Thank you, Madam Chair. I also had questions about this particularly, not so much around climatic conditions but around the economic situation in the scenario where somebody hasn't been doing their due diligence and had not been a proper businessperson and tried to use this. However, any further discussion with the clerk and the Minister and the pointing out of section A saying that it has to be beyond the control of the employer or because of an unforeseen event, but then, as well, that this is the discretion of the employment standard officer, who is someone that we have entrusted a lot of faith in already to make certain decisions when it comes to these sorts of things. What I'm saying is that I think of a scenario where, say, a road is wiped out by a climatic condition and workers can't get to the site, the site shuts down, nobody can work, and they are laid off. There won't be a state of emergency declared by any state or level of government at that time. It doesn't lead to destruction or major breakdown of equipment, so there are scenarios where I don't think the other subclauses do fit or would be able to accommodate for those types of situations, and as a result I will be voting against this motion. Thank you.
Katrina Nokleby on Committee Motion 93-19(2): Bill 20: An Act to Amend the Employment Standards Act - Deletion and substitution in subclause 11(3), Defeated
In the Legislative Assembly on March 12th, 2021. See this statement in context.
Committee Motion 93-19(2): Bill 20: An Act to Amend the Employment Standards Act - Deletion and substitution in subclause 11(3), Defeated
Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
March 12th, 2021
Page 2544
See context to find out what was said next.