Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2022

The Current Transcript for April 5, 2022

Host: Matt Galloway

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

MARC BELAICHE: Whether it's dangling a four day workweek, whether it's dangling more money, whether it's dangling better benefits, whatever it is, a lot of companies have to be really creative right now.

MATT GALLOWAY: It's Tuesday, four more days of work until the weekend, unless you happen to work a four day week. Around the world, employers are experimenting with whether it's possible to be more productive by working fewer hours in a week. In 30 minutes, as part of our Work in Progress series, whether your return to the office might see you clocking in less and what larger workplace issues that might solve. Also this morning, as the world's eyes are focussed on Russia's invasion of Ukraine, some Canadians are urging leaders here not to lose sight of Canada's North.

P.J. AKEEAGOK: Canadians safety is at risk if we do not step up to the plate. Foreign countries are paying a lot of attention to the North, and it's time that Canada does the same.

MG: In an hour, the premier of Nunavut on why he believes concerns around Arctic sovereignty in the face of Russian aggression are an opportunity for Canada to recommit to being an Arctic nation. We begin, though, with accusations of war crimes and the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war. Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway and this is The Current.

[Music: Theme]

Accusations that rape is being used as tool of war in Ukraine

Guests: Alona Shkrum and Christina Lamb

MG: I want to start this morning with a warning. The first 20 minutes of our program will deal with issues of sexual violence. As Russian troops have retreated in some parts of Ukraine. Ukrainian troops have been met with horrific scenes and stories. Human rights organizations have reported accounts of executions, torture and rape committed by Russian soldiers, and there is mounting evidence that sexual violence is being used as a tool of war. Alona Shkrum is a Ukrainian member of Parliament. She recently travelled to the UK to highlight what she has heard, and she joins me today from France on her way back to Ukraine. Alona, hello?

ALONA SHKRUM: Hello. Hello.

MG: There are, as I mentioned, reports from human rights organizations about alleged crimes of sexual violence against women and girls by Russian soldiers. What are you hearing?

AS: Oh well, I have to tell you honestly that we've heard those... Well, those things about two, maybe even three weeks before three weeks ago, we started to talk about them two weeks ago, but we didn't have any evidence because most of the crimes were committed in the cities which were occupied and obviously how we knew about those crimes. Well, of course, there is this passage of people who are texting each other and saying that a friend of mine has been first raped by three men and then killed, and I found her dead in the city of [inaudible]. But other than that, what was even more horrifying to me. We have anticipated a lot of other conversations just by phone of Russian soldiers between each other or between them and their friends somewhere in Russia, and they would be bragging about what they did to Ukrainian women. To Ukrainian actually women in their age of over 60 years old, and they would brag about it and they will talk about it. And this is how we found out in the first place while intercepting those conversations.

MG: Where is this happening?

AS: Well, I'm afraid that this is happening in all of the occupied cities, as we've seen from Bucha. It was a city which was on the north of Kyiv and which was liberated right by the Ukrainian troops. So we've actually seen those evidence very, very clearly. Where there would be five women who were taken hostage by the Russian army and they would be on the road with the Russian army for a number of days. We don't know how long they would be raped and they would be just thrown away on the highway near Kyiv when the Russian troops were leaving and Russians tried to actually burns the bodies and burns the evidence of those crimes. But they did not have the time to burn the bodies, since the bodies did not burn, and so we find it was complete evidence of rape and torture.

MG: You mentioned what women were saying to each other and the messages that you had seen. How afraid are women to come forward to talk about what has happened to them?

AS: It's a very difficult question. I mean, even in the times of peace, you know, it's quite difficult to talk about it. And I mean, you know, how shocking it is and terrifying. But in the time of war, it is even more horrifying. So yes, we are actually having discussions with the British government right now on how to help them, especially the ones that are refugees right now in the European Union and in Great Britain. We are having a discussion with one of the members of Parliament from Great Britain, who has been great, who's been working on the Bosnian [inaudible] case, and she has connected us to a number of women who has been through that during that Yugoslavia war times, you know. And we are going to see what we can do and how we can very, you know, very cautiously try to help those women.

MG: In terms of support that they could be offered psychological support or...

