FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Women Still Cannot Break Corporate Glass Ceilings

Yes it takes time for more women to reach leadership positions in companies, even though more and more qualified women are entering business management fields.  One human resource expert in 2011 referred to the so-called infamous glass ceiling as being more of a brick ceiling.  Yes, there are more women in senior management than ever before.  However, proportionately, they still are under-represented as to their numbers in businesses in general.  Back in 2020, Bloomberg News reported that women held more than a quarter of the board seats at S&P 500 companies for the first time, a significant gain.  It was also reported at the time that, according to Catalyst which follows labour market trends, there now were 32 women leading S&P 500 companies.  Increasingly although at a snail’s pace, more women are now holding the top finance jobs (e.g. Chief Financial Officers) at large U.S. companies, despite the fact that companies continue to have fewer women in operational roles.

What is disheartening in 2022, Bloomberg News reports that women are leaving the top ranks of companies at higher rates than ever before — as female employees remain less likely to get promoted into leadership roles in the first place.  According to a new McKinsey & Co. and LeanIn.org report, for every woman at the director level who gets promoted, two female directors are choosing to leave their company.  Bloomberg notes that while women have long been at a disadvantage in the workplace, many of problems have been further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.  For example, a lack of affordable childcare has contributed to more women leaving the workforce than men in recent years.  A gender pay gap, which had been narrowing, also stalled during the pandemic.  Furthermore, those in the highest ranks of their organizations are re-evaluating — because of a lack of advancement opportunities, flexibility or unequal treatment or a combination of these and other factors.  Many of the factors were once again particularly true for women representing visible minority groups, such as women of colour.  Women of colour continue to represent far fewer women promoted to a manager role from entry-level when compared to women in general.  This is further complicated by the fact that there are still simply fewer women in upper management at most companies to be promoted.

McKinsey and LeanIn reported also that the pandemic affected women in other ways, in particular those related to remote work and work-life balance, especially where children are involved.  They found that only one in ten female employees want to work from the office most of the time.  The summary of their report said “many” women call hybrid work schedules a key reason for joining or sticking with an employer.  LeanIn CEO Rachel Thomas points out that: “Women are not breaking up with work, they are breaking up with companies who are not delivering the work culture and the opportunity and the flexibility that’s so critically important to them”.

Women have made some strides to break the glass ceiling in recent years.  According to a 2014 report by Reuters, for the first time more than half of 4,000 corporations worldwide reported boards with 10 percent or more female members.  However, it is noted that for all the progress that’s been made, male CEOs and board members still vastly outnumber women. 

All in all, it appears that the pandemic has stalled the steady progression which promoted more and more qualified women to senior management and corporate board positions.  Most governments in the U.S. and Canada have made it clear that the current situation is still unacceptable.  At all levels of government, most have promoted women to leadership and judicial positions, cabinet portfolios, and have attempted to encourage more women to run for political office.  On the other hand, as one author noted, the inability to recruit and retain women in the corporate arena could be disastrous for businesses.  This is not hyperbole, especially when women now make up the majority of university grads and most plan to enter the labour force upon graduation.  Yes, frustration has set in and rightly so.  Paying lip service and tokenism are no longer an option!  At this time, what one has is only a crack in the glass ceiling!

Leave a comment »

Elder Poverty Is Growing In Both The U.S. And Canada

Employer pensions are not what they used to be.  An analysis done back in 2016  found that just 99, or about 20%, of Fortune 500 companies offered a “defined benefit plan” to new salaried employees in 2015.  This was down from 104 companies, or nearly 21% in 2014, and a dramatic fall from a decade earlier in 2005, when 248, or just over 48% of Fortune 500 firms had such plans.  Defined benefit plans provided pensioners with specific annual amounts of funds from a company pension following their retirement.  Instead, most companies began to offer “defined contribution plans”, leaving it up to employees to invest for their retirement through various financial institutions.  In 2022, the U.S. Labor Department reported that while 72% of civilian workers had access to an employer-sponsored retirement plan, only about 56% took part in one.  Many other Americans without company pension plans have been forced to invest in a 401(k) (today’s No. 1 retirement vehicle in the U.S.) or other kinds of retirement savings.  The problem is that less than half of working Americans have access to a 401(k) plan.  Many who have a 401(k) at work opt not to participate, and many who do contribute often don’t save enough.  On top of which, many seniors with 401(k) accounts were negatively hit by the Great Recession.  A whopping 36 percent of Americans have less than $1,000 saved for retirement.  As a result, Americans hitting retirement today frequently depend on Social Security as their only source of income, which wasn’t the program’s original intention as a supplemental plan.

