime. They work long weekends. Why do they do that? Because they are completely committed to protecting women and girls in our province and to keeping them safe. I don’t feel that I can say the same is true of this government.

If this government wanted to actually address what women need in the workplace, I can’t think of a better place for you to start than women who work in VAW shelters across our province. There is a report that was done called the Feminist Brain Drain. It essentially talks about the problem that is existing. It says, “While the backbone of shelters”—and transitional houses—“are ... struggling to recruit and retain staff,” it’s because they are facing “burnout, exhaustion, vicarious trauma, and overall lack of wellness in their workplaces.” Women work in these workplaces. They have to come with the strength to support women and children who have seen the absolute worst.

Again, discharging Lydia’s Law and not allowing sexual assault survivors to have their voices heard—where are these women going to go now? They’re going to take their trauma and their grief and their rage at this government to these organizations. And these women, who are already underpaid, who are working long hours, who are trying to do the job that a government should do, now are going to be burdened with the grief of these women who were denied not only their justice in court but were denied justice in this House by this government. It’s a shame.

As I said, this is me trying to contain my rage, but what I am saying is factual. It’s absolutely the case. This is what has occurred in this province, and this is under this government’s watch.

We know that women-led sectors—women primarily work in what I would call the caring sector or the giving sector. We have women who primarily work as health care workers, primarily work in gender-based violence and interval houses and shelters. They primarily work as ECEs. What we see, especially when it comes to ECEs, is that they also are underpaid.

While this government has dragged their heels on coming out with $10-a-day child care, the early childhood educators are leaving the sector. Some 50% have left in the last five years. Why? Because they are not paid. They’re undervalued, and they’re not paid adequately to look after the youngest people, our young children. The fact that the sector is ignored by the government’s bill after bill on working for workers—you’re ignoring women-led organizations, and you’re ignoring women-led workplaces. I would say early childhood education is a significant example of that.

Early childhood educators in Ontario are among the lowest paid in Canada. These are women among the lowest paid in Canada. This is the government that has made absolutely no attempt to have equal pay legislation in this province, equal pay legislation that would help women workers: women workers in early childhood education; women workers in our interval, transition and gender-based-violence organizations across this province. The status of workers is that the only way we’re going to keep ECE workers working and attract them is if we pay them more. It’s just a simple matter of supply and demand.

I will leave this with you, that if this government really wanted to work for women workers in this province, women want more than a clean washroom. They want more than period products made available. Is that important? Yes, but it’s the least that you could do. It’s the least that you could do, particularly given how you’ve betrayed women by taking Lydia’s Law and discharging it out of this House.

I will just leave you with this, Speaker. These organizations have to fundraise for wages, essentially. Would we allow firefighters to have to fundraise for their wages? Would we allow police services to have to fundraise to pay the wages of the officers in this province? I think not. Organizations in the gender-based-violence sector are starting food banks for their own staff—not for the women they serve; they’ve already done that—food banks, for workers in gender-based violence organizations.

I will end by saying that in Hamilton we have so many wonderful organizations, like SACHA, like Interval House. The YWCA is hosting their 14th annual fundraiser, Walk a Mile in Their Shoes, and that’s to support their critical work for programs to end violence against women. It takes place on June 12. While you have nothing to help women in the bill, show up to Walk a Mile in Their Shoes and help those women fundraise to keep women safe in this province.

I agree we’re debating the workers thing and that we’re talking about workers all afternoon, so whether you’re a man or woman you’re talking about workers. We’re all workers.

I want to talk about wage theft. Between 2020 and 2022, Ontario workers filed more than 8,400 successful claims for workplace violations and were owed $36 million. The Star reported that by the end of 2022, government collection recovered less than half, less than 40%. The numbers were $36 million owed to workers; $13 million was collected. These bad actors got to keep $23 million in wage theft.

Do you believe that the bad actors or scumbag employers should keep $23 million in wage theft?

I want to thank the member opposite for her statement and her passion. We are totally understanding of it.

I know young people in my community, including plenty of women, are struggling to find the opportunity to find meaningful work. I know that this legislation has new pathways for those young women to find a career that can help pay the bills. MPP Leardi, MPP Jones and I met at St. Clair College a number of women in the WEST trades program for electrical trades. I’m wondering what your thoughts are on supporting those career pathways for young women.

I do appreciate the passion coming from the member from Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas. I appreciate the passion, and I think that is the passion we need in order to see change in Ontario. I don’t want to see the member lose their fire. However, passion and speaking about the issue is one thing, but actually moving into place, the changes that need to be made, is another thing. What we’ve been able to do in our government is go out and listen to women and give them a chance to speak about the things they need us to change.

So I ask the member, why is it difficult for us to actually listen to the women who’ve experienced trauma and share their stories in committee? Why are we not rushing that and giving them the opportunity to do that, to speak, so we can hear them, so that we can make changes. Because in the trades, and in these sectors, women have experienced sexual assault and they need to have their voices heard. So what is the problem—

I thank the member for his question and I appreciate that you had that many women working in your workplace. So it astounds me that you would have voted in favour to discharge Lydia’s Law to committee, because I can’t imagine that in a workplace of that many women you didn’t see issues of intimate partner violence; you didn’t see issues of gender-based violence or trauma. Because the stats will say that you did, whether you recognized it or not.