AS: In terms of everything, in terms of support, in terms of medical, in terms of, you know, getting them to a safe place where they can talk maybe after a week or two and what was going on in terms of their families supporting them because, you know, it's very hard for the family to talk about it either. And you have to be very careful of what you say. And obviously it's a horrifying thing. I cannot even... I cannot imagine what those people have been through. But we do have women right now who decided to come forward who have very bravely said about it. And one of the cases was already opened by our prosecutor general on the evidence of a woman who came forward.

MG: Aside from gathering those resources for those women in speaking with international lawmakers... You're in France right now, I mentioned that you had been in the UK as well. What do you want the international community to know about what's happening?

AS: Well, we make those trips, so I did it twice. I met with the prime minister of Great Britain. We met with President Macron in France, obviously, with a lot of other ministers. We need the world to move much faster on the sanctions of Putin, on taking the companies, all of the companies out of Putin Russia on turning to switch off for all of the Russian banks because there have been a lot of attempts and actually successful ones to avoid the sanctions by using the other banks on the cryptocurrency system or the other systems. So this is one of the economic front, because, you know, we need to do everything to stop this military machine being financed by Putin. And it's already happening, Putin is already having trouble finding resources for the soldiers, for the war, for the tanks. But we need to stop it as fast as possible. We would also be asking very soon every parliament in the world to consider acknowledging that this is not just a war crime committed by Putin, not just a breach of the Geneva Conventions, but also a crime of genocide. Because what we've seen in Bucha, in [inaudible], in other liberated cities, it does amount to genocide. It's not even a crime for the sake of war. It is a crime to kill the Ukrainians just because they are Ukrainians, just because they are resisting the Russian occupation and they have been killing Ukrainians who have completely no military value for them and no risk for them, like very old grandmothers just going outside in her yard and they would shoot her or children holding the hands of their mothers. And they were shot as a family and they died holding their hands together, so this does amount to the genocide in all of the international conventions.

MG: Just finally, you mentioned earlier the importance of gathering evidence. How important is it to make sure that these crimes are properly documented if you are looking for accountability in future?

AS: Incredibly important. This is actually something that President Macron told us a number of times because France has froze already 22 billion worth of dollars of Russian estate and Russian yachts and Russian property and property of the oligarchs. But they cannot give it to the Restoration Fund of Ukraine. They can only freeze it until there is international court law orders. And basically rulings of the courts all over Europe and all over the world. So for us, it's incredibly important to gather those kind of war crimes evidence, violence evidence, rapes evidence, crimes of genocide evidence. We are doing that from day one. Obviously, the worst and the most difficult cases together are actually the rape against women and the rape cases. But we are doing that from day one. Ukraine is quite, well, digitalized. So what we did, we have about three different apps right now, even though, you know, it sounds terrifying, but this is what you have to do. And you would have an app on your Android or iPhone, and you can take a picture anywhere in Ukraine and anyone can take a picture, then take a picture of yourself and put your location. It's quite secure. It's quite verified. And then basically, you give this evidence to the prosecutor general like that. And of course, then the prosecutor general works on the legal direction.

MG: I know you have a lot going on. We'll leave it there, and I'm really glad to speak with you, Alona. Thank you very much.

AS: Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Goodbye.

MG: Alona Shkrum is a Ukrainian MP. She was in France on her way back to Ukraine. Christina Lamb is the chief foreign correspondent for the Sunday Times and the author of Our Bodies Their Battlefield: What War Does to Women. Christina, hello to you.

CHRISTINA LAMB: Morning.

MG: You wrote that your heart sank, but you weren't surprised with the reports that were coming out of Ukraine, similar to what we just heard from Alona Shkrum. Tell me more about that. Why weren't you surprised?

CL: I'm afraid, no, I wasn't, because as a correspondent, that's been covering conflict around the world for the last 30 years. I'm afraid that this is something that happens very often in war and increasingly in the last six or seven years, I've seen much more of it.

MG: In what way is rape and sexual violence weaponized as a tool of war? And why is it so effective in terrorizing a population?

CL: Well, I'm afraid that it's one of the problems, it’s very effective. If you want to humiliate and terrorize and clear a population from somewhere, raping the women and girls is a very effective way of doing it. And I've had militias say to me before. It's very cheap. It's cheaper than a Kalashnikov bullet. So what we've seen in recent years is groups using it... Whether in ethnic conflicts or religious conflicts, or trying to take over areas that are rich in mineral resources. Each time using literally ordering their fighters to rape the women and girls. So what we don't know in Ukraine is, is this systematic or were the fighters encouraged to do this? Or was it something that was happening on an individual basis?

