April 20, 2011
A new study commissioned by the Mowat Centre in the School of Public Policy & Governance at the University of Toronto has found that Canada is an international exception because it relies on where one lives to calculate Employment Insurance benefits.
Toronto – A new study commissioned by the Mowat Centre in the School of Public Policy & Governance at the University of Toronto has found that Canada is an international exception because it relies on where one lives to calculate Employment Insurance benefits. All other countries treat workers identically regardless of where they live.
The new Mowat publication—The Postal Code Lottery: Canada’s Regional EI System Compared—examines Canada in relation to 17 other OECD countries, including all eight OECD federations.
According to the study’s author, Vuk Radmilovic, “other countries provide workers the same benefits regardless of where they live. Canada is unique in modifying benefits on the basis of region of residence.”
Radmilovic adds, “regional differentiation governs three of the most important questions a recently unemployed Canadian may confront: can I access the EI system? For how long? And, if I qualify, how much do I get?” In this respect, “the system is like a postal code lottery. It is unfortunate that no federal parties are talking about this issue during the election.”
According to Josh Hjartarson, Policy Director at the Mowat Centre, “this is important. Even if one could justify regional differentiation, which is a questionable proposition, it is hard to justify the inequities and complexity that it produces.”
The program produces striking inequities. For example, during the recent recession, less than 40 per cent of the unemployed in Ontario and Alberta accessed benefits. In Newfoundland and Labrador and New Brunswick, over 97 per cent of the unemployed collected benefits.
According to Radmilovic, “regional differentiation also creates Byzantine complexity. Workers struggle to figure out just how much they are entitled to claim, and how and why some get more than others. This complexity threatens the legitimacy of the system.”
“Clearly, efforts aimed at simplifying the EI system and increasing its transparency and fairness are necessary to strengthen one of our most important national social programs,” Hjartarson adds.
Read the entire studyLearn more about the Task Force
