CANADA EMPLOYMENT AND IMMIGRATION UNION
SYNDICAT DE L’EMPLOI ET DE L'IMMIGRATION DU CANADA
90 Eglinton Avenue East, Suite 608-B, Toronto, Ontario
M4P 2Z7
Tel.: 416-488-3000
WATS: 1-800-268-8809
Fax: 416-488-8319

CLAIMANT RE-EMPLOYMENT STRATEGY
THE FIGHT AGAINST CLIENTS
The stated goal of the CRS is to ’’speed up
claimants return to work”. In principle, we in
CEIU agree with this. In principle, everyone
agrees with getting unemployed people back to
work as quickly as possible.
BUT — we want to provide claimants with
training, with counselling to get them placed in
a job which suits their needs and desires and
will last The CRS just wants them to get a
job and get off UI.

This means that client groups, anti-poverty
organizations and so on will be opposed to
CRS when they understand what it will really
mean for UI recipients. It will be denounced
by them (and correctly) as part and parcel of
the Bill C-21 attack on the unemployed.

In the past, there has been a separation within
CECs between the employment and the UI
sides. One of the major positive reasons for
this is to allow counsellors to work with
unemployed people outside of the stigma of
the control function in terms of UI eligibility
and access.
People could be frank with
employment counsellors because the interview
did not have a control aspect to it. The CRS,
however, will involve interview that have both
a control function and a service needs function
- IN THE SAME INTERVIEW.

What will this look like to the client? An
interview with a CEC worker who claims to be
providing counselling and/or service needs
determination but is also exercising a control
function concerning the client’s claim will
focus on getting the client back to work regardless of the work. How can the client
feel comfortable and be open in an interview
that, in part, is trying to catch him or her in
some breakage of the rules? According to
Arthur Kroeger, ’’strengthened claims control is
a natural result of the CRS".

If the goal is to help clients return to the
workforce with the skills needed to retain a
good-paying job, then we in CEIU support
that But CRS is just interested in getting
claimants off UI - Mcjobs are what we’ll be
offering, or rather imposing on our clients.
Remember, the interview involves control of
claims as well as helping find a job.
WHAT CAN WE DO?

WHAT SHOULD WE DO?
The CRS is not legislation - it is departmental
policy and is being implemented at the local
and regional levels. We do not need to
implement it at all. In the interests of Canada,
we should refuse.

Component of the Public Service Alliance of Canada
Elément de l’Alliance de la Fonction publique du Canada

CANADA EMPLOYMENT AND IMMIGRATION UNION
SYNDICAT DE L'EMPLOI ET DE L'IMMIGRATION DU CANADA
90 Eglinton Avenue East, Suite 608-B, Toronto, Ontario

CEIU

Tel.: 416-488-3000

WATS: 1-800-268-8809

M4P 2Z7

Fax: 416-488-8319

LFDS
LABOUR FORCE DESTRUCTION STRATEGY

The final fact about LFDS is that these training
dollars will not be accessible by those who
need them the most - the economically
marginal, the unemployed, the social assistance
recipient. These people will either not be
eligible for UI or be forced off UI by the CRS.

a) fewer jobs in the CEC,
b) more police work for CEC workers,
c) fewer programs delivered by CECs,

for the unemployed,
The second fact about LFDS concerns
contracting out of CEC jobs. The government
is using the fact that CEC are under-staffed to
give our jobs to the private sector.
Counselling, job finding clubs, diagnostic
services are all on the block for private sector
investment

a) less training
b) less counselling
c) more economic hardship

SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!!!!

as

.-

Overall, the LFDS program will mean, for
CEIU,
y

The most important fact about LFDS is that it
plans to use the money taken from UI benefits
to train unemployed workers. It represents a
savings for the government because they will
no longer fund training out of general revenues
but let the unemployed pay for the training.
CEIU and most other organizations, including
the consultation groups set up by the
government, are adamant that UI funds should
not be used for training, but for income
maintenance as was originally intended.

The third key fact about LFDS is the CRS, the
Claimant Re-employment Strategy.
This
’strategy’ is really- very simple - get UI
recipients off UI and back to work. But it will
mean that we will have to force people to take
virtually any available job - low-paying, dead­
end jobs mostly.

.

In conjunction with Bill C-21, the Mulroney
government has instituted the LABOUR
FORCE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
(LFDS). This is the plan to spend the money
being taken out of the pockets of the
unemployed by Bill C-21. It is also the plan
to make training less accessible for those who
need it and more attuned to the needs of
employers than the needs of unemployed
workers.

Component of the Public Service Alliance of Canada
Elément de l'Alliance de la Fonction publique du Canada