September 29, 2000

The Hon. Chris Stockwell
Minister of Labour
400 University Ave., 14^th Fl.
Toronto, ON  M7A 1T7

Re: Proposed Amendments to the Employment Standards Act

Dear Minister Stockwell:

The Windsor & District Chamber of Commerce represents over 1,400 business members who collectively employ over 80,000 people in the Windsor and Essex County area. With a mandate of fostering an environment that allows Windsor and Essex County business to prosper and compete, we submit a list of comments related to the views of employers of small- to medium-sized businesses of the proposed amendments to the Employment Standards Act:

1.         Flexible Work Arrangements

The permit system was confusing to the average employer. The proposal establishes a simple system where the parties to the employment relationship discuss and establish work arrangements within reasonable guidelines, i.e., 60-hour maximum and daily break or rest requirement. Issues that arise regarding the agreed upon work arrangement could be resolved by an Employment Standards Officer.

2.     Vacation with Pay

        The ability to schedule an employee’s vacation time by the day upon the mutual agreement of the employer and employee would be beneficial to a small employer. It would be easier for a small employer to replace or operate without an employee for a day at a time as opposed to a one or two week block of time. This initiative also provides greater flexibility for the employee to schedule time away from work when they might need it for personal reasons.

3.     Public Holidays

        In small workplaces, it is important to have qualifying conditions regarding the payment of public holidays. The cost consequences associated with the elimination of the qualifying conditions would be significant for a small employer in terms of replacement costs for absent employees and actual public holiday payment.

4.     Enforcement

        The existing offence and penalty provisions found in the Act, and the reinstatement provision related to pregnancy and parental leave, are sufficient to achieve the objective of compliance within smaller workplaces. These economic consequences send a significant message to a small employer who is found to be in violation of the Act. The issuance of a reinstatement order does not necessarily create a viable employment relationship and this is particularly relevant to a small workplace where the owner/manager may be working closely with employees on a day-to-day basis.

         A “forced” employment relationship is rarely imposed by the agencies who currently have the authority to do so in non-unionized workplaces. Further, if a terminated employee has been replaced, there are further cost and/or displacement consequences that would result if reinstatement was an option. Finally, in the event that there is a decision to introduce reinstatement as a remedy under the Act, the authority to impose same should reside with a senior decision-maker within the Ministry of Labour after a full hearing of the matter.

We trust the above comments will assist you in reviewing the proposed changes. If you have any additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,