MG: Why is it important to distinguish between the two?

CL: I think it is important, I mean, obviously neither is excusable, but there's always been rape in war, and I'm afraid in the chaos when laws break down, these things are happening. The fighters will take advantage and other people too. But if it's actually something that is happening on a systematic basis, that's happening widespread. As indications now seem to be that, you know, that makes it very much a war crime.

MG: As you mentioned, you have covered war zones and conflict zones for 30 years. In that work how difficult is it to get women to talk about what they have gone through?

CL: I mean, obviously, this is something very difficult for women to talk about. You know, this is the most personal and most horrendous ordeal that you could go through. But you know, the amazing thing is that women have been bravely coming forward, whether it was the Yazidis who talked about being taken by ISIS fighters and kept as sex slaves or the girls taken in Nigeria by Boko Haram, like the Chibok girls. And then also a few years ago, 2017 in Bangladesh, all the Rohingya women that were being driven out of them and told about being tied to banana trees and gang raped, often in front of their children. So these are horrendous stories, but you know, women have come forward and spoken. And actually, that's why I ended up researching this so much and writing a book about it because I couldn't believe that people were telling us and that nothing was happening, it wasn't like people didn't know.

MG: Well, as you've said, no one pays a price.

CL: No, and justice, I'm afraid, you know, every woman I spoke to said what they most wanted was justice. I think justice means different things to different people. It doesn't necessarily mean seeing the perpetrator in court. Sometimes it means, you know, having what happened to them recognized. But the fact is, at the moment, accountability is the exception, not the rule. The International Criminal Court has convicted successfully only one person for this crime and more than 20 years of existence. At a time when I would say tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of women have undergone all rape around the world.

MG: People will, and this is something that we've spoken about on this program many, many times over the years refer to the crimes committed during the Bosnian War. What happened to women in that war and what happened when those women began to talk about what they went through?

CL: Well, that's one of the terrible things about the fact, you know, here we are in 2022 talking about this again, because then in the 1990s, people were so shocked at the idea that there were literally rape camps in Europe that many politicians said never again, and an international tribunal was set up in The Hague. People were tried, but actually, when you look at it, very few people were actually tried for the rape. And if you go to Bosnia now and talk to some of the survivors, they will tell you that the men that raped them, they see them in local coffee shops... some of them are still working in the police force, that very few were actually brought to justice. And in fact, one group of Bosnian women even was so frustrated that they started trying to track down their perpetrators themselves. And actually, they've led to more than 100 people being prosecuted, which is amazing.

MG: You've called this the world's most neglected war crime, a weapon of war that we don't want to talk about. Why? Why is that still the case, do you think?

CL: I think, you know, it's something that people don't want to think about. And I can't help thinking that a lot of the problem is that peace negotiations are almost always carried out by men. There isn't a single peace process in the world that's led by a woman at the moment. Very few women are involved in it. And they just don't take it as seriously as an issue is often seen as a side issue. People talk about it after the event, and it's not part of the main thing in the way that it should be. I've had like the Chief Justice in Iraq who is trying ISIS fighters. I said to him, Are you trying any of them for what they did to the Yazidi women? And he said no. And I said, why not? And he said, Well, they also killed and tortured people. Why would we bother about the rape? Well, you know, if you were one of the women that went through these ordeals, many of them told me they would rather have died, then survived with what they've gone through. I mean, that is something that not just the physical damage, but the incredible emotional trauma.

MG: Alona Shkrum talked about the importance of collecting evidence, of documenting crimes and ensuring that the evidence is sound and then passed along to those in the legal realm for accountability. From your perspective, how important is it that evidence is collected?

CL: Yeah, I mean, obviously, that's one of the difficult things and many of the places where I've reported from, you know, there isn't really the ability to do that and they don't have effective police forces sometimes or courts. And so that... And of course, you know, if you're in the middle of a war zone, you get raped. I mean, who are you going to go and try and... You haven't got a rape kit or something to try and get evidence. That is incredibly difficult. But that's where Ukraine actually in a strange way is an opportunity. I mean, it's absolutely horrendous that this is happening, but it's sort of happening in real time in front of us. We're all watching this. And so we are actually able to do something about it in a way that some of these other conflicts where it's only emerged long afterwards, we're not able to do anything.

