Ever the big business apologist, The Globe and Mail, as reported by Operation Maple, had an article the other day by one of their newer hires, Leah Eichler, who essentially says that young workers today have it pretty good.
Entitled For younger workers, perks trump pay, Eichler asserts that even though compensation may not be up to par, something more important and more valued is being offered: benefits that enhance the quality of workers' lives.
These include variable pay (work really, really hard and earn more!), flexible hours, career planning and sabbaticals. In a startling expression of obeisance to the corporate agenda, the writer asserts, without a hint of irony, that this trend of companies turning toward intangible benefits instead of cold, hard cash is exactly what we Canadians have been asking for.
Hmm, most people I know just want a decent-paying job to pay off student debt, mortgages, and those other very inconvenient exigencies of life.
For those interested in a broader public policy discussion than has been permitted by our political 'leaders' thus far, the NDP nomination of journalist Linda McQuaig yesterday in Toronto Centre, Bob Rae's old riding, is an auspicious beginning. No stranger to progressives, McQuaig has exposed the iniquities of gross income inequality in her writing for many years, trenchantly challenging the increasingly obdurate notion that nothing can be done about the ever-widening gap between those who have and those who do not.
While it is still anyone's guess as to when Stephen Harper will call the byelection for the riding, without question we can expect a vigorous debate on the important issues, especially given that another journalist, Chrystia Freeland, received the Liberal Party nod. While the leaders of their respective parties have hewed to either a very close-mouthed or conventional approach to the economic questions that plague our country, given what I know about Ms. McQuaig, the byelection campaign will see these issues front and centre, and I strongly doubt that McQuiag will be happy to utter the conservative platitudes that Thomas Mulcair has recently been given to uttering.
Are we entering a new era of exciting and dynamic politics? Having one knowledgeable, passionate and outspoken candidate will not likely change the political landscape, but at the very least, it is a hopeful beginning.
I have written several recent posts on the campaign gaining traction across the United States to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour from the current average of just over $7. That struggle has now come to Ontario, where those living in poverty thanks to the current minimum of $10.25 are demonstrating for a boost to $14 per hour. Raising it to that level would put workers just above the poverty line, assuming a full working week.
The minimum wage campaign, which began Aug. 14, is planning similar days of action across Ontario on the 14th of every month in advance of next spring’s provincial budget, when the Wynne government is expected to weigh in on the matter.
As reported by the CBC, according to Statistics Canada, more than 800,000 Canadians were working at or below minimum wage in 2009.
Lest one think that $10.25 is a princely sum, consider the circumstance and words of some of the demonstration's participants:
Toronto meat packer Gyula Horvath has to work a gruelling 50 to 60 hours a week to survive on his wages of just $10.25 an hour.
“It’s no good,” the 22-year-old Hungarian immigrant, who is also supporting a wife on his meagre minimum wage earnings, said Saturday. “It’s very hard to pay rent.”
Call centre worker Jenny Kasmalee, 38, can rarely afford new clothing or other personal things on her $10.25 per hour.
“I have always worked for minimum wage,” she said. “It’s not much.”
Estina Sebastian-Jeetan, a mother-of-two who attended the rally, described some of the challenges she faces as a low-wage earner. "Sometimes I skip my medication in order to make ends meet," she said.
Cogent arguments have been made that having a living rather than a subsistence wage would benefit our entire society. As pointed out by economist Jim Stanford, when people have some money to spare after paying for rent and food, they are likely to spend it, thereby stimulating the economy.
And of course, it is wise to remember that minimum wage jobs in this economy are no longer the domain of the poorly educated. Many university graduates, struggling to find their place in the world, are toiling in retail and service and other traditionally low-paying sectors.
The dean of social sciences at McMaster University in Hamilton, Charlotte Yates, observesthat changes in Canada’s labour market are permanent – most notably a penchant for part-time and contract hiring – and are not a temporary blip.