In its annual retirement survey in 2007, the Hartford Financial Services Group Inc. revealed that many middle-aged and older adults have serious concerns about their financial security in retirement and are doing almost nothing to shore up their finances.  As a result, the survey indicated that many people plan to “continue working in some capacity while retired,” including one of every two workers in the U.S.  The number of elderly Americans living in poverty is on the increase, particularly following the impact on employment during the pandemic.  Those 65 or older usually weren’t eligible for as much pandemic relief as families with children, thus eating further into their savings.  By 2020, the figure for elderly Americans living in poverty had fallen to 9.5%.  However, in 2021, even as the poverty rate sank for everyone else, it rose among seniors to 10.7%.

In 2009, it was estimated that only about one-third of working Canadian adults have pensions, the majority of which are administered by funds that have taken substantial financial hits with large, unfunded liabilities.  As in the U.S., Canadian companies are relying more heavily on defined contribution plans to lower their human resource costs.  Many elder Canadians have come to rely on government programs such as the Canada Pension Plan (into which they have to pay premiums while working), along with Old Age Security and Income Supplement payments for lower income older individuals.  Although partially indexed to inflation rates, payments under such plans have fallen behind recent cost of living increases.

According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), although today’s share of elderly people officially below the poverty line in the U.S. is low by historical standards, it remains among the highest in the developed world, including Canada.  Furthermore, today’s hyperinflation is further cutting into the incomes of seniors in both countries.  In addition, with fewer workers accessing company retirement plans, there is an increasing concern that younger workers may not be saving enough for their future retirements.  Experience has shown that they cannot rely solely on social security payments to live comfortable and active retirement lives, without having to remain in or re-enter the labour force.  Both countries have a growing aging population, led by more and more boomers leaving employment to enter into retirement.  Given that elder poverty is on the increase, one has to question what will be their quality of life after retirement.  What we need today are longer-term solutions, and not small short-term “band-aid” increases in government pension schemes or random handouts.  What we don’t need are governments willing to reduce current high levels of fiscal debt on the backs of seniors.  Companies as well need to attract and retain workers with better funded retirement benefits. 

Moreover, how we treat the elderly is a societal issue!  It’s obvious that as a society, we are indeed at a crossroads when it comes to this important issue.  Given the financial circumstances of most millennials and generations Y and Z, one cannot expect that they will be in a meaningful position to help their parents financially.  Given the projected growth in the proportion of seniors falling on or below the poverty level, there is an immediate serious need for governments, communities and individuals to come to grips with the problem.

Leave a comment »

When Compared to Americans, Canadians are still Naive about Extremist Groups

Finally, something very interesting is coming out of the House select committee investigating the January 6th 2021 assault on the U.S. Capitol.  Ten days before the attack, a Secret Service field office relayed one tip sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) warning that members of the far-right nationalist gang the Proud Boys planned to march, armed, into Washington DC.  For years, federal law enforcement agencies have sounded the alarm about rising threats of far-right violence in congressional testimony, in-depth reports and internal memos.  Months before 2020 presidential election, the FBI issued an intelligence report warning that far-right groups and white supremacists pose a “violent extremist threat” to the U.S. and the 2021 presidential inauguration, which could serve as a “potential flashpoint” for violence.  Even with all this available intelligence, largely because of Donald Trump’s continued provocation and resulting inaction, we know what tragically happened on that day.

Here in Canada, there is similar awareness among government agencies such as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) who are at the forefront of Canada’s national security system.  For years, they have been aware of the activities of foreign and domestic extremist elements operating in Canada.  To be sure, there are linkages and interactions among several far-right groups and white supremacists between Canada and the U.S.  The Internet has simply made the constant communication among such groups all that easier.  This includes platforms and messaging apps like QAnon-hosting 8Kun, Parler, Gab and Telegram; and even such mainstream platforms like Facebook groups and on Instagram stories, Reddit, TikTok, Twitter and YouTube.