MG: One of the other things that is connected in a way to this is what you wrote about from Warsaw. You just returned from Warsaw and you wrote about the rise in sex and human trafficking. As a result of this war, four million plus people have been displaced from Ukraine. The majority 90 percent plus have been women and children. What did you see there?

CL: So that's one of the saddest things, I mean, women and children are often the main victims of war. But what I saw was, you know, it doesn't end when people flee the war, that because this refugee crisis is almost all women and children fleeing because men have to stay and fight. So it's quite different to other refugee crisis and of course, the women when they arrive into Poland or the bordering countries, they've gone through terribly traumatic experiences. They've fled bombing. It's often a difficult journey. They're often with small children and they're hungry. They might not have any money. They don't necessarily have anywhere to go or know anybody. So they're very vulnerable and you see all these people on the border offering rides and rooms. And many of those people are good people who, I'm in awe of their generosity. But some people are not, and some are taking advantage. And so we're telling refugees now that they need to be careful. When you get into a car, don't go on your own. Take a photograph of the number plate. All of these things. But you know, that's hard for someone when they're in that kind of state to think of doing. And really, I don't think the onus should be on the refugees. There should be safeguarding measures in place so that people are not put into that situation.

MG: Just finally, what will it take to get accountability for these sorts of crimes? I mean, people talk about the United Nations, people talk about the ICC. The anti-terror prosecutor in France has opened enquiries into possible war crimes in Ukraine. What will it take to get accountability, do you think?

CL: Yeah. Well, I mean, it's been incredibly frustrating covering these things because, you know, at the moment, it's not just happening in Ukraine, it's in the Tigray region of Ethiopia. It's in detention centres in Belarus, the league of People being held in Xinjiang, migrants in Libyan detention centres. So, you know, many places where rape is being used against women in conflicts and nothing is happening. So hopefully, you know, and I don't think that... Justice doesn't happen by accident. It needs some international leadership to actually do more than just express outrage because the laws are there. And in fact, every country... member country of the United Nations, including Russia, voted 20 odd years ago, a resolution to say that we must do something about sexual violence in conflict zones and reduce it. But in that time, the amount has gone up a lot. So clearly, we're not doing what needs to be done. So hopefully this time people will do more than just talk about it and actually start collecting the evidence, setting up the mechanisms and making sure people pay a price for this.

MG: This is a hard conversation. I'm really grateful to talk to you about it. Christina, thank you very much.

CL: Thank you for listening.

MG: Christina Lamb is the chief foreign correspondent for The Sunday Times and the author of Our Bodies Their Battlefield: What War Does to Women. She was in London. The CBC News is next. And then:

FEMALE VOICE: The labour scarcity we are experiencing is real. But for most labour economists, it's not actually really a crisis. It's an opportunity to catalyse better working conditions for those who need them most.

MG: In six minutes, the four day workweek, a change that sounded like a pipe dream pre-pandemic, it's gaining real traction now. We'll talk more about it coming up. My name's Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current on CBC Radio One.

[Music: Theme]

Canadian workplaces sees increased productivity in four-day work week

Guest: Clementine Van Effentere

MG: Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

MG: Still to come, as Russia has increased its military presence in the North, who owns what in the Arctic has suddenly become a much more urgent question. In just under 30 minutes, what's being done to secure Canada's northern border? But first, four days on three days off.

[Music: Theme]

MG: You already know some of the ways this pandemic has changed the world of work. For example, you might be listening to this at home during your five second commute to the kitchen table. Our ongoing series Work in Progress has been focussed on the people rethinking what it means to work. The idea of a four day workweek has been around since long before COVID, but it's been getting a lot more traction lately, including at a small company called Situra near the Toronto airport. Our producer, Alison Masemann, stopped by for a tour.

FEMALE VOICE: So this is a fabrication facility, so this is John. [cross talk] So he manages the space and the stuff in it.

JOHN: This is what we fabricate. We elaborate the drawings and then we bring everything to the material.

ALISON: So, explain what I'm looking at here.

JOHN: This is an expansion joint. It's made out of rubber. It goes actually on top of the roof or on the cement part. So, anywhere there's a gap there is an expansion joint... So we know she's baking. So it's baking our material, so our piece will get prepped and ready to be [inaudible].

