Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 3 - Evidence - Meeting of March 3, 2008
OTTAWA, Monday, March 3, 2008
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 5:03 p.m. to study, and to report from time to time, on the application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it, within those institutions subject to the Act.
Senator Maria Chaput (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable senators, the meeting will now begin. My name is Maria Chaput. I am from Manitoba, and I chair the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages.
On my left is Senator Comeau, who is from Nova Scotia, Senator Murray, who is from Ontario, Senator Keon, who is also from Ontario, and Senator Losier-Cool, who is from New Brunswick.
In accordance with its terms of reference, the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages studies the application of the Official Languages Act, as well as the regulations and directives made under it, within those institutions subject to the act.
Honourable senators, I would like to introduce our witnesses from Air Canada, who were invited to appear before us today. They are Louise McEvoy, General Manager, Languages and Diversity, and Joseph Galimberti, Director, Government and Community Relations.
Air Canada has a number of obligations under the Official Languages Act, particularly regarding those provisions that govern the language in which services are provided. It is subject to the policies of the Public Service Agency of Canada with respect to Parts IV, V and VI of the Act.
Since 2004, Air Canada has been a fully owned subsidiary of a new mother company — ACE Aviation Holdings Inc.
[English]
As chair of the committee, and on behalf of our members, I would like to start by thanking you for your appearance today. Ms. McEvoy and Mr. Galimberti, perhaps you would begin with your opening remarks.
Louise McEvoy, General Manager, Languages and Diversity, Air Canada: Honourable senators, good evening, and thank you for the opportunity to appear today. My name is Louise McEvoy. I am responsible for official languages at Air Canada. I am in company with my colleague Joseph Galimberti, director of government relations.
Air Canada's commitment to offering its customers services in the official language of their choice is a fundamental company value, and we have a long history of significant investment and considerable effort in programs and activities to support this initiative. We are committed to the provision of service in both official languages to our 34 million customers yearly, be it over the phone or in person, throughout our website and other electronic products, in dozens of airports and on thousands of flights around the world.
Air Canada also encourages the use of both languages in the workplace, whether this is communicating, training or supervising all Air Canada employees. We support official language communities throughout the country with, among other activities, the sponsorship of events.
[Translation]
That said, we are not perfect, nor do we pretend to be. We do receive our share of complaints and although this is a relatively small number when one considers the number of passengers we serve, we do believe that even one complaint is too many. We are aware that like all the other institutions subject to the Official Languages Act, it is our obligation to meet and exceed the standards set forth by Parliament in that legislation. We continue to work to meet that goal.
We believe we have made significant progress in that regard, but we still face profound and significant obstacles in meeting our obligations.
As you are aware, after we had integrated the 87 per cent English unilingual workforce of the former Canadian Airlines International, at a cost completely absorbed by Air Canada, we requested government assistance as we worked to improve our linguistic capabilities. To that end, we were supported by the Joint Committee on Official Languages in their February 2002 report. While this matter took place five years ago, these unilingual employees are still with us today and their numbers will remain significant for the foreseeable future.
Unfortunately, the financial support recommended by your peers and your colleagues in the House of Commons has consistently been denied. For instance, in 2003 and 2005, Air Canada was invited to and did apply for funds through a Treasury Board program called the Official Languages Innovation Fund. We were rejected both times, in writing, and were finally advised that we should request that the invitations to apply for this program no longer be sent to us, given that they would never be accepted.
It is the well-established will of Parliament that Air Canada should be subject to the provisions of the Official Languages Act. However, if that is Parliament's will, we suggest that the original recommendation of the joint committee be reasserted, and that Air Canada be given access to the same reasonable financial support that other federal institutions, subject to parallel obligations, have access to.
One significant challenge we face relates to hiring. As with many other federal employers, we are experiencing increasing difficulty in hiring bilingual staff outside the province of Quebec, the National Capital Region and Moncton.
To put this dynamic in context, for the past seven years we have hired flight attendants in Montreal and transferred them to in-flight bases in Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver. In total, nearly 1,000 flight attendants were transferred.
[English]
Unfortunately, this is a short-term Band-Aid which is not sustainable. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of the Montreal flight attendants who are transferred to other cities apply to return to Montreal as soon as vacancies in that city become available.
At our operational bases elsewhere in Canada, there is quite simply a lack of sufficiently qualified candidates to fill vacancies — a problem that is exacerbated by the lack of funding for a program that would allow us to provide language training to new hires. We have requested assistance from the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages, from the Treasury Board and from members of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages in identifying and recruiting bilingual candidates, particularly in Toronto and Western Canada. These efforts have so far been universally unsuccessful.
Our most recent hiring blitz in Toronto is typical of our recent experiences in sourcing bilingual candidates. Air Canada attempted to hire 600 flight attendant positions with the objective of filling all these vacancies with bilingual candidates. Of the over 1,600 candidates interviewed, 464 were referred for a second interview. Out of this group, 44 per cent were unilingual. Only 9 per cent were bilingual — that is 44 candidates — and 76 more candidates, 16 per cent, were capable of passing a very basic and rudimentary oral examination, which does not correspond to a level acceptable in the service industry.