While showing up with a big cheque is important, as I said, these organizations are starved for funding. You need to do more. You need to dig deep and have the courage of your convictions to vote what is appropriate and vote what is just, not just what you’re told to do.

I really want to talk particularly about women workers, women who work in precarious jobs, women who work piecework. They’re very often afraid, even if they know what their entitlements are. They’re often afraid to speak up about the wages that are being stolen from them, because they fear reprisals.

The associate minister for women’s issues said that in the skilled trades sector, women feel that they are treated differently. Well, that’s no different from all women across all sectors. If they really wanted to help women in the workplace, as she has said in her speech here, you need to look at women having their wages stolen—the most low-income women in our province, pieceworkers, garment workers. You need to address that. The government’s job is to make sure that women get the wages that they deserve.

I would also remind you that intimate partner violence and the issue of sexual assault perpetrators, rapists, going free is not the same issue. This is a problem with the courts, and this is a problem with your government’s failure to declare intimate partner violence an epidemic.

You pass bills here in a day, in two days, and we have all kinds of time here to debate your bills and debate bills that you’ve made mistakes on. Why did you not want to hear from the voices of women in this House that were prepared to come here? Instead, you dispatched it to committee where you know—

I met with a child care organization called Today’s Family in my community, and they shared with me that they are completely committed to the Canada-wide Early Learning and Child Care program, but that they’re struggling to implement it because they can’t afford to pay the workers what they deserve and they can’t continue to retain workers who cannot work on starvation wages, and I will just say that I had a question in the House the other day about women and families that can’t afford baby formula.

So this is a government that’s completely tone-deaf, is in their own bubble when it comes to the impact that women are facing, the economic difficulties that women are facing in this province under your government’s watch.

Questions?

I recognize the member from Niagara Falls.

Response?

I recognize the member from Parkdale–High Park.

I thank the member for her presentation. There’s been quite a bit of discussion this afternoon around working for workers, particularly women, and so I think that one of the things, when you look at what the Conservative government says versus what they do, you see that a lot of times the actions actually hurt women. When you look at Bill 124 and the attack on health care workers, when you look at the child care sector, these are sectors that are predominantly women—actually predominantly low-wage, racialized, immigrant women.

So my question to the member is, particularly when you look at child care, the wage enhancement that was promised by this government back in January has still not arrived. Workers still are not receiving that wage enhancement, and that wage enhancement only applies to a very small percentage of workers, not all child care workers. Do you think that this is the right way forward, and does that help all women who are in the child care sector?

Further debate?

You know what language is allowed and not allowed in the chamber, so I will caution you in regard to using it and not offer to use it again even though you know it’s not supposed to be used.

Interjections.

The member for Mississauga–Malton may continue.

We all heard it.

Speaker, you heard it. I heard it. You could hear it.

Women in the trades is important. This is a nut that many governments have been trying to crack. This is not the first government that’s attempted to make sure that women in the trades feel comfortable in non-traditional work for women. It’s not new. But you can’t go right to that without addressing the conditions all around for all working women in this province. You can’t just cherry-pick and say, “We just want to focus on the well-being of women in the trades sector.” You need to look at the broader economic sector as well. It’s important; I agree. But this bill is so narrowly focused I don’t see how it will succeed in accomplishing what you’re saying.

It’s not correct, and you know it.

As we recognize North American Occupational Safety and Health Week, it is very fitting to be speaking on Bill 190, Working for Workers Five Act, 2024.

As always, before I start, I want to say thank you to the supreme God for giving me health and well-being compared to the last time so I can stand up and be the voice of Mississauga–Malton. Thank you to the family, the staff and, of course, the residents of Mississauga–Malton for giving me an opportunity to represent them.

Madam Speaker, this bill is making sure that every worker is important to this government. Ensuring every worker returns safely to their family is crucial, and the initiative that I am going to talk about is actually talking about Ontario’s ongoing commitment to that goal.

Today, we’re implementing, and we’re asking, if passed—the changes to further advance the progress we have achieved over the past few years in supporting and protecting workers in this province.

And I want to talk a little bit about the achievement this government has with respect to the workers. The investments which are made by this government are: investing $1.5 billion in the skilled trades strategy to modernize and promote the trades, investing $1 billion in skill development projects—over 600 projects training over 500,000 workers. The workers, through the training, are able to get the training and advance into the jobs, in another way getting better jobs, bigger paycheques.

And we have seen Ontario has the highest representation of women and visible minorities in skilled trades today, thanks to these policies in Canada.

Let’s look at last year. Ontario had the highest number of apprentice registrations in over a decade. The government eliminated apprenticeship fees and cut journeypersons’ fees by half. And the output? Madam Speaker, the output is simple: Ontario has welcomed more manufacturing jobs than all 50 US states combined, and that is the report card of this government and the policies.

Let’s look further, Madam Speaker. Number of jobs: Ontario has created over 700,000 new jobs since 2018. Thanks to the historic investment, today, close to 600,000 Ontarians are working in construction, more than at any point in Ontario’s history.

