July 17, 1943

LIB

Gordon Benjamin Isnor

Liberal

Mr. ISNOR:

Did it state that?

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
CCF

Stanley Howard Knowles

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. KNOWLES:

Yes; that was stated in the act. As a matter of fact, $38.50 was $2,002 a year.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

It cannot very well be put in when there is no ceiling.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
CCF

Stanley Howard Knowles

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. KNOWLES:

But there is a ceiling of $2,400.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

For one group; and they are covered in section 22.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
CCF

Stanley Howard Knowles

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. KNOWLES:

But previously it read "$26, but less than $3S.50 in a week."

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Humphrey Mitchell (Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MITCHELL:

Then $38.50 was the ceiling.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
CCF

Stanley Howard Knowles

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. KNOWLES:

The ceiling is now $2,400.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

That is for certain groups. For hourly labour groups there was no ceiling. For the so-called white-collar class there is a ceiling of $2,400. Perhaps the hon. member has not borne in mind those two classifications.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
CCF

Angus MacInnis

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. MacINNIS:

Does the Unemployment Insurance Act differentiate between the white-collar class and others?

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Humphrey Mitchell (Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MITCHELL:

No; possibly I should not have used that expression.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
CCF

Angus MacInnis

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. MacINNIS:

Why does the minister say there is a white-collar class?

Unemployment Insurance Act

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

One is on salary and the other is on piecework or on a mileage basis. In line 7, "earning $26 or more in a week", sets out the ceiling. That includes the man earning $2,400 for assessment, as well as the hourly or mileage worker, or the piecework rate worker, who at present has no ceiling. That is, line 7 is from that point up. It is from $26 up.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

John James Kinley

Liberal

Mr. KINLEY:

It means that the white-collar man who earns over $2,400 does not come under it?

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

Correct, provided he is on salary.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
CCF

Stanley Howard Knowles

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. KNOWLES:

Was consideration given to establishing another bracket in this list? As it now stands, we find spreads within these brackets of S3, S4, $5 or $6 a week. Then there is a spread of $20 a week, paying the same insurance and, if unemployed, drawing the same benefits. I wondered if consideration had been given to creating a new bracket in which there would be a slightly higher rate of contribution and a corresponding higher rate of benefit.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Humphrey Mitchell (Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MITCHELL:

Consideration was given to that, but we did not want to upset the actuarial status of the act. We were advised by our actuaries against creating another class, and it was not undertaken, but we did give consideration to it.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink

Section agreed to. Sections 26 to 28 inclusive agreed to.


LIB

Joseph-Arthur Bradette (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

The CHAIRMAN:

Shall I report the bill?

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

Before that is done, I want to make one correction. Yesterday the senior hon. member for Halifax asked me if the Retail Merchants' Association of Canada had registered an objection, and in error I stated that they had not. I now wish to correct that statement. The Retail Merchants' Association of Canada did object because of the effect on their members; they argued that workers in retail trade receiving over $2,000 should not have to assist in insuring workers in war industries unless all exceptions were abolished.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink

July 17, 1943