CHAUNTELLE: My name is Chauntelle Facey and I am the marketing director at Situra Inc. It was around the pandemic and we were all kind of just navigating what the best strategy was. Are we remote? Are we working from home? Are we a hybrid? Are we certain people in, certain people out? So I think we were starting to re-evaluate what was the best way for employees at Situra to work and how Situra can be, you know, sustainable during this time. As soon as the pandemic hit, you started to hear about these companies going to a four day work week in Europe, and during the staff meeting, the operations team presented this idea of a four day week.

WALLY: Oh, my name is Wally. I'm the national account person and I love the four day work. It has a lot of advantages for me personally. I'm recently a new dad, so I have a seven month old baby and it gives me more time with them. I go on Mondays now, which is my day off. I go with him to swim classes and then also have an impact of environment. I live in Milton and for me it's a long drive, so having to drive four days, that's less on the environment as well. And, you know, driving four days instead of five.

ALISON: And so I mean, for sales, numbers are important, right? Like it's... You can measure whether or not you're doing what you used to do. So how do things compare?

WALLY: Well, I mean, as far as last year, we were able to meet our budgets by even quarter three. So that's a great improvement for me. That's like a twenty five percent increase. It worked really well for me because I'm more focussed at work, I find. And you know, when you know that you have only those four days to do your work, you kind of come in and condensed. You're like, You know what? I'm doing this, this, this, this. But at the end, it translated to a better sales year. Definitely. Last year was a great success for me.

KAREN: I'm Karen Stevenson and I'm the company controller. The bottom line, we've seen at least a 20 percent increase in revenue from the time we started it because I think we can attribute it to our efficiency and productivity, most definitely.

ALISON: Did you have any scepticism about it?

KAREN: Yes, because I wanted to know how we would work it. At first, I said to my boss, Is it going to be 10 hours a day? And he said, No, it's going to be four days, eight hours. We just have to find a way to work more efficiently. But now it's been in motion for almost a year. It works, smooth like we have it down pat.

CHAUNTELLE: The difference between the way we... It was designed to how people automatically think is that it's one day the company is off. So Fridays we're shut down, which is not the case. The team... the operation team actually created a staggered schedule. You don't just tomorrow decide, OK, nobody come in tomorrow or you guys stay home like it wasn't like that. It was trials and a lot of feedback. Every department is covered still so that the customer always gets 100 percent Situra.

[Active equipment sounds]

JOHN: We just remove the fleece so we can allow the volganizer strip to attach to a material as a sander, bell sander. So we actually removed the fleece.

CHAUNTELLE: Definitely when we are hiring and during the pandemic, we were, luckily we increased our team. I will say when they hear we're on a four day week, it is very enticing. Situra is saying that, you know, we're very aware that especially during the pandemic, the way you work and the way you think of work changed. And so, you know, mental health is very, very, very important.

KAREN: On my day off what I do, I try to fulfil my three generation obligations, as I call it. I have my senior citizen mom who absolutely loves it, and what she has done now is built her life to try to fit all her stuff into my schedule on my day off. And then I have a teenage daughter who's been doing remote learning for the past two years. So I try to make sure I'm home to do something with her, be it, go to the park or have lunch together. And then what's left over is for me.

JOHN: We manage with the workflow that we have. We actually manage to work for the week. We squeeze everything in a four day week. Everything gets more exciting. So we know that Monday to Thursday we get to work quickly and we get it done and we work as a team. So therefore, if we have to wait an additional half an hour, sometimes on a Thursday to make sure our products get done on Friday, then we get it done. And you do it with pleasure, right? Because Friday off, right?

ALISON: Highly motivated.

JOHN: Motivation, exactly. Motivation is the key, actually.

CHAUNTELLE: Listen, like numbers don't lie, right? So we definitely are a culture that empowers the person to complete their tasks how they want. So you don't have someone you know, down your neck, but at the end of the day, we're still in construction. And so there are hard deadlines, and everything in construction was due yesterday. So we definitely make sure that the people on this team are able to do that.

MG: The four day workweek has been catching on in Canada and around the world. The Spanish government is currently subsidising 200 small and medium sized companies so they can offer thousands of employees a four day week with full pay. New Zealand and Iceland have also run trials that they called successful. Clementine Van Effentere, is a Labour economist and assistant professor at the University of Toronto, Clementine. Good morning.

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: Good morning. Thank you for having me.

MG: Thanks for being here. You were listening to what happens at that Toronto company Situra. People talking about a shorter commute, more family time, the opportunity to take the new baby to swim lessons. What stands out to you about how that company implemented a four day workweek?