Many of these candidates had attended French immersion programs, but when faced with a very basic examination to test their abilities to interact in French, were simply unable to pass even the most basic of standards.
This situation repeats itself every single time Air Canada undertakes recruitment efforts outside Quebec. Our objective is always to hire only bilingual candidates to fill vacancies, but there are simply too few to be found.
[Translation]
Access to bilingual candidates and bilingual employees is even more crucial for Air Canada given the inherent mobility of our primary workplace — our aircraft.
The most basic reality of the airline industry is that, on any given day, our customers or our employees can start their day on a flight from a destination where demographics are such that language obligations apply, then can continue on another flight where they do not, and so on.
For this reason, we have decided of our own accord to ensure a bilingual capability is present on all our routes, without exception. Because we have chosen to ignore demographic considerations in deploying our bilingual service, Air Canada's application of the Official Languages Act is in fact more rigorous than that of other federal institutions.
In conclusion, although we are far from being perfect, we do take our obligations seriously. We work hard to correct deficiencies whenever they are identified. We are determined to continue to improve our ability to serve our customers in the official language of their choice, regardless of the difficulties. For us, it just makes good business sense, regardless of the legislative obligations imposed.
That concludes our opening remarks. We would be pleased to take your questions.
Senator Goldstein: Ms. McEvoy, you made an excellent presentation. I noted some of your remarks with pleasure, and with some pride as well:
[English]
The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of the Montreal flight attendants who are transferred to other cities apply to return to Montreal as soon as vacancies in that city become available.
[Translation]
I am pleased to see that your flight attendants have such good taste when it comes to the city in which they would like to live.
[English]
The bulk of your presentation deals with your unsuccessful attempts to obtain financial assistance from the government and from other sources, but predominantly from government and government-run agencies.
Air Canada is a profitable enterprise. It has not always been thus, but it is now. What justification would you consider to be available to a government to offer financial assistance to a highly successful enterprise — predominantly non-Canadian owned, might I add; I may be wrong about that; or largely not-Canadian owned, which is neither here nor there — but, in any event, an enterprise that is profitable, in contrast with dozens of other enterprises who have managed to become bilingual or French-speaking, predominantly in Quebec, without government aid; with government pressure, but without government financial aid. Could you tell me how a government, be it a Conservative or Liberal or any other kind, could justify the use of tax dollars to help a profitable enterprise do what it is supposed to do?
Ms. McEvoy: What we base our logic on is that Air Canada, first of all, does invest a lot of money in languages: over $2 million on language training and testing each year. Air Canada is aware that this is just not enough. Second, Air Canada is subject to obligations and does not have the same resources as other institutions that have the same obligations. That is the basis of our logic.
Senator Goldstein: The federal government has had some difficulty recruiting and keeping bilingual people as well. It has developed a program that has achieved some success offering bonuses to people who are bilingual or who have become bilingual. Have you considered that option?
Ms. McEvoy: We have considered that option in the past. We have not gone that route. Our employees, when they have languages, and when they are bilingual, especially, have other types of rewards. They have better flights. They have better bidding conditions. We find that is a better incentive.
Senator Goldstein: I was on a flight yesterday from Finland to Paris and from Paris to Montreal on two different airlines. All of the attending staff spoke English, French and, on the last leg, Italian and Spanish. Can you help me understand why they are able to do that and we are not?
Ms. McEvoy: Are they European airlines?
Senator Goldstein: Oh, yes.
Ms. McEvoy: We find that also. That is what we observe on European airlines. They have the possibility of finding more candidates who speak those languages. In Canada, when we ask for candidates who speak a third language for one of our destinations, we rarely find candidates who are bilingual and have that language. It is a fact. I cannot explain how this can be.
Senator Goldstein: However, when it is commercially appropriate for Air Canada to find multilingual people, they do so. I think, for instance, of the daily flights from Montreal to Tel Aviv where you have English-speaking, French- speaking, Arabic-speaking and Hebrew-speaking flight attendants without exception. I have taken that flight probably 50 or 60 times. Why are you able to do that on that kind of commercially profitable route yet you do not seem to be able to do it as well on other routes?
Ms. McEvoy: We do put at least one bilingual agent on all our flights, and more if we can, according to the number of seats, and other languages as well, depending on the destination. Yes, on flights to Tel Aviv we would have English, French, Arabic and Hebrew. On our flights to China we would have English, French, Mandarin and Cantonese. This works in most flights. Within Canada it is English-French on all flights, but not all flight attendants. That is what we are saying. We are having difficulty finding them, but we do put at least one on each flight, and more whenever possible.
Senator Murray: Correct me if I am wrong but I think that the rationale for your asking for government help to fulfill your obligations under the Official Languages Act is that you are subject to the Official Languages Act but your competitors are not. Porter Airlines is not; WestJet is not. In fact, none of the other airlines in the country are subject to that act. You are subject to the Official Languages Act because when we, the government, Parliament, privatized you, and because you had been subject to it as a Crown corporation, we decided that you were to continue to be subject to that act. We also decided that your headquarters should continue to be in Montreal; is that right?
