I believe EI has run a surplus for years only to be stripped away by government for general revenue; let’s us the surplus for the educational/training program.
By BOB MILLER on April 18, 2019
If this can be looked at like training insurance for all business that pay into it, and gives business’ an opportunity to train and develop their employees with further education and skills then YES it would be a brilliant opportunity! But if it turns out to be a cash grab with limited opportunity then it will draw a line between the business people and our Government and that would not be a wise move Canada!
By Ann Laurin on April 18, 2019
I am so tired of reading about tax increases from our governments at all levels. This would be a non-issue if our governments would simply begin controlling their outrageous spending, and reallocate those savings to their ‘new programs’.
So I say enough is enough! No more increases. They should find their money via cutting costs elsewhere. There are dozens of government programs out there that provide little to no benefit to the average Canadian, but cost a lot to operate and maintain.
By Gaetan Ladouceur on April 17, 2019
I voted no because the current government’s wasteful spending habits and what looks like corrupt tendencies may take these monies intended for training & put it into general revenue in order to pay for other programs that I do not support. This federal government has not earned the right to be trusted with more of our hard earned money. EI premiums would become just another form of taxation without representation.
By Joseph Lepage on April 17, 2019
Government, at all levels, seems to have an infinite capacity to take our money to fund all manner of pie-in-the-sky projects designed to keep them in power or to grant them some kind of “legacy”.
We keep paying just to provide bribe money to get us to continue to keep them in power.
By Lyle Urbanowski on April 17, 2019
Typical Liberal approach - give once with one hand, take twice with the other.
By Rick on April 11, 2019
Everyone who pays into EI will pay more. Will a $250 refundable tax credit really make enough difference to get someone from a labour intensive job into jobs related to the ‘tectonic digital shifts’ that workers are suppose to gain skills for. Similarly, four weeks leave within a four-year period doesn’t seem like enough time to learn a new skill significant enough to allow a change in careers. And so, how many people will take advantage of this. If a person only needs this small amount of training to get ready for digital careers, they probably earn enough that they don’t need help. Workers who need to change careers will need more education than what the proposed benefits will fund. Well, it sounds good before an election.
By Martin on April 04, 2019
It’s only “proposed” - my trust level is low
By Patricia Russell on April 04, 2019
There is only so much you can load onto small businesses. With businesses having to pick up significant health costs in order to reduce the Medical Services Premiums and increased CPP contributions small businesses will be forced to reduce staff not hire new staff.
By Nancy on April 03, 2019
By Randolph Edmead on April 03, 2019
If EI was losing money (they’re not) and if they were not adding any other burden to the business owners, then maybe. I am so looking forward to a different government whose approach is NOT to throw money at the voters, then increase taxes to cover it.
By Doris Woodman-McMillan on April 03, 2019
I think this will mean more employees will be classified as “contractors”. See too many already. As long as there is a contract for employment it seems to satisfy CRA and the tax court
By Pat Morton on April 03, 2019
The reason I said NO to the government scooping more money for EI is because they have a huge amount in the chauffers’ already!!
CRA has been collecting “Trust” funds (deposits for employees) that they call “taxes” to evade the fact that they are putting it all in “General Revenue”.
If we, as business owners, collected funds to be held in “Trust”, such as deposits, and then put it in “general revenue” to be used as we wished…....we could be hauled up on the carpet…....and even taken to court…....
By Jacquie Johnston on April 03, 2019
Small businesses are under increasing pressure, what with all the government-mandated inceases in premiums and added taxes. However, above and beyond the EI premium increase is the issue of having to grant up to four weeks’ leave (unpaid) to any employee who wants to take a training. It can be tough enough to ensure all get their vacations when they want. To have to further juggle staff so someone can go off for a month for a training that in no way reflects the needs of the current job and may even lead to that employee quitting and moving on is adding insult to injury.
By Jo Ruelle on April 03, 2019
I feel that the government keeps looking at small businesses to fund more costs. No one in this country works harder or longer or takes more risks than small business owners and we have very few perks or deductions
By Cindy Kindret on April 03, 2019
The cliche of giving with one hand and taking with the other is very apropos for the introduction of the rebates for small business that the present government is implementing. This can be said for the carbon tax as well.
By Brian Shumak on April 03, 2019