Says Judith Maxwell, past chair of the Economic Council of Canada:
“People over their forties in Canada have no idea what it’s like for a young person trying to find a pathway to adulthood right now.”
Predictably, business is much more conservative and restrained on the question of minimum wage increases. Last week the Canadian Chamber of Commerce published a report, the most pertinent being the following conclusion based on a survey of its members:
In the survey of 1,207 members, 46 per cent said the minimum wage should rise with inflation.
Of course the main problem in tying any increases to inflation means that the workers would continue to live in poverty; they simply wouldn't sink any deeper, which to me is simply another way of ignoring the problem.
The poor have little voice in the formulation of government policy. The moral responsibility for change therefore resides with those of us who have had the good fortune to work productively and profitably throughout our lives; we need to add our voices to theirs and promote change. A letter to one's MPP would be a good start.
It seems to me that any school should feel very lucky to have a teacher of Kristen Ostendorf's character and courage. Totino-Grace Catholic High School in Minnesota is not one of those schools:
Star readers offer their insights on the Quebec Purity Charter. Both sides are ably represented:
An outrageous plan, Editorial Sept. 11
Quebec Premier Pauline Marois and her crowd are playing on the fear of difference. Also, there is an appealing assumption that the more homogeneous society is the more harmonious society is. “If only we all could be the same,” as the thinking go, “we all would be better off.” That is, of course, pure bunk. A quick scan of the world reveals that many countries that score high on the homogeneous scale are riven by political turmoil.
Unless Quebec’s Parti Quebecois is deliberately exploiting ignorance for political gain — that may well be the case — Premier Marois, seemingly, cannot understand that Quebec, like the rest of Canada, is already a well-established multicultural society and every effort must be made to make the best of it. It is far too late to return to a simpler time when its society was less diverse.
Besides, a multicultural society offers so much more, although it does come with challenges, but that goes for all societies and all civilizations.
Ms Marois has not shown any evidence that the wearing or displaying religious symbols within the public service is a problem that warrants government action. If a few people in Quebec are upset at seeing a turban or headscarf on a person’s head or a large Christian cross hanging around the neck, my advice to them is: Get over it. Where’s the harm? Besides, a threat of prohibition raises the risk of “waking up a sleeping giant.”
If the PQ government thinks it has a problem with religious symbols, wait until minority groups hit the streets in protest. It won’t be a picnic.
Far better that the Quebec government build its society on its diversity. There is plenty of it and Quebeckers can learn and benefit so much more from each other. Therein lies the beauty and richness of diversity.
John Harvard, former Lt. Governor, Manitoba, Winnipeg
Isn’t journalism supposed to provide some balance in reporting? I have not read anything in your paper that simply explains the Quebec charter’s intent in an unbiased way. You’d think Quebec was promoting child molestation.
It’s clear that the Marois government is looking for an alternative to the policy of multiculturalism, but this is taboo. We are getting a one-sided condemnation from your newspaper, with no extra perspective.
Multiculturalism is only a recent official policy (the Trudeau years), and we have not yet seen its long-term effects. We can’t say then that multiculturalism is a universal, eternal value that is applicable always, everywhere until the end of time. We must continue to see it as a human invention that demands review, reflection and questioning. Let’s not close the debate and start a witch hunt against those who are opposed to it, please.
Erin McMurtry, Toronto
Recently an Afghani father visited a GTHA school to enrol his 10 daughters who were wearing full veils. He demanded that his girls were not to sit next to boys; not allowed to take music, art or history; nor to participate in sports either co-ed or same sex; or extra-curricular activities.
We don’t understand why school authorities have to accommodate those requests rather than present three options — accept the public school system’s practices and curricula; home-school their children or attend a private school that honours their religious beliefs.
If our family moved to a Muslim country we doubt any requests for Western values would be accommodated. When you move to another country you adapt to that country, not the reverse and even more in the event of becoming citizens. Multiculturism is a noble concept but our Canadian culture needs to be respected and followed or does multiculturism trump all?