Ms. McEvoy: Right.
Senator Murray: I must say that I am sympathetic to their proposal, and more than a little dismayed by the narrative that tells us that they were told bt the government to stop applying for assistance because the answer would always be ``no.'' We have to ask some questions of the government on this. If you think that financial help is the answer to your problem, then the government should pony up the money if we are to continue to insist, as we do and as I think we should, that you be subject to the Official Languages Act. The government may be in a position to give you other assistance as well, not just financial. The government has some experience, perhaps with modest success, in training people, and so forth. I must say that I am rather sympathetic to your point of view there. I think we will want to raise it with the appropriate ministers at some point.
I should point out that there is a bilingual bonus in the public service and that successive Commissioners of Official Languages have recommended that it be discontinued.
Senator Comeau: And committees.
Senator Murray: Yes, supported by various committees. I can see why.
You are in a competitive environment, and you are a privatized airline. I presume that if you are not paying a bilingual bonus, then a knowledge of several languages would be taken into account, would it not, in salary?
Ms. McEvoy: There is an incentive for our employees to have better flights or better work programs at the airport.
Senator Murray: But not necessarily more money?
Ms. McEvoy: Not necessarily, but better work conditions.
Senator Murray: They are members of a union?
Ms. McEvoy: Yes.
Senator Murray: Thank you, Madam Chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: In answer to the questions put by Senator Goldstein, you said that whenever possible you arranged to have at least one bilingual person on every flight, for instance on the Montreal-Winnipeg route. You said that usually there was bilingual capability.
Ms. McEvoy: Usually, there is.
The Chair: In your presentation, you talked about recruiting ``qualified bilingual candidates.'' I would like to know how you define a qualified bilingual candidate.
Ms. McEvoy: A qualified bilingual candidate is a candidate who passes a test showing that he or she can speak in a professional manner, without making too many mistakes. Some candidates have a qualification as high as a mother- tongue equivalent, while others are somewhat weaker but are still qualified. That means they can converse correctly and make announcements professionally without too many mistakes after completing their initial training.
The Chair: Candidates are assessed verbally and not in writing, if I understand correctly.
Ms. McEvoy: That is correct.
The Chair: Because you do not need a written assessment.
Ms. McEvoy: No, we do not need one.
The Chair: Across Canada, French is spoken with a wide variety of accents and idioms. Take the Acadian community, for example. Does the fact that they speak French with an accent put them at a disadvantage?
Ms. McEvoy: Regardless of whether they are Acadians, Montrealers, or Manitobans, they will be considered qualified if they can speak French in a professional manner, whatever their accent. Accent is not a factor. Pronunciation is important, but accent is not.
The Chair: Do you provide those candidates with training after they pass the test?
Ms. McEvoy: If necessary. All flight attendants have to do a workshop on making announcements, regardless of whether they are qualified in French or English. If they are not qualified in French, they have to take a workshop entitled ``Un moment s'il vous plaît'', which provides them with some basic French as well as with strategies for not leaving a client in the lurch in the aircraft or at the airport.
Senator Tardif: I have some questions relating to Parts IV, V and VI of the Official Languages Act, to which you are subject. A few weeks ago, we heard representatives from the Public Service Agency, who said that they could not apply any disciplinary measures to your employees. I would like to know how you manage complaints filed with the Official Languages Commissioner.
Ms. McEvoy: As soon as we receive a complaint from the Official Languages Commissioner, we have it translated if necessary so that the employee concerned knows exactly what the complaint is about. The complaint is then forwarded to the employee's superior, and appropriate measures are taken. The employee is summoned and made aware of the complaint, and appropriate measures are taken.
Senator Tardif: Were any measures taken in connection with the incident in Nova Scotia, when Jean Léger asked to be served in French?
Ms. McEvoy: In March 2007, yes — absolutely.
Senator Tardif: I think it was more recent than that.
Ms. McEvoy: The incident was reported on more recently, but actually it took place in March. Apologies were made and measures were taken. The story on the incident came out later.
Senator Tardif: What sort of measures were taken?
Ms. McEvoy: Measures are taken on a case-by-case basis for every employee, and in consideration of the employee's union. If the employee has a clean record, we apply first-stage measures. Otherwise, we move to the second stage, and so on.
When a complaint is related to language, the employee in question — if he is not bilingual — is required to take the workshop entitled ``Un moment s'il vous plaît.'' If he is bilingual, he is sent on a course to help him maintain the language he has acquired. We provide a great deal of training in all cities across Canada, including Halifax.
Senator Tardif: If I understand correctly, a mention is included in the employee's record, and the employee is required to take language training. Is that correct?
Ms. McEvoy: Yes. In fact, in Halifax the Official Languages Team organized an awareness-raising session with employees who were associated with the complaint.