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: So what I think is really interesting and what we are learning from this different experience is how companies are putting in place the proper both physical capital and human capital investment to make this work. Basically, we know that different industries would be facing different constraints in implementing this type of working arrangement and that the demand from workers would also differ a lot in a sense that not all workers are going to be willing to consider these alternative working arrangement if that means cutting wages. So it also very much depends on their own willingness to spend more time with their family or education or leisure in order to accept these new working arrangements. So what do we learn from these companies that actually show that this model is fisable? First is the question of coordination. Is coordination facilitated? Did these companies implement certain new technology to facilitate coordination? And how much is teamwork important in this particular domain or industries? And also how valuable continuous work is? We can see that for this particular firm that we heard about, continuous activity is really important. So that means that not all workers in this particular firm are going to take their time off at the same time. So all of this is going to very much depend on the type of firms and the type of activities provided by the firm.

MG: I want to ask you about some of the specifics that you've mentioned in just a minute. One of the things that we heard from one of the employees there is that they're not working 10 hour days, for example, at this company. It means a thirty two hour workweek, not a compressed workweek, where people work the same number of hours, but cram it into four days. Why is it important to make that distinction?

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: Yeah, it's very important to clarify what the four day workweek means. In a sense, it's reducing and not compressing work hours. Just a little bit of historical perspective. We've gradually reduced the number of hours worked within a typical work week since the late 19th century. So it is not a new thing, and this has been seen as improving overall health, job satisfaction and life satisfaction of employees.

MG: We're working less now generally?

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: Yeah. Compared to the end of the 19th century, definitely working less overall in most advanced economies.

MG: I just ask because I think some people might be surprised thinking that their work is actually extended, particularly during the pandemic, when we've seen sort of an erasure of that line between work and the rest of our lives.

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: Yes. So things have changed substantially during the COVID 19 pandemic, and we have seen that it basically drove a mass social experiment in working from home, for instance. So there has been a lot of changes in terms of the norms attached to work after the pandemic. But overall, the duration of the workweek has been decreasing substantially in most advanced economies over the whole 20th century.

MG: One of the executives at Situra said that they have seen at least a 20 percent increase in revenue in the midst of that change to a four day workweek. And the people who are working there said that they were able to do the 32 hour a week without any cost to their productivity or their sales. What do we know about that? What evidence is there? Because this is one of the, you know, the obstacles that's often presented, your productivity will decrease if you are reducing people's hours. What evidence is there that that's not the case?

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: We still know very little. And that's why these experiments happening across the world are very interesting. We know mostly that working hours and productivity do not go well together. And we know that from a sample of call centre agents where scientists like economists have measured that as the number of hours work increases, the average handling time for call increases, which means that agents become less productive. And these results shows that fatigue can play an important role even in jobs with mostly part-time workers. So the best evidence we have is that when you increase the number of hours, work productivity tends to decrease. So that suggests that is consistent with what has been observed by these companies, where revenue has not necessarily decreased substantially after the adoption of these new working hours.

MG: What do you think's going on there that if you're working fewer hours, how is it that you're more productive in those fewer hours?

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: So we have some suggestive evidence, you know, coming from experiments in Europe. So I'm thinking, for instance, about the 1998 French workweek reduction. We have some suggestive evidence that it increased health, and that it increased job and leisure satisfactions of the workers that were affected. So these can positively affect the productivity of each individual worker. But overall, it can also incentivise firms to reconsider their arrangement to reconsider certain communication, coordination, information technology as well, which could have positive spill-over in terms of the firm's profit overall.

MG: I want to play you something else here. This is Marc Belaiche, who runs a recruiting company called Toronto Jobs.ca.

MARC BELAICHE: Well, on balance, it sounds like a great idea, conceptually, but it depends on the industry, depends on the employee, depends on the department. For example, an accounting department could be more easily set up this way to do their job in four days instead of five. But if you're talking about a front facing order desk customer service, the company might be at a disadvantage. How are they going to fill that extra time? Who's going to... Who's going to fill in for those extra hours that the person is not there anymore? What we're finding is that there is a significant amount of open jobs right now. There is at last count, a million job openings across Canada. What do companies need to do to attract staff? Because what's really going on right now is employees accept offers and they don't show up. So what we find from the employers is that they're trying to do whatever they can to attract people to work, sometimes they... They can only get one application, whether it's dangling a four day workweek, whether it's dangling a little bit of money, more money, whether it's dangling better benefits, whatever it is. A lot of companies have to be really creative right now in order to attract people.