We’re making the hiring and employment experience fairer by requiring job ads to state whether a position is currently available or just a potential future need so that when a worker applies they know what is going to be happening, requiring employers to respond to the applicants within a prescribed period after they have interviewed for a job with a hiring decision. We’re standing for our workers.

Under the Employment Standards Act, we are doubling the fines for individuals convicted of offences to $100,000, the highest in the country.

Madam Speaker, yes, I’ll hear it loud and clear: “Oh, will increasing the fines reduce the people who are making mistakes, wrongdoings?” Well, yes, of course. We want to make sure they understand that it’s not a casual business, and we want to make sure, by increasing the penalty for repeat offenders, we’re going to stand for our workers.

Madam Speaker, if you want to look at the tale of two governments, the penalty for repeat offenders exploiting workers under the Liberal government, supported by the NDP of course, was $1,000.

I just want to say to the member opposite: Yes, you do have an opinion, and you should express the opinion. That’s why the people of Niagara have voted you in. But at the same time, even if we disagree, we need to be civil. So I just want to say—

Interjection.

Let’s go back to what matters most to the people of Ontario. What is more important to the people is that this government is taking action—action by raising the penalty to $5,000 per employee, because it is unacceptable for bad actors to buy their way out of consequences for putting workers at risk.

We are also reducing the administrative burden for sick workers and health care professionals, and putting patients before paperwork. Madam Speaker, the WSIB has been successfully streamlining and modernizing its processes, from digitizing document submission to enabling direct deposits and tracking your claims online, so that any and every worker who is applying can get the service they need and deserve. And they will continue their effort by working with health sector organizations to explore further options to reduce the administrative burden on workers and doctors.

Additionally, Madam Speaker, our government will further reduce the paperwork for health care professionals by prohibiting employers from requiring a sick note for a worker’s job-protected leave. On average, family doctors are spending 19 hours filling out forms and documentation. That’s nearly half their work week on paperwork and other red tape.

That’s why we’re consulting on amending exemptions under the Employment Standards Act to no longer exclude IT workers from some of the basic rights, like overtime pay.

Through this bill, Madam Speaker, we are keeping front-line heroes and workers healthy and safe. We are making sure, by lowering the service time required for firefighters to receive compensation for skin cancer from 15 to 10 years. I am sure, Madam Speaker, you remember it used to be 25 years in the previous government, from 25 to 10 years, moving the coverage directly into the legislation. We’re making sure to include wildland firefighters and wildland fire investigators under the same coverage for post-traumatic stress disorder that applies to municipal firefighters.

Madam Speaker, again, through this bill we’re not just helping and supporting workers. We’re actually giving an opportunity to the opposition to stand up for the workers and make a difference.

Madam Speaker, it doesn’t matter what they do. We will continue to keep working for the workers to make sure the workplaces are safer and more welcoming, even for our women workers, by modernizing the Occupational Health and Safety Act to include virtual harassment, and making sure that the constructors and employers maintain washroom facilities, when they’re provided, in a clean and sanitary condition and maintain records of washroom cleaning. The other side is going to say, “What a big deal.” Well, talk to the women who are working at those construction sites about what a big deal it is.

Madam Speaker, we want to encourage more women to get into the skilled trades and create a more inclusive environment. We are requiring that menstrual products be provided on construction projects above a certain size and duration.

This is the reason this bill would benefit injured workers, women at work, internationally trained workers and job seekers young and old, no matter your background, and the heroes who put their lives on the line to keep us safe. While the benefits will be spread across our entire economy, the measures are of critical importance to skilled trades, construction, regulated professions, service and hospitality.

This is the time when we all can come together, stand up for the workers and vote in favour of Bill 190 so that we can build a better, stronger Ontario.

I would like to say thank you to the member for that question and reminding that they had the choice to support this budget and they did not. They had a choice to say yes to the investments to the people of Ontario and he himself said that they picked their choice and they actually did not vote in favour of investing. But that’s totally fine. That’s the reason people have sent you here to be their voice.

Talking about the WSIB—the member talked about it—the WSIB provides the lost wages, medical coverage and assistance in getting back to work. I just want to talk about the data: 96% of claims have an allowance to be seen within 10 days; up to 89% in 2019. The rebate—for the first time in history, the WSIB issued a surplus, but at the same time, made sure that it was able to give back the claims to the people of Ontario.

As the Premier always says, the firefighters are our heroes. When everybody is running away from the fire, they are the ones who are going towards the fire. They make sure that the people come first before themselves, so we just want to take a moment to thank them. This is a government who believes in our firefighters and wants to support our firefighters.

That is why this act will introduce robust measures to protect the health and safety of front-line workers. The service time required for firefighters to receive compensation for skin cancer will be lowered from 15 years to 10 years. It used to be 25 years; from 25 to 15, and now 10. For example, if there was a firefighter who worked for about 11 to 12 years, in the previous way, he would not have got the coverage, but today, he or she will get the coverage, and this is one way we want to make sure that we support and respect our firefighters.