Senator Tardif: You took measures to ensure that an incident of that sort would not happen again there.
Ms. McEvoy: That is correct.
Senator Tardif: Then how do you explain the fact that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police was called in for an incident of that kind?
Ms. McEvoy: Since September 2001, employees have had to apply a specific protocol when dealing with unruly passengers.
Senator Tardif: I would hope that speaking French is not considered being unruly?
Ms. McEvoy: Not at all. He probably became unruly because he could not manage to get service in French. There, we are 100 per cent guilty.
But once someone becomes unruly, the employee involved has to apply a given protocol, be it in the aircraft or at the airport.
The RCMP was not called because he wanted to be served in French, but because, following the incident, he behaved in an unruly fashion, according to the employee who called the RCMP. In fact, it probably was not the RCMP he called in that case.
Senator Tardif: Yes, it was. It was the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, according to the information I have. We also saw the catastrophic outcome of the incident in Vancouver, when a passenger was unable to express his needs in his own language, and no one understood what was going on.
But coming back to this official languages incident, in my view the events in Halifax are completely unacceptable.
Ms. McEvoy: Absolutely. That is what we have made clear to the employees involved in the incident.
Senator Losier-Cool: Good afternoon, to both our witnesses. In you presentation, I sensed real good will on your part when it comes to recruitment. I find it unfortunate that there are so few bilingual candidates, but I do understand that is not your fault. Once again, we need to evaluate the bilingual education that Canadians should have before they join the labour force.
That said, earlier Senator Tardif indicated that we had seen someone from the public service agency, who said that you had established a new language training model. Is that the new program you call ``Un moment s'il vous plaît''? Can you tell us something about it?
Ms. McEvoy: We have called it ``Un moment s'il vous plaît'' because of what we want our employees to say when they are in contact with the public. Instead of saying ``Sorry, I do not speak French,'' we would like them to say ``Un moment s'il vous plaît'' and go find someone who does speak French. We also give them the tools, some basic communication skills — both for flight attendants and airport personnel — to use if they cannot find a French- speaking colleague to help them out right away.
Senator Losier-Cool: Are those basics taught by your employees, or a language school?
Ms. McEvoy: We have an in-house team of teachers, which give courses in French and English across Canada. The teachers give that workshop — ``Un moment s'il vous plaît'' — as well as workshops entitled ``Annonce en vol'' and ``Annonce à l'aéroport.'' Those are three-hour workshops given to all new employees, and on request also given to existing employees across Canada.
Senator Losier-Cool: Do employees take those workshops during their working hours?
Ms. McEvoy: That depends on the union to which they belong. Employees who are members of CAW take the workshops during working hours, while others take them on their own time. New employees take the workshops during working hours.
Senator Losier-Cool: When you ask for additional funding, is that language training included in the plan you put forward?
Ms. McEvoy: We submitted a comprehensive application for assistance in providing language training. If we had greater means, we would provide courses for more employees. At present, the courses are voluntary for new employees. We ensure that incoming employees take the courses. Others can take it on a voluntary basis. If we had the means, we could ensure that more employees would take these courses during their working hours.
Senator Losier-Cool: In many presentations made by the Official Languages Commissioner, and in reports by the Official Languages Committee, we see that Air Canada is at the top of the list.
Ms. McEvoy: Yes, we are among the 10 organizations that receive the most complaints.
The Chair: The first three.
Senator Losier-Cool: How do you explain that?
Ms. McEvoy: We carry 34 million passengers a year. At present, we have 6,000 or 7,000 flight attendants and 3,000 customer service agents at airports. We never see two complaints filed against the same employee. However, those are a lot of people to inform.
To show you what I mean, I will give you the example I always give. When someone gets to customs, he knows exactly where to go to get service in French. In a plane, however, you cannot just sit francophone passengers between, say, rows 12 and 15. You just cannot do that.
Senator Comeau: I would like to thank both our witnesses for being here today, and for telling us about Air Canada's approach to recruiting bilingual employees in Canada.
I want to come back to the fact that you have difficulty recruiting bilingual candidates outside Quebec, the National Capital Region and Moncton.
I would like to know how you go about finding candidates outside those three areas. Can you tell me how you would go about this?
Ms. McEvoy: We put ads in the papers, like everyone else, but we also approach all francophone communities outside Quebec, across Canada, to establish contact with them and tell them about our recruitment goals.
For example, there is currently a recruitment process underway for airports. The official languages people initiated contact with the communities, and have now given our recruitment department the task of going back to those communities, putting ads in the papers, and so on.
Senator Comeau: For instance, who did you approach in Nova Scotia?
Ms. McEvoy: I would have to come back to you on that.
Senator Comeau: In your remarks, you say that you approached the Official Languages Commissioner, Treasury Board and members of the House of Commons Official Languages Committee for help. But did you approach the Fédération acadienne de la Nouvelle-Écosse, for example, to tell them about the difficulties you were having in finding bilingual candidates outside Moncton, and to ask for their help?