Despite the evident surveillance of extremists by the RCMP and CSIS in Canada and constant communication with foreign security agencies, including the FBI and Secret Service, most Canadians continue to be unaware of their activities in the country.  The Trucker Convoy, which occupied Canada’s capital last winter for three weeks and set up blockades at U.S.-Canada borders, had several extremist elements behind its planning and illegal operations.  Taken somewhat by surprise, this forced the federal government to take the unprecedented action of invoking the Emergencies Act in order to help end the Trucker Convoy’s activities.  Authorities appeared to have been taken by surprise by the extent to which small groups could carry out such protests in a threatening way and even call for the overthrow and replacement of the current legitimate federal government.

Like in the U.S., Canada has seen a significant polarization of the political spectrum.  Right-wing extreme groups have latched onto Canada’s angry populism, especially during the COVID pandemic and the imposition of vaccine mandates and other restrictions by governments across the country.  In Canada, at the very least, consensus politics is becoming a thing of the past.  For some time, politicians have been blind to the new emerging reality while the liberal mainstream press remains arrogant and complacent.  Indeed, some politicians have even gone as far as to show their vocal support for so-called freedom movements, although they represent a tiny fraction of the overall population.  Governments have had to once again declare that the right to be heard does not include the breaking of laws and any promotion of violence.

For some time now, I have been highlighting the extent to which there have been radicalization movements in both countries.  For example, The Role of Conspiracy Theories in Radicalizing North American White Folk, Potential of Insurgency Grows Everyday in U.S. and Canada, Canada also has its own Right-wing Extremist Groups, Right-wing Extremism is a Growing Concern in North American Communities, and White Extremism in North America is very Worrisome and Dangerous.  As indicated in FBI and Secret Service documents and gathered intelligence prior to the January 6th Capitol assault, there are mounds of evidence regarding the continuing activities of extremist groups in the U.S.  One would hope that Canadian agencies and mainstream media are paying attention so that Canadians won’t be as naïve as they were prior to the Trucker Convoy last winter.

Leave a comment »

Is National Legalization of Cannabis on the Horizon in the U.S.?

This past week, President Joe Biden pardoned thousands of Americans convicted of simple possession of marijuana.  What’s more interesting, Biden announced that he has instructed Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra and Attorney General Merrick Garland to begin reviewing how marijuana is classified under federal drug laws.  Marijuana, also referred to as pot or weed, is currently a Schedule 1 substance under federal drug sentencing guidelines, the same as heroin and LSD.

The President’s move could be a first step in moving toward the federal government’s legalization of marijuana use for recreational and other purposes.  The issue leads us back to the legalization of marijuana by the Canada’s federal government in October 2018.  At the time, the new law made Canada the second country in the world after Uruguay to legalize cannabis.  In addition, on the day cannabis became legal, the Canadian government announced that it would introduce new legislation allowing people charged in the past with “simple possession” to apply for a pardon with no fee or waiting period.  By 2018, recreational cannabis was also legal for adults in nine U.S. states and the District of Columbia, and 30 states had government-sanctioned medical cannabis programs.  Today,19 states have passed recreational cannabis laws.

In both countries, there have been far too many persons who have ended up in prison for the simple possession of pot.  According to one study, as many as 500,000 Canadians may possess a criminal record for cannabis possession.  Their convictions hamper their ability to travel (most notably to the U.S), apply for jobs and volunteer with charities.  By some reported estimates in the U.S., there are nearly 5,000 laws on the books which bar people with past convictions from most of the necessities of life like housing, loans, work, and access to government services.  In both countries, arrests for cannabis possession particularly affected marginalized groups, disproportionately impacting people of color and low-income communities. 

Measuring whether the legalization of pot increased its consumption in Canada is difficult to ascertain.  Prior to 2018, most recreational pot users would not have declared their illegal possession and use, except in cases of medical cannabis use.  However, a Statistics Canada study based on data from the National Cannabis Survey showed that the prevalence of cannabis use has been increasing since its legalization in October 2018.  In fact, cannabis use in the year before the survey increased among Canadians aged 15 and older, from 15% in 2017 to 21% in 2019, for both men (from 19% to 23%) and women (from 11% to 19%).  It is believed that increased social acceptance of cannabis, and the increased number of outlets and range of products available were among the factors thought to have led to increased consumption.  In addition, cannabis can now be added to foods and drinks.  There is also some speculation that the COVID pandemic may have contributed to increased cannabis consumption due to the associated social and economic upheavals it caused over the past two years.

