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.

Questions?

Thank you to my colleague for his remarks regarding Bill 190. I was interested to hear about the firefighters and the wildland firefighters that he mentioned in his remarks. I’m curious if he can expand a little bit more and tell us what new protections are included in the act to enhance the health and safety of front-line workers and heroes.

Yes, I would just say that I’ve stood up for workers my entire career. I hope you can spell it.

He did raise WSIB. Let’s be clear on WSIB: Why does your government continue to support deeming instead of getting rid of deeming that is forcing workers to live in poverty? My question is, why are you forcing workers to live in poverty?

And I will say, because you raised the budget, there isn’t an opposition that has ever supported the government’s budget, including the 15 years that you guys were the official opposition. You voted against every single budget, so learn your history before you talk—

The member, I want to thank you for your comments today. One of the games that the government plays in this House is they always say, “Oh, the opposition, they voted against this, they voted against this, they voted against this.” We voted against your budget bill, and your budget bill is bankrupting our schools, it’s bankrupting our colleges, our universities—11 out of 23 universities in this province are declaring shortfalls, are running deficits this year. Our hospitals are being bankrupted so that you can privative all of our public services.

How could you possibly ask us to support a bill that is bankrupting the most important public services in this province?

One of the things the government announced when they announced this in their media release—and it got all the headlines—was that it would include a suite of measures to support workers, including requiring menstrual products be provided on larger construction sites. That sounds like a good thing, except it’s not in the bill.

This is one of the things that this government does. They do what my colleague from Hamilton West calls pinkwashing. They put out this headline that, “Oh, we’re doing this wonderful thing for women workers. We’re going to make sure that there are menstrual products available on construction sites,” but it’s not in the legislation. So it means nothing.

When I look at the record of this government with regard to women and women workers, it’s really quite appalling. It starts with the midwives. Midwives were fighting for equal pay for work of equal value. The Human Rights Tribunal decided that, yes, their case was legitimate. What did this government do? They appealed that decision to the courts and then it went all the way to—it took several years, went to the courts. The courts upheld the decision and said that, yes, this government and the previous Liberal government were ripping off midwives; they were not giving them equal pay for work of equal value. They were actually underpaying them because they are women workers.

The next thing they did is they passed Bill 124, which illegally capped public sector workers’ wages at 1%. This primarily impacted women workers, disproportionately women workers. A lot of these workers, health care workers, PSWs and nurses that this government illegally tried to cap their wages—that had to go all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada. It took four years to get there and then it was finally overturned. Now the government’s having to pay them out.

In the meantime, what happened was women workers were so distraught, especially the health care workers, the nurses and the PSWs through the pandemic—they were not getting rewarded for the work that they were doing, not getting rewards for the risk that they were taking to support people and to help patients through the pandemic. So a lot of them left. As another of my colleagues mentioned today, there’s a 25% attrition rate among PSWs per year in this province because this government refuses to pay PSWs a legitimate working and living wage that’s commensurate to the work that they’re doing.

This government passed Bill 28 when they first got into power, and Bill 28 actually stripped the workers of their charter rights using the “notwithstanding” clause. This was charter rights, the fundamental freedoms—freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association. It stripped them of their legal rights against arbitrary detention. This meant that if those education workers went on a wildcat strike, they did not have rights against arbitrary detention. They could have just gone and arrested them all.

It also stripped them of their protection under the Human Rights Code. The Human Rights Code protects against discrimination based on gender, based on race, based on ability, disability, gender preference. This government actually stripped those workers, who were primarily—60% of those workers impacted by that bill were women workers.

Yesterday, in the Legislature, my colleague brought forward Lydia’s Law. This law is about compelling the province to provide statistics on sexual assault cases and mandating progress reports. It comes because there have been 1,171 sexual assault cases that have been stayed in 2023. In 2022, the number was 1,326 sexual assault cases stayed.

There’s a case I was just reading about online in the news. There was a student who was sexually assaulted on her campus. The case went, over an almost-two-year period, to court. She had the courage to face her assaulter in court, but just before the case came to conclusion, the case was thrown out. She never got her day of justice. She never got the court to actually hear and make a decision on that sexual assault case. She had the courage to come forward and go through all of the process of making the charge and going through that court case

There are hundreds of women in similar cases. There were 100 women in this Legislature yesterday to hear Lydia’s Law—

This government has said that this is a bill about improving the working conditions of women, and it’s called Working for Workers. When they announced it, they said, “Hey, we’re going to have menstrual products available on construction sites.” That’s not even in the legislation.

