13.10.2018 Views

LMT October 15th 2018

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

4 Last Mountain Times • Monday, <strong>October</strong> 15, <strong>2018</strong> • lmtimes.ca<br />

EDITORIALS, LETTERS & OPINIONS<br />

Is the Canadian Workplace ready?<br />

New study highlights strong disconnect between<br />

managers and employees on recreational<br />

cannabis use and expectation in the workplace<br />

Trans Mountain mired in hopeless<br />

consultations and useless studies<br />

The court decision against the pipeline veered away from<br />

objective legal analysis into opinions designed to justify<br />

preconceived biases<br />

For the second time in two years, three judges<br />

with the Federal Court of Appeal struck down a crucially<br />

important oil export pipeline project that had<br />

undergone years of regulatory review. The approval<br />

of Northern Gateway by the former federal government<br />

of Conservative Stephen Harper was struck<br />

down in 2016. That was after Enbridge spent halfa-billion<br />

dollars on a massive six-year review and<br />

Indigenous consultation process. Now the Trans<br />

Mountain expansion, approved after a billion dollar<br />

expenditure by Kinder Morgan and since purchased<br />

by the federal government, has met the same fate.<br />

Last week, the Liberal federal government of<br />

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced it would<br />

not appeal that decision to the Supreme Court of<br />

According to our new poll from<br />

Ipsos, the changing legal status<br />

of cannabis in Canada highlights<br />

a disconnect between employers<br />

and employees, especially as it<br />

relates to when and how cannabis<br />

can be consumed at work.<br />

According to the survey, only<br />

six per cent of employed Canadians<br />

believe their organizations<br />

will allow the use of cannabis<br />

(marijuana) for recreational<br />

purposes during work hours or<br />

before coming into work. However,<br />

10 per cent of managers are<br />

much more likely to say it will be<br />

allowed than employees without<br />

managerial responsibilities. In<br />

fact, nearly one in five managers<br />

say they are at least somewhat<br />

likely to consume cannabis for<br />

recreational purposes before<br />

going to work, and 14 per cent say<br />

it’s at least somewhat likely they<br />

will consume cannabis during<br />

work hours – vastly outnumbering<br />

non-managers, where only<br />

seven per cent said they will likely<br />

use cannabis before work, and<br />

only four per cent say they will<br />

use during work.<br />

Changes in the workplace are<br />

always difficult to navigate, but<br />

it appears cannabis legalization<br />

for recreational purposes adds<br />

a particularly complex disconnect<br />

between the expectations<br />

and intentions of employers and<br />

their employees. It’s particularly<br />

interesting to see that employees<br />

without managerial responsibilities<br />

are more reserved in their<br />

expectations of personal use<br />

during working hours than their<br />

managerial counterparts.<br />

Another cause of the disconnect<br />

between managers and employees<br />

stems from their understanding<br />

of formal policies and guidelines<br />

surrounding the use of drugs and<br />

alcohol in the workplace. While<br />

75 per cent of managers say they<br />

are aware of such policies in their<br />

places of employment, only 64<br />

per cent of non-managers say the<br />

same – with a further 17 per cent<br />

saying they do not believe their<br />

workplace has specified policies<br />

or guidelines to regulate drug<br />

and alcohol usage. Furthermore,<br />

while 36 per cent of managers<br />

say that their organizations are<br />

introducing or revising their<br />

workplace policies and guidelines<br />

because of the impending legalization<br />

of recreational cannabis,<br />

only 13 per cent of non-managers<br />

say this is happening in their<br />

workplace – with nearly half (49<br />

per cent) saying they are unsure<br />

if their policies and guidelines are<br />

being updated or revised.<br />

It’s clear, managers need to<br />

have detailed, informed and<br />

thorough conversations with<br />

employees about what constitutes<br />

acceptable behaviour in the workplace<br />

when it comes to cannabis.<br />

Having these conversations early<br />

on will help to set clear expectations<br />

on both sides and reduce<br />

the chance for any negative impact<br />

on workplace performance<br />

and productivity.<br />

Other findings of note from<br />

the study include: 10 per cent of<br />

respondents in Alberta, Saskatchewan<br />

and Manitoba are the<br />

most likely to believe they will be<br />

allowed to use cannabis for recreational<br />

purposes during work<br />

hours or before coming into work,<br />

and 12 per cent of Saskatchewan/<br />

Manitoba respondents say they<br />

are at least somewhat likely to<br />

consume cannabis during work<br />

hours.<br />

These are some of the findings<br />

of an Ipsos poll conducted<br />

between September 17 and 21,<br />

<strong>2018</strong>, on behalf of ADP. For this<br />

survey, a sample of 1,000 working<br />

Canadians (500 of whom are<br />

managers, 500 of whom are not,<br />

none of whom are self-employed)<br />

aged 18+ was interviewed online<br />

via the Ipsos I-Say panel and<br />

non-panel sources.<br />

- Hendrik Steenkamp, Director,<br />

HR Advisory, ADP Canada.<br />

Canada. It’s bad enough that a private company<br />

can’t get a fully approved infrastructure project<br />

done. But can you think of another country in the<br />

world where three judges can overrule the ability<br />

of a national government to exercise its constitutional<br />

right to build its own project? And, in both<br />

cases, those judges based their decision on dubious<br />

conclusions that veer from objective legal analysis<br />

into nuanced opinions seemingly designed to justify<br />

their preconceived biases. At the heart of both decisions,<br />

the panels concluded that the government’s<br />

consultations with First Nations had been “inadequate.”<br />

Here is a summary of the consultations that took<br />

place prior to the approval of the Trans Mountain

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!