Debates of March 7, 2005 (day 50)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we’ve been talking a lot on this side of the House today about discrimination. I’d like to talk about the way this government treats casual and term employees. In an earlier set of questions, the Deputy Premier indicated that we’re not even including the casual employees who are going to be losing their jobs as a result of the actions taken in Hay River. I’d like to ask Mr. Roland, the Minister, what’s the purpose of hiring people on a casual and term basis in this government? Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Minister responsible for the Financial Management Board Secretariat, Mr. Roland.

Return To Question 560-15(3): GNWT Casual And Term Employees

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the casual employees would be hired on the basis of less than six months. That’s a normal thing for short term, summer employment, short projects that staff or departments did not have enough personnel to do the work. That’s the area of the casual employees, as well as a number of departments who do have a number of casuals when it comes to filling in for facilities that are on a 24-hour operational basis. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Supplementary To Question 560-15(3): GNWT Casual And Term Employees

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, of the people that we had indicated would be losing their jobs in Hay River, I had indicated 12 full-time positions at the Dene K’onia and the 10 casual positions. The Minister indicated that we wouldn’t count the casuals into the job losses. However, Mr. Speaker, I’d like to indicate that of the 10 casuals, at least six have worked at that facility for more than three years, four years, three years, seven, and seven. Quite a number of them have been there for a long time. This is their sole source of income. I think it is really a sad statement on the part of this government and somewhat an abuse of employees, to be able to just now dismiss them with no consequences and no security and no financial risk to this government, to just let them go. I’d like to know if the Minister considers these types of casual links of service to be just…if it’s okay by policy, just to let them go. Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 560-15(3): GNWT Casual And Term Employees

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, when an individual applies to the Government of the Northwest Territories under a casual position, they’re fully aware and made aware that in fact that position is short term and there are no other ties to the GNWT once that position is deemed no longer necessary. There are no additional benefits in the sense of pension and those things. When somebody is hired on as a casual, they’re aware that the casual basis is different than that of a term employee or a full-time employee. So that’s the information they operate with and some individuals do choose to take the more flexible environment of casual employ. At the same time, they don’t have as many deductions as a full-time GNWT employee, because there are deductions for other insurance packages that are available to employees. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Supplementary To Question 560-15(3): GNWT Casual And Term Employees

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m sure they’re aware when they take casual positions of that, but I’m sure they’re also compelled to take it because they probably need work and they probably have families to feed. But, Mr. Speaker, with respect to term employees then, as well, is it possible that this government would let term employees go when their term comes up, in order to backfill their positions with other affected employees who have been on a priority hire list because of job losses? Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 560-15(3): GNWT Casual And Term Employees

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Member is referring to, I believe, the staff retention policy that we have as a government. When a term position comes up, it usually means that that job is no longer there for an employee or else there is a returning employee coming back to that position. We do, through staff retention, put affected employees on a list and when openings do come available, they would be slotted in, according to their work history and background, to see if in fact they could be fitted into a position that would become available to them. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Supplementary To Question 560-15(3): GNWT Casual And Term Employees

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What recourse would an employee have if they had been in a term position for a two-year period, the term is going to be renewed but they are ineligible to apply because somebody else is on a priority hire staff retention list? Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 560-15(3): GNWT Casual And Term Employees

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, when an employee is hired on a term position, again, their employment contract would state for how long that position is available. If it’s a two-year position or so on they would be available, that’s the timeline of that. The staff retention portion -- and I would have to double check this -- I don’t believe would apply because the job is slated to come to completion in that time frame. But I’d have to get the background on that. I’m not fully up to speed on that section. Thank you.