So when the government is trying to pretend that they are working for women workers, they should actually step up and work for women workers. There are a lot of women workers who work in sexual assault agencies, supporting survivors of sexual assault. They are dealing with the trauma. They are dealing with underpayment and with a lack of funding for the important work that they are doing.

Many of them were here in the Legislature yesterday, and many of the survivors were here in the Legislature yesterday. All they wanted to do was to hear the debate on Lydia’s Law, and this government cancelled the debate. The members opposite in the Conservative Party stood and voted not to hear that debate, even though there were 100 survivors of sexual assault in this Legislature yesterday.

It’s not just this example that this government is working against women workers. This government has shown incredible disrespect for women workers. Women still make 32% less for the same work of equal value than men. If you’re going to have a Working for Workers bill, and you’re going to pretend that it’s for women workers, you should be addressing that gender pay gap, because it’s just incredibly unfair that women are still, in 2024, not getting paid equally for work of equal value. You’ve shown with the midwife case that you are willing to take women to court to fight against their right for equal pay.

I’ll just go to another Working for Workers bill. This government always announces, and they have a really good, catchy byline. This time, it was menstrual products. In a previous Working for Workers bill, they said they were going to give gig workers the right to use the washroom—

That was a great diversion from what the actual bill was about because what that bill was about is, there was a tribunal hearing that said gig workers had been misclassified as contractors, but they were actually employees, so they were entitled to protections under the Employment Standards Act. What that bill—that “working for workers” bill—did is, it stripped those workers of their protections under the Employment Standards Act, so they are not entitled to minimum wage for all of the work hours that they had worked.

For example, a lot of the gig workers, a lot of the drivers—there was a report in the Toronto Star recently that said that after expenses they are making $6.37 an hour. And this government’s response to the abuse and the exploitation of gig workers was to strip them of their rights under the Employment Standards Act to create a separate subclass of workers that are called “gig workers,” who do not have the protections that other employees do in the province of Ontario.

I think this government is trying to get away with something. This government is trying to convince people that they are supportive of workers, but your record shows exactly the opposite. As far as women workers go and as far as women, and particularly survivors of sexual assault go, what this government did yesterday was absolutely shameful.

I actually got involved in politics when my kids were in elementary school because the Mike Harris government of that day was underfunding our schools. I actually had a newsletter that I was putting out to parents. Every week, I would put out another edition and it would highlight the two things that the government was cutting—that this government, through their supervisors at the Toronto District School Board, was cutting from our schools. Sometimes it would be the daytime custodian at my kids’ school or it would be the gym classes for kindergarten students or it would be the art program.

This government wants all of our public services and all of our public assets to go to their corporate friends so that they can generate profit, rather than provide services to the people of Ontario.

I recognize the deputy government House leader.

I caution the member; you are outside the scope of the bill that we are discussing.

Further questions? The member from—

Interjections.

Point of order.

But, believe me, there is a clip reel somewhere being developed now watching you socialize that harmful term that diminishes the value of women in the skilled trades—

In my riding of Niagara Falls, Fort Erie and Niagara-on-the-Lake I have Niagara College—this member talked about education—which is $12 million in debt, with 12,000 students, because of this Conservative government. Then, just down the road, Brock University: $25 million in debt, 19,000 students.

My question is pretty simple: Why do you think the Conservative government is deliberately underfunding our post-secondary education, which is going to harm our students?

Yes, thank you.

I first want to begin with commending the member from Spadina–Fort York for his work as a firefighter previously. So I’m going to ask you if you and your party will support our government’s efforts to expand the PTSD coverage for wildland firefighters and other front-line heroes to address their unique mental health challenges. As we know, the work that they do is very difficult. We’ve expanded WSIB coverage quite significantly since coming to government through our Working for Workers. So I would like to know if you will be supporting that.

I think we all support firefighters whenever we can; I think that’s pretty clear. What I don’t understand is, we raised this as a party before you did Working for Workers 4. Why do you think this government didn’t include that particular part in Working for Workers 4 and waited till number five and had to put it in because of what was said by this NDP government?

The following are the titles of the bills to which Her Honour did assent:

An Act to enact the Protecting Against Carbon Taxes Act, 2024 and amend various Acts / Loi édictant la Loi de 2024 sur la protection contre les taxes sur le carbone et modifiant diverses lois.