Ms. McEvoy: I cannot tell you precisely who we approached in Nova Scotia. I will find out, however.
Senator Comeau: I would like to know. For example, did you approach Université Sainte-Anne, in Nova Scotia?
Ms. McEvoy: Yes, I am sure we did. That name is familiar.
Senator Comeau: Did you approach the Collège de l'Acadie, which would be delighted to help you recruit and train people?
Ms. McEvoy: Generally, universities and colleges are our target recruitment audience, as it were. I will give you the list.
Senator Comeau: I am very surprised you were not successful with those groups. I am sure that Campus Saint-Jean in Edmonton, Saint-Boniface in Manitoba and federations that represent francophone communities would be very happy to help you. You will be surprised to find there are many more bilingual people in the provinces than you think.
Ms. McEvoy: Certainly.
Senator Comeau: There is a vast network in which you could recruit employees.
Ms. McEvoy: When we hire from Montreal, for instance, we do not have any problems. But when we hire outside the area, to take flight attendants to Toronto, where our real needs now are —
Senator Comeau: Many of those young people now have to work in places they do not really want to go to, like the far north of Alberta.
Ms. McEvoy: It is not that they do not necessarily want to go to Toronto —
Senator Comeau: I think they would be happy to go to Toronto.
Ms. McEvoy: We are not getting discouraged.
Senator Comeau: There is certainly interest in working with Air Canada. Your excellent reputation is made. You should be very proud, because you are one of the best airlines in the world.
Ms. McEvoy: Air Canada is indeed an employer of choice, but making people agree to travel so that they can work is a challenge, even if they get to travel again afterwards.
Senator Comeau: When you give your instructions to the Air Canada recruitment people, do you ask them to recruit in bilingual schools, or in francophone universities?
Ms. McEvoy: We recruit when we are short of personnel. Along with Air Canada's official languages team and human resources team, we have started making presentations in secondary schools. This is because we believe we have to tell young people that they must continue to speak French and English, that we need them, and that when they speak those languages they will find a good job down the line.
Senator Comeau: I would encourage you to think about the idea of a partnership with universities who graduate bilingual people every year. I am sure that many universities will be very pleased to work with you.
Ms. McEvoy: Yes, there are such institutions across Canada.
Senator Comeau: There are also colleges that could provide courses if you have problems. I am sure that you would be able to hire a large number of graduates.
Ms. McEvoy: Yes.
Senator Comeau: Lastly, what was the outcome of the incident in Nova Scotia involving Air Canada and Mr. Léger? We know that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police was called in, and when you call the RCMP, it is because the incident is serious.
If I insisted on being served in French at the Halifax airport, and an over-zealous customer service agent decided to call in the RCMP, I wonder whether I would have done everything Mr. Léger did. I would probably not have been as brave as he was.
Was Mr. Léger considered unruly by the flight attendant or by Air Canada?
Ms. McEvoy: By the flight attendant, because he makes that decision. And the incident was dealt within immediately, because Mr. Léger was able to take the next flight.
Senator Comeau: Yes, but the fact that the RCMP was called in is still a problem. Then there is the September 11 excuse, that flight attendants use all too often. I understand that flight attendants have to be extremely cautious, but Mr. Léger still had the right to be served in his own language.
Ms. McEvoy: Absolutely, and we recognize that.
Senator Comeau: I find it unacceptable that the September 11 excuse was used in the case of Mr. Léger.
Ms. McEvoy: That is why an effort is being made to raise employee awareness. We want to know if they are thrown off their stride because they do not speak the language — because Air Canada employees generally do not treat passengers this way.
Senator Losier-Cool: Senator Comeau piqued my curiosity when he talked about universities and colleges. What are the academic requirements for people who want to become flight attendants? Do they require graduation from CEGEP, a community college or just high school?
Ms. McEvoy: High school.
Senator Losier-Cool: And what training is provided to future flight attendants?
Ms. McEvoy: As soon as they arrive, flight attendants take an eight-week training course.
Senator Losier-Cool: Are they paid more than minimum wage?
Ms. McEvoy: The working conditions and the salary are very attractive.
Senator Losier-Cool: I think it is peanuts.
[English]
Senator Keon: First, it seems to me that most of the unhappiness I see on airplanes, including those of Air Canada, has little to do with linguistics. It seems that the service at the airports is getting worse and worse. It seems to me that the planes I am on virtually never pull into their proper gates any more; usually you have to wait. Sometimes the plane has to be shuffled off to two gates before we get one from which we can walk off. I think that generally puts people in a bad mood, although I do not know that it is fair to blame the airlines for everything. Travel has become much more cumbersome than I remember it back 25, 30 years when it was very nice.
However, with respect to the linguistic problem, it seems to me that you are being perfectly clear that when the Government of Canada tells you that you must be bilingual but that you cannot run a profitable airline and also put out the money to be bilingual. The situation seems perfectly clear to me that if the Government of Canada wants you to be bilingual, they need to come up with the scratch and then the problem is solved, right?
Ms. McEvoy: Exactly; part of the problem is solved.
