This is page numbers 2525 - 2568 of the Hansard for the 19th Assembly, 2nd Session. The original version can be accessed on the Legislative Assembly's website or by contacting the Legislative Assembly Library. The word of the day was going.

Topics

Mathisen

Thank you Madam Chair. Our office doesn't typically track the number of group terminations that occur, but they do occur from time to time. Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Chair

The Chair Lesa Semmler

Thank you. Member.

Kevin O'Reilly

Kevin O'Reilly Frame Lake

Thanks, Madam Chair. Just to be really clear, was there a request from employers, individual companies, bigger employers, to make this change? Where is the impetus coming from? Thanks, Madam Chair.

The Chair

The Chair Lesa Semmler

Thank you. Minister.

R.J. Simpson

R.J. Simpson Hay River North

Thank you. We received correspondence from, I guess you would say, an industry lobbyist group, if that is what the Member is referencing, but it was really the northern experience and the situation we found ourselves in that led to the inclusion of this. We often receive suggestions from lobbyists about what we should be doing in terms of our employment legislation, and it is not the case that it is just automatically implemented. Thank you.

The Chair

The Chair Lesa Semmler

Thank you. Member.

Kevin O'Reilly

Kevin O'Reilly Frame Lake

Thanks. I appreciate the Minister's frankness there. I guess we were lobbied to make this change. I need to turn to the law clerk, Madam Chair, or I'll start with the Minister. I understand that, of course, there are individual termination provisions in the act and that people can actually get paid out. There are the group termination notice provisions, as well; people don't get paid out. However, if this is passed, it appears to me that some workers, if they work for a larger workplace with 20 or more employees, they could lose weeks of paid work as a result of a waiver being granted. Is that the Minister's interpretation of how this could affect employees? Thanks, Madam Chair.

The Chair

The Chair Lesa Semmler

Thank you. Minister.

R.J. Simpson

R.J. Simpson Hay River North

No, that is not my interpretation. This isn't an application process whereby a company thinks that perhaps they can lay off employees sooner by applying to the government. That is not how this works, at all. Employers will provide notice of group termination, and if they haven't provided adequate group termination, under the current act, they are in violation of the act. What this amendment would do would be to allow the government, the employment standards officer, to look at the situation surrounding that termination and determine whether or not the employer met all of the criteria in the act. If they did, then they would not be in violation of the act. However, any sort of individual notice of termination or pay in lieu of notice is governed by a completely different section of this act, and this does not affect individual employees' rights, at all. This is really an administrative section that involves an employer and the Employment Standards Office and, in applicable situations, trade unions, so this does not give companies the right to terminate employees sooner than they can now. Thank you.

The Chair

The Chair Lesa Semmler

Thank you. Member.

Kevin O'Reilly

Kevin O'Reilly Frame Lake

Thanks. I'll try one more time maybe. Right now, there is no provision for a waiver in the legislation. This bill is about providing an opportunity for such a waiver, which would allow for the shortening of the group notice, a group termination notice period. If a waiver is accepted or ordered by an employment standards officer, employees will lose weeks of paid work. Is that not the case? Thanks, Madam Chair.

The Chair

The Chair Lesa Semmler

Minister.

R.J. Simpson

R.J. Simpson Hay River North

That is not the case. Thank you.

The Chair

The Chair Lesa Semmler

Member for Frame Lake.

Kevin O'Reilly

Kevin O'Reilly Frame Lake

Thanks, Madam Chair. I would like to seek the opinion of the law clerk on this, please, Madam Chair.

The Chair

The Chair Lesa Semmler

Thank you. Minister.

R.J. Simpson

R.J. Simpson Hay River North

I think he's seeking the opinion of the law clerk.

The Chair

The Chair Lesa Semmler

Okay. Mr. Clerk.

Deputy Law Clerk Of The House Mr. Kruger

Thank you, Madam Chair. The act provides at Section 41(3) that no employer shall terminate the employment of any employee for which a notice of termination is required before the required period of notice has expired. That provision of the act is remaining. It is unaffected by the bill, and the bill does not affect individual entitlement to severance or notice. Those are dealt with in a separate section of the act. However, insofar as Section 41(3) goes, that no employer shall terminate the employment before the required periods of notice has expired, what the bill would contemplate is that the employment standards officer would then have the ability to set the appropriate period of notice and that the employer would not be able to proceed with the group termination before the expiry of whatever that notice is determined to be.

The Chair

The Chair Lesa Semmler

Thank you. Member.

Kevin O'Reilly

Kevin O'Reilly Frame Lake

Thanks. I appreciate that. There is no waiver provision in the legislation as it stands now. This would provide a waiver which could conceivably, or would if the employment standards officer issues an order, shorten up the group notice time period. Thus, workers could lose weeks of paid leave. Is that a correct interpretation? That's for the law clerk. Thanks, Madam Chair.

The Chair

The Chair Lesa Semmler

Law clerk.

Deputy Law Clerk Of The House Mr. Kruger

Thank you, Madam Chair. It is possible that the employment standards officer could decide to reduce the period of notice to a period lower than what is currently in the act. That is correct.

The Chair

The Chair Lesa Semmler

Thank you. Are there any other general comments? Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Steve Norn

Steve Norn Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh

Marsi cho, Madam Chair. Just listening to some of my comments to my colleague here and some of the opening remarks, there was mention that similar acts to this act are happening in other parts of the country. The question to the Minister is: has there been a cross-jurisdictional scan for this act? Thank you.