An Act to amend the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998 respecting certain Board proceedings and related matters / Loi modifiant la Loi de 1998 sur la Commission de l’énergie de l’Ontario en ce qui concerne certaines instances dont la Commission est saisie et des questions connexes.

An Act to amend the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities Act / Loi modifiant la Loi sur le ministère de la Formation et des Collèges et Universités.

An Act to implement Budget measures and to enact and amend various statutes / Loi visant à mettre en oeuvre les mesures budgétaires et à édicter et à modifier diverses lois.

An Act to revive 1000151830 Ontario Inc.

An Act to revive Qui Vive Island Club Inc.

An Act to revive Richard Crosby Investments Limited.

Further questions.

Thank you.

My question to the member is: Does the opposition not agree that requiring employers to maintain clean, sanitary and healthy washrooms in all workplaces—does that not uphold the dignity for all workers, especially our female workers looking to enter the skilled trades?

I come from a trades background. My father is a tool and die maker. All of my family members were working in different trades. I was a forest firefighter in northern Ontario with some of the first women crew members in the 1980s. So I appreciate any effort to get women into trades, to open up doors for women, because there are often too many barriers to get them into different jobs.

Clean washrooms: They should be mandatory on any work site. The thing that this government announced, though, when they announced this bill is that they were going to have free menstrual products available on construction sites. That was the announcement and it’s not in the bill.

So you’re pretending that you’re supporting women workers. You make an announcement that you’re supporting women workers. You say that it’s going to be in the legislation, but it isn’t there. So what are women workers supposed to think of that? Are they supposed to think that, “Oh, well, maybe they will fulfill their promise”?

For the survivors of sexual assault who came here yesterday, many of whom had had their cases thrown out of court because this government is underfunding our court system—there aren’t enough staff in our courts, and those cases are getting thrown out. Sexual assault cases are getting thrown out. So they came here to have a day in the Legislature where they could actually hear their cases brought forward. They could hear their stories brought forward. Yet this government silenced it.

I think that’s got to be traumatizing to the women who came here, the 100 women. There was one woman who flew from Los Angeles to hear that debate, and this government silenced that debate, silenced those women’s stories. I think that’s absolutely shameful.

Good afternoon, colleagues. I rise today to talk about Bill 190, Working for Workers Five Act, 2024, that was introduced by the Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development. As the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Education and as a professional with a background in HR, I’m happy to speak to this bill.

Today, I would like to focus my attention on a couple of items, specifically, opening the pathways to skilled trades and increasing fairness for job seekers and employees.

Speaker, we are building a better Ontario for the future. That future needs workers that can build and maintain the infrastructure that we need. We know there’s a huge shortage of skilled workers in Ontario. The majority of skilled tradesmen and women are retiring or approaching retirement, leaving a gap in the labour market. As the demand for skilled trades workers continues to grow in the manufacturing and construction sectors, our government is committed to taking action to ensure that our province has the tradespeople to grow and prosper. We need to remove the stigma and introduce students to technical education, teaching them important skills that may eventually lead to a good-paying job and career in the trades.

That’s one of the reasons why the Ministry of Education is making it mandatory for students to take at least one technical education course starting this September. Programs like the Ontario Youth Apprenticeship Program support skilled trades initiatives in secondary schools. OYAP is a specialized program in high school that allows students to explore apprenticeships and consider careers in the skilled trades, generally starting in grade 11 or grade 12, through their school’s co-operative education program.

Building on OYAP, our government is creating a new stream to further increase interest in the trades: FAST, Focused Apprenticeship Skills Training. This training program will allow students in grades 11 and 12 to participate in apprenticeship opportunities through co-op credits. Students would work toward their high school diploma. Upon completion of this program, they would receive a new seal on their Ontario secondary school diploma recognizing their dedication to learning a trade.

The FAST program would allow students to focus their senior-level courses in co-op, accelerating their entrance into a skilled apprenticeship. FAST would also help to address dropout rates and provide students who are at risk of dropping out of school the opportunity to pursue different pathways to completing their high school diploma.