Joseph Galimberti, Director, Government and Community Relations, Air Canada: At least we will be judged on the same playing field that other federal institutions are judged.
Senator Keon: Wait a minute now. I believe here in the public service the problem is largely solved. That is because, if there are positions that need particular linguistic skills, the training is provided and people get the linguistic skills.
Ms. McEvoy: That is where we are at now; we would need to train these people.
Senator Keon: It seems to me that there are enough young Canadians coming out of French immersion or French schools or whatever, that the task of taking them from that point to a point where they can converse, and that is all you are asking —
Ms. McEvoy: Exactly; that is exactly where we are at, at the moment.
Senator Keon: — to converse in a friendly and straightforward manner with the passengers is not a herculean task. It seems to me that there is a barrier here that really should not exist.
Ms. McEvoy: Not only do we need to bring them to that point where they can converse and make an announcement but they need to maintain those skills, and in their day-to-day professional work they do not have much opportunity to do that. They do not practice their language day in and day out, so we need to also give them some training to maintain their skills.
Senator Keon: In many other disciplines, in my old profession, we had to be updating our skills all the time.
Ms. McEvoy: A lot of employees do it, but not enough, obviously.
Senator Keon: Therefore what you are asking of us is a very straightforward ask.
Ms. McEvoy: Right.
Senator Goldstein: I continue to be concerned about the approach that you are taking. I lived in Quebec, still do, but I lived in Quebec from 1976 on when we had a government which, with coercion, and with not an insignificant amount of unpleasantness, caused the francization of uniquely English-speaking enterprises. I am talking about Bell Canada. I am talking about every bank except the Banque Nationale, which was predominantly French-speaking. I am speaking about every insurance company except the Quebec-based companies, and in the space of 10 years those enterprises became thoroughly French-speaking and mostly bilingual without any government financial support and with a great deal of government coercion, although the Quebec government had no jurisdiction, legally speaking, over Bell Canada, banks and, with rare exceptions, insurance companies.
I come back to my previous question. Air Canada has not been coerced by the Government of Canada to become, appropriately in the minds of many, bilingual. I am not being critical of your efforts. You are making efforts but the efforts are not working, or not working well enough, I suppose. Let me put it that way.
You admit that it is not working as well as you would like. What is stopping you from making the additional effort required? We know that an additional effort makes it work. We saw it with Bell Canada, the Royal Bank and the Bank of Montreal, et cetera. Why can we not see that with Air Canada?
Ms. McEvoy: You do see it with Air Canada, in the province of Quebec. We are fully bilingual in the province of Quebec. It is finding candidates elsewhere in Canada that we have a problem with. That is why we hire from Montreal, and then transfer out to Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver. However, we cannot find the bilingual candidates in those cities.
[Translation]
I would like to make a comment before I ask my question. You told us, Ms. McEvoy, that you could not find any candidates. In my province, Alberta, over 30,000 students are enrolled in immersion programs and over 200,000 are enrolled in French-as-a-second-language programs. I fail to see why you cannot find any candidates from Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan or elsewhere to fill these positions.
I fully support what my colleague, Senator Comeau, was saying. I think we have to focus the recruitment effort and go to places where people have some training in French that both francophones and francophiles — because there are many English-speaking students in immersion programs and in French as a second language who are looking for opportunities to use their French after high school. If a company like Air Canada were to advertise that it wanted to encourage people to continue their education in French, this would be a great incentive for young people and a great encouragement to them as well. However, that is not my question, it is just a comment and something I would encourage you to do.
Your action plan contains no objectives regarding Part VII of the Official Languages Act, which has to do with the development and enhancement of official language minority communities. Why is that, and what are you doing to promote Part VII of the Official Languages Act?
Ms. McEvoy: Our efforts are focused mainly on sponsorships or on support to the communities through events such as the Rendez-vous de la Francophonie or the Festival du voyageur, to mention just two. That is the main focus of our efforts throughout the country.
Senator Tardif: The fact is that Part VII provides that you must now be instituting some positive measures. What do you understand by this term, positive measures?
Ms. McEvoy: With Mr. Galimberti's group, Government and Community Relations, we have managers travelling across the country throughout the year to meet with the communities, and the minority communities are part of these groups. That service now exists at Air Canada.
Senator Tardif: What is the objective of these meetings?
Ms. McEvoy: To listen to what the communities want. For example, a flight was added to Bathurst at one point as a result of a meeting. We may provide support or sponsor an event, or we may add a flight to a place or provide some other service to a community.
[English]
Senator Murray: To follow up on our earlier conversation, as I said, it is obvious that since you are under legal obligations that do not apply to your competitors, you have a justified reason for asking the government to help you both financially and with all the technical resources that are at the disposal of that government.
Now, you seem to depend almost exclusively or largely on your recruitment in order to bilingualize or improve your bilingual capacity at the airline. Does Air Canada have no language training at all?
Ms. McEvoy: We do training in eight cities. In our six bases in our eight major airports, we have training on a regular basis at all levels: beginner, maintenance of skills and through specialized workshops that we run.
