Before today’s federal budget, rumours were swirling that Finance Minister Jim Flaherty would announce that self-employed Canadians were going to be able to opt in to Employment Insurance maternity and parental benefits.
Alas, it was just a rumour. Flaherty’s budget instead promises the government will be “Consulting with Canadians and developing options to provide self-employed Canadians with access to EI maternity and parental benefits”.
In other words, having a baby will still send the following people to the poorhouse: artists, small-business owners, consultants, designers, restaurateurs, and other brave independent folks trying to make their mark on the world.
These folks will be less inclined to take time off to nurture their little family—and, thus, to breastfeed.
This issue is old news to West Coast LEAF’s executive director, Alison Brewin.
For more than a decade, the legal advocacy group has been using the courts to fight for better EI for women.
Brewin is outraged. “They didn’t need to do a consultation 15 years ago when they slashed the system back,” she told the Straight in a phone interview today (January 27). “They have the power and authority to make these changes.”
Brewin pointed out that parental leave is designed for folks who work full-time for an employer—the “antithesis of what women’s work patterns are”, she said.
The EI system takes money from the paycheques of people working seasonally or part-time, she explained, even if those people are not eligible for leave.
She also pointed out that Canada’s Constitution suggests that women’s lives should be considered when social programs are created. EI maternity and parental leave, she said, completely misses where Canadian women are at.
Only about two-thirds of women who have babies are eligible for maternity leave, according to a Human Resources and Skills Development Canada’s media representative.
“Why do they need to ask me?” Brewin said of the consultations. “It seems like the right thing to do. They need to spend money on consultation on that? Lord.”
Most Popular
- 1. Peak oil educator Richard Heinberg challenges “binary thinking”
Comments (4) - 2. J.C. Penney and Ellen DeGeneres stand up to One Million Moms Comments (5)
- 3. Your horoscope for February 9 to 15, 2012
- 4. B.C. government changes rules to allow liquor licensed venues to screen movies Comments (31)
- 5. The Georgia Straight's 2012 sex survey: The lust and thrust report Comments (1)
- 6. Gwynne Dyer: The Syrian opposition’s great mistake Comments (5)
- 7. Vancouver musicians get to the heart of sex, love, and rock ’n’ roll Comments (2)
- 8. What’s the most unusual location where you’ve masturbated? Comments (5)
- 9. Women who want sex constantly Comments (67)
- 10. What’s the most unusual place where you’ve hooked up in the Lower Mainland?
Comments
Were it mandatory for all SE women to pay such premiums, those past their child-bearing years would be paying for those who aren't....and there are millions of such older women. Also, SE women/men would pay premiums at 2.4 times the basic rate, as employers also contribute to EI at 1.4 times the basic rate over and above the employee's share. This cost would be enough to deter people from becoming self-employed at times when that's their only option. How could you ever prove that you were eligible to draw benefits...except for the maternity/ medical issues?
I've been self-employed a hefty portion of my life, several times as a single mom, and, now, as a not-quite senior. Even after working part time, I could never claim EI due to low number of hours allotted. So, I have been without a safety net most of my working life.
No, EI is not at all fair to women. However, you can't blame it solely on the basis of this budget, especially now coming into a major recession.
IMHO, EI should work the same as it did when I first started working. In the updated system , benefits should be paid in proportion to the amount of contributions you actually made. If your 'eligible hours' are only 25% of the amount needed for full benefits, you can only collect 25% of those benefits. At least, you'd get a cheque. That's the only way the system will be fair for women/men working part time as most never accumulate enough hours to be eligible to claim.
Part time workers are feeding the system at an atrocious rate and can very seldom collect. The government stands to lose billions of dollars should it make the EI honest. It won't happen in ANY budget, let alone in 2009.