I’d like to share a quote from Cathy Abraham, president of the Ontario Public School Boards’ Association: “We welcome the new OYAP FAST program and thank the Ministry of Education for listening to feedback received from stakeholders during its robust consultation. School boards recognize there is a need for more students to pursue opportunities in the skilled trades as part of a modernized secondary school program. This plan recognizes the importance of exposing students to the skilled trades while also ensuring they remain connected to their school, increasing the likelihood that they will graduate. We look forward to further dialogue with the Ministry of Education on other aspects of implementation, to help ensure student success in whatever path they choose.”

I want to take a moment to talk about a skilled trades program that I have been a huge supporter of that I learned about probably about a year or so ago. At Notre Dame Catholic Secondary School in Burlington, there is a construction shop class that builds tiny homes. This project exposes students to a number of different skilled trades including carpentry, construction, electrical and plumbing, offering them hands-on experiential learning. Not only does this class have a wait-list, but the majority of the students in the class are women.

The Working for Workers 5 legislation pursues measures that will encourage more women to join the skilled trades. Our government’s message is clear: Skilled trades are open to everyone. Our government is proud of the steps we’ve taken so far, and we’ve seen the results. In the past year, the percentage of new entrants to the skilled trades who are women is up by a historic 28%. We’re going to continue pursuing measures that will encourage women, just like the women at the Notre Dame tiny homes construction class, to join the skilled trades and make sure the doors to these in-demand careers are open to everyone.

Changes that we’re proposing in this legislation will require employers and constructors to maintain washroom facilities and provide menstrual products based on the size and duration of the project. Encouraging more women to get involved in the trades fosters an accepting, inclusive environment and also makes Ontario the first jurisdiction in Canada to require menstrual products on construction sites as part of occupational health and safety requirements.

I was recently at an event that celebrated women coaching other women. There was a young lady who was a guest speaker. She told us about her journey as a student where she wasn’t sure what she wanted to do, but after taking an apprenticeship program, she became an electrician. She has now purchased her first home at the age of 25. She has a thriving business and is encouraging other women, young and not so young, to explore a meaningful career in the trades. By opening the pathways into the skilled trades, we are making it easier for students and giving women a chance to take a different direction in their career.

We’re also encouraging mature workers to leverage their existing skills and education. The Working for Workers Five Act, if passed, will allow mature workers to meet alternative criteria that leverage their existing skills and experience, providing them a chance at a second career in an in-demand field and a well-paying job.

Speaker, our government continues to remove barriers through a new online job matching platform for new and prospective apprentices, to network and share opportunities that match their skills. We have also, since 2020, invested over $1.5 billion in the skilled trades through programs like the Skills Development Fund that support training in different sectors. This is because we know that in order to build Ontario, we need skilled workers and tradespeople working along side us.

Also in this bill, we are proposing to make the hiring process more transparent. As someone who has worked in human resources for the greater part of my professional career, I understand how important it is for employers to adopt clear, transparent and respectful recruitment practices that include notifying candidates on the outcome of their interviews. From an employer’s perspective, providing no communication to candidates following an interview is a sure way to leave a bad impression. It can also negatively impact an organization’s reputation and its ability to attract talent in the future.

I’m sure we all know someone who has gone through a very rigorous recruitment process, only to never hear back on the status of their application. Once that experience is shared, other qualified candidate may choose not to pursue opportunities with that organization. This information alone can be enough to deter a candidate from applying and illustrates the importance of providing constructive feedback to candidates and at the very least informing them that they will not be progressing.

Further, when a candidate receives no feedback for weeks following a first or second round interview, they may presume that they have been unsuccessful and there is an increased chance they will either reject a job offer, have lost interest or will have found a job elsewhere. From a candidate’s perspective, hearing back from a perspective employer is an opportunity to ask for feedback, to learn from their experience and for closure.

This legislation, if passed, would also require potential employers to state on the job posting if the position is vacant or for future consideration, enhancing transparency for job seekers and ensuring they invest their time and resources wisely.

The Working for Workers Five Act builds on the previous Working for Workers legislation. If passed, Ontario will continue to lead the country with new initiatives, including the OYAP FAST program, providing supports to encourage more students to pursue careers in the skilled trades. Thank you.

And you’re on it.

But what I want to talk about is that this bill, about working for women, completely ignores the women that work in gender-based-violence organizations across the province. They have to fundraise for their wages. They have had to start a food bank for their own workers. They’re dealing with more and more complex, traumatized cases, as we see an epidemic of gender-based violence, which this government refuses to declare as an epidemic. So why would this government exclude and ignore not only the voices of sexual assault survivors but the voices of women that work in that sector?