Senator Murray: Did I understand you to say that it is voluntary on the part of the employee?
Ms. McEvoy: It is on a voluntary basis, yes, and with some union groups it is on company time, while other unions use personal time.
Senator Murray: How effective are the training programs?
Ms. McEvoy: We have hundreds of students each year who come to our courses. They are very motivated.
Senator Murray: They are motivated because if they can acquire the necessary skills, they get better postings?
Ms. McEvoy: Exactly, and many do acquire the bilingual qualification.
Senator Murray: In the hiring process, have you considered making it a condition of a hire that the person undergo language training? Do you do that?
Ms. McEvoy: It is not put exactly in that way. It is a condition of hiring to maintain their skills. We do not hire someone on a permanent basis who is not bilingual, so it is a condition of hiring.
Senator Murray: The condition of hiring is that they acquire the skills?
Ms. McEvoy: The condition is that they maintain their skills.
Senator Murray: If they do not have a bilingual capacity to begin with, they would still be eligible for training, would they not?
Ms. McEvoy: Yes, they are eligible, but we do not have the condition that they acquire the language.
Senator Murray: I am sure you have looked at it, but there are processes in the public service where it is understood that certain jobs are designated as bilingual. If an incumbent is not bilingual, he or she has a certain amount of time to become bilingual, or is offered training to become bilingual. I do not know whether that kind of regime could be applied to an organization like Air Canada.
Ms. McEvoy: In fact, we are looking at something of that sort. It has not yet been discussed with the unions.
Senator Murray: Finally, just so I have a better understanding of what the position of the government is with regard to helping you discharge your linguistic obligations under the Official Languages Act, what do they say besides ``Forget about it.''? There must be a paper trail somewhere.
Ms. McEvoy: There are categories of institutions, and apparently we do not belong in that category, such as a ministry.
Senator Murray: We understand that.
Ms. McEvoy: That is the basis of the denial.
Senator Murray: We took it upon ourselves, as Parliament, to impose that obligation on you when you were privatized. This is an obligation that does not apply to any other airline. What do they say? You do not fit into the category? You are not in the right category? Is that the answer?
Ms. McEvoy: Yes. That is the answer.
Senator Murray: Thank you.
The Chair: Could you send more information to the committee regarding Senator Murray's question?
Ms. McEvoy: I can send you copies of the e-mails that were exchanged at the time.
The Chair: That would be just great. Senator Comeau, do you have a supplementary question?
Senator Comeau: Yes, I do. It follows the same line of questioning as Senator Murray.
[Translation]
I have two or three brief questions. At present, Air Canada provides training in-house, through its own people, does it not?
Ms. McEvoy: Language training?
Senator Comeau: Yes.
Ms. McEvoy: Language training is provided by teachers, who are Air Canada employees.
Senator Comeau: Have you considered using external resources? There are teachers who are experts in teaching people who are unilingual, or who have great difficulty speaking a second language. This is a very particular skill, and teachers need years of experience before they can provide this kind of training. That is one of my recommendations: use external resources.
Ms. McEvoy: These are certified teachers.
Senator Comeau: The teachers I am talking about are professionals in institutions who are familiar with the methods used to provide second-language training. That is a second recommendation.
The Chair: The clock is ticking. I will allow two further questions.
[English]
Senator Goldstein: Have you considered in-service training where you give your unilingual people about 10, 12 or 16 weeks of paid leave so that they can attend intensive French-language courses — with exams and success criteria at the end to make sure that it is not simply a paid vacation — so that people can come back in and be reasonably able to serve Canadians in both official languages?
Ms. McEvoy: Yes, we are looking into this aspect at the moment, as I mentioned. However, it has not been discussed with the unions as yet. It is something that we are looking at. It is an extremely costly measure, and we always come back to that fact.
Senator Goldstein: We are getting back to that. I understand you are running a commercial enterprise, and commercial enterprises are there to make a profit. Everybody around this table understands that. However, you are also running an enterprise which — for a variety of good public policy reasons — is subject to certain obligations. The government can enforce those obligations in a nasty way if it chooses to do so. It does not, obviously, choose to do so.
Is there not some way in which Air Canada could be induced to make a very special effort — costing money, because any effort will cost money — to make that happen?
Second, if you were to apply for financial help and put up front on that application the amount of additional money that Air Canada is willing to put into a program if the government helps put that program into effect, would that not put the situation into a somewhat different perspective? Then we would be less anxious to be heavies with you and more anxious to be heavies with the government.
Ms. McEvoy: We presented our linguistic action plan in 2001, I believe, to the committee at the point where we had a recommendation. We were not asking for the total amount but in our document we outlined how much it would cost us to bring all the people who have the basics of the language to a qualifying level, and we could do that.
Senator Goldstein: Could I see that? Did you undertake in that approach to pay for a piece of it if the government paid for a piece of it?
Ms. McEvoy: I am sure we did not expect the government to pay the totality of it. Yes, we were aware of that obligation, and we wanted to put some resources into that.