With the legalization of cannabis, Canada also introduced numerous regulations concerning its sale, production and distribution.  The Cannabis Act created new criminal offences for the sale of cannabis to youth — with penalties of up to 14 years in prison.  It also prohibits “illicit” cannabis of unlicensed producers, sellers and distributors.  Much like tobacco and alcohol, government regulations for growing and selling cannabis include standards for labelling and packaging.  Every package must be plain, without additional imagery besides brand name and logo.  Packages must also include a standardized cannabis symbol, a health warning and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration levels.  The government also established the tax rate for cannabis, to be split by the federal and provincial governments.  Of course, the government wanted a cut of the lucrative legalized cannabis action.  So far, the regulated cannabis industry appears to be working well, ensuring the control, quality and safety of the product sold.

It may be useful for the U.S. to examine the impact of Canada’s legalization of cannabis as part of its planned review of marijuana’s classification under federal drug laws.  The federal government may also want to get into alignment with legalization actions already taken by 19 of its states.

Leave a comment »

Why The Minimum Wage Is Not A ‘Living Wage’

Going back over four decades, I studied changes across Canada in labour standards legislation, especially as they apply to minimum wages.  The minimum wage is the lowest hourly pay an employer can legally pay an employee whether they work part-time or full-time.  In Canada, minimum wages are primarily the responsibility of each of the ten provinces and three territories.  However, there is a federal minimum wage, which came into force in December 2021, adjusted automatically on April 1 of every year based on the average annual increase of the Consumer Price Index (CPI).  The federal minimum wage applies to workers and interns in federally regulated private sectors, including banks, postal and courier services, and interprovincial air, rail, road, and marine transportation — or roughly 6% of private sector employees in Canada.  The federal rate is currently set at $15.55 per hour.  Provincial and territorial minimum wage rates currently vary from $13.00 per hour in Saskatchewan to $15.50 in Ontario. 

Years after minimum wages were in first introduced in British Columbia and Manitoba in 1918, other jurisdictions followed suit.  Minimum wages are calculated and adjusted differently among the provinces, territories and the federal government.  Rates can be determined and adjusted according to regulations, rates of inflation and social and economic conditions.  In 2013, 61 percent of employees earning minimum wage were between the ages of 15 and 24, especially those working in the services sector (e.g. restaurants and fastfood chains) and the retail sector.  In recent years, there are those who argue that the current minimum wage rates do not reflect what became referred to as a ‘living wage.’  Originally, the formula for minimum wages was thought to be aligned with the average industrial wage rate, usually representing about 60 percent of that rate in Canada.  However, over the years, the determination of annual minimum wage rates became more a political factor based on the policies of the governing parties in power.  As a result, increases in the rates began to vary more extensively among jurisdictions and depended on the particular government in power.  For this reason, minimum wage rates began to lag far behind the rate of inflation and average industrial wage rates.

In today’s economy, many will rightly argue that current minimum wage rates, especially in urban centers, are putting workers in a near poverty situation given the high cost of living in many cities.  Matters have been made worst by the current hyperinflation being experienced across Canada.  As a result, many low-wage workers are required to have more than one job just in order to make ends meet.  Labour advocates say recent minimum wage gains are long overdue.  However, they also now advocate that the long-championed goal of a $15 an hour pay floor across the country no longer goes far enough to address the affordability crisis.  “We’ve been calling for a $15 an hour minimum wage for so many years, but now it’s no longer enough,” said Bea Bruske, president of the national Canadian Labour Congress. “It really needs to be $20 an hour or more when we look at inflation and the cost of food and housing.” 

Business organizations on the other hand continue to use the same old arguments against having a living wage.  These include the argument that higher minimum wages would cause employers to reduce the number of employees and the number of hours worked, potentially leading the hiring of more part-time workers.  A 2014 report from the right-wing Vancouver-based think-tank Fraser Institute concluded that both economic theory and the evidence suggest that living wages, like minimum wages, create distortions in the labour market that have a negative impact on employment.  Left-wing organizations in Canada, including the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and Living Wages for Families continue to campaign for living wages, arguing a higher standard of living will benefit the overall economy. 

Remember what Henry Ford said about higher than normal wages for his automotive assembly line workers in the early 1900’s.  He argued that not only would the high turnover rates for the dull and monotonous work — running at over 300 percent — be reduced, but his workers would eventually buy his Model Ts as many of workers could then afford to buy one for themselves.  In today’s consumer society, one can argue the same is true for many low-income workers if they were to have a living wage.

Leave a comment »