Senator Goldstein: Could we see that application?
Ms. McEvoy: The 2001 action plan? Certainly.
Senator Goldstein: If you do not mind. Thank you.
Ms. McEvoy: Annually, we do spend about $2 million in language training and testing.
Senator Goldstein: How much is your net profit this year, Ms. McEvoy?
Mr. Galimberti: It would be comparable to WestJet's net profit, and WestJet does not have to spend —
Senator Goldstein: Take me into your confidence. How much is your net profit?
Mr. Galimberti: Offhand, I would be hesitant to give you an exact number. It is not insignificant, but at the same time you must recognize that we are four or five years away from our restructuring under bankruptcy protection. The airline industry is —
Senator Goldstein: I am familiar with your restructuring. I was very involved with it. I understand —
Mr. Galimberti: Then you would be familiar with the tenuous nature of the industry.
Senator Goldstein: — that the market value of your shares has gone from nothing to very significant. Your market cap is very significant.
Mr. Galimberti: Interesting that you mention our shares —
Senator Goldstein: Just let me finish my question. I am not suggesting that you spend your entire profit but, with great respect, $2 million of $100 million of profit is not terribly significant.
Mr. Galimberti: It is $2 million more of a commitment than anyone else in the domestic industry makes.
Senator Goldstein: Maybe we should be taking WestJet more often.
[Translation]
Senator Losier-Cool: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a very brief question. You mentioned the union several times. Can you tell us whether your young flight attendants -— let us begin with the flight attendants, because that is more precise — the younger generation, are more bilingual than those who are protected by the union because they have a number of years of seniority?
Ms. McEvoy: Until recently I would have said yes, in spite of the recruitment problems. There is no doubt that we want to recruit bilingual flight attendants, so those who are hired more recently are more bilingual than those who have a number of years of seniority.
Senator Losier-Cool: All the better. Thank you.
[English]
Senator Murray: I wonder whether you know anything about language training programs in other airlines. You have spoken about the European airlines. Perhaps they solve their problem by recruitment, and that would be understandable. What about the British and the American airlines?
Ms. McEvoy: We are part of a group called IALCO, International Airline Language and Communication Organisation, and we meet on a yearly basis. The Americans have not participated for the past seven or eight years.
The European airlines are very strong in language training as well, hiring multilingual candidates.
Senator Murray: Hiring multilingual candidates, if they are available; that is the easiest, most direct route. How much do they do in terms of language training of their employees?
Ms. McEvoy: Typically, the airlines around the world train their personnel in English, which is really the language they all need to improve. They have language training internally, both KLM and Air France. British Airways had some training years ago. I do not know if they still do.
Senator Murray: You say KLM and Air France are mainly teaching English?
Ms. McEvoy: English.
Senator Murray: Thank you.
Ms. McEvoy: You are welcome.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Can you tell me whether Air Canada's management team is surprised by the poor results that the Official Languages Commissioner reports regarding Air Canada year after year? Has the management team formulated an action plan to take corrective measures?
Ms. McEvoy: The action plan submitted in 2001 is a 10-year plan. It is an action plan under which our official languages group is accountable to management for statistics, complaints, the number of bilingual employees, the number of employees in training, and so on. Senior management takes a very close interest in the issue.
Senator Tardif: You will obviously say yes to this, but is Air Canada's senior management committed to meeting the requirements of the Official Languages Act, and even going beyond them?
Ms. McEvoy: Absolutely. Mr. Brewer, Air Canada's president, has said so to the Official Languages Commissioner, who came to meet with him in January.
He told the Official Languages Commissioner that not only was this important to him, but that he also wanted to measure the quality of service in both official languages. We are now setting up that process.
Senator Tardif: If the action was established in 2001, it has obviously not led to very significant results. Perhaps the plan should be reviewed.
Ms. McEvoy: We update the plan every year, and apply it as far as we are able. Perhaps we should indeed formulate a new plan before we come to the end of the existing one.
Senator Tardif: You invest two million dollars in language training at present. What percentage of your total budget does that represent?
Ms. McEvoy: What percentage of the company's budget?
Senator Tardif: Yes.
Ms. McEvoy: I would have some difficulty in giving you the exact number, but I will make a note of your question.
[English]
Senator Goldstein: If I may, Ms. McEvoy, this is not a question but an apology. You have presented to us a case with which some of us do not agree, but you have done so honestly, fairly and forthrightly. My remark about taking WestJet was quite uncalled for, and I apologize for it.
Ms. McEvoy: That is no problem, senator.
[Translation]
The Chair: Ms. McEvoy, Mr. Galimberti, on behalf of the members of this committee, I would like to thank you for coming here today, and for being so open and frank in the discussion and in your answers. Will you be forwarding the information that senators have asked you for?
Ms. McEvoy: Absolutely.
The Chair: Thank you. Honourable senators, we will suspend the meeting for a few minutes, and resume in camera to discuss the committee's future business.
The committee continued in camera.