MG: So there's a couple of things there. One is the competition for talent for bringing in people in a very difficult environment where people... And for employers, where people, it seems like the balance has changed and people have more power as employees. But the other side of it that, he said, is that there are some industries and some workplaces where you just can't have a four day workweek because it would cost too much. How do you strike that balance?

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: Yeah. Definitely the question of who are going to be the first movers in promoting these alternative work week arrangements is going to be critical, especially in a context of what we call labour shortages. So the idea that there are a phenomenon in the labour market with more job openings than unemployed workers and this is something that we haven't honestly measured empirically yet, but we have some anecdotal evidence that people's valuation of their own time has changed and that people are less eager to do low paid, you know, debt and service and hospitality work and the desire to actually spend more time on family, education and leisure, even if that means less consumption. So for sure, if firms want to attract the most productive workers and if they have trouble hiring, then this question of providing alternative working arrangements should go hand in-hand with talking about wages. Workers are not necessarily going to consider these alternative working arrangements if that means cutting wages.

MG: Is there a cultural shift that's required for this to be accepted? There are certain industries I think of law, for example, where having a long workday and long work hours. Some ways it’s really entrenched. People don't like it and you're seeing an exodus in some quarters from certain industries. But that's in some ways how people see that workplace. Is it about also a cultural shift?

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: So I think overall, we should always look at the evolution of culture and work with the evolution of economic forces. This goes together, and it is true. We see the numbers that certain firms, certain jobs tend to disproportionately reward long and specific hours. So you mention law firms, consulting firms also, for instance, where individuals who work 70 hours a week receive far more than twice the earnings of those who work 35 hours a week, for instance. And these are occupations where, for instance, the gender gap in pay tends to be really high because women are penalised for not being able to work as many hours. So definitely this is going to be potentially more challenging to implement in occupations where you have a high value of job continuity, where contact with clients from the same worker is really important and when coordination and teamwork is valued. However, we've seen that norms have shifted quite substantially with the pandemic when we talked about working from home, for instance. So I think overall, there's still some scope for experiments and still some scope for firms, investment in new technologies and new arrangements to facilitate that coordination of workers.

MG: Who benefits the most from keeping a five day workweek, keeping the status quo?

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: That is hard to say. I think overall it would be interesting to offer the option for workers and see those who are willing to adopt or not, these working arrangements. I think overall, we know from the literature that women's working hours tend to be tightly linked to the presence of children, for instance. So if you have more decentralisation of schedules between a parent that is a mother with a kid, for instance, there may be less likely to adopt these arrangements. So this is also something to consider from the firm's perspective, depending on how family friendly they want to be. In a way, this should not impose an additional organisational burden on parents. And what we know from the literature is typically more mothers who have to account for this.

MG: You mentioned France, and I mentioned in the introduction Iceland as well. Is there one thing that we might learn from experiments abroad when it comes to the four day workweek?

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: I think it's always interesting to compare what's happening in other places, despite the fact that the institutional setting might be very different. Institutions in place like wage bargaining, organizations or the role of unions and so on. So it's always good to have a look abroad. But it's also important to experiment within Canada, I think, to learn more about what people want and how feasible it is to implement that at a larger scale.

MG: If we were to implement this here, how likely do you think it is that Canadian employers would see this as in the changing nature of work, something that should seriously be considered, working a four day workweek?

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: I think it depends how much they are incorporating potential large benefits in the long run and whether they are willing to experiment. There would definitely be a potential advantage for first movers because if they are able to afford to offer attractive wages and positive non-wage amenities, which is what all of these, you know, flexibility in terms of scheduling, and so on. They will be able to attract the most productive workers. So there is an, you know, an advantage in being in the forefront and trying to experiment. So I think if based on the experience they will see around, they will evaluate whether it's potentially profitable for them to adopt these new working arrangements.

MG: And I guess just finally, I wonder whether they will have a choice given the fact that for many people, the nature of work and their relationship with work has changed, as we've said over the course of the last couple of years in this pandemic.

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: Yeah. So the labour scarcity we are experiencing is real, but for most labour economists, it's not actually really a crisis, neither for the economy as a whole nor for employers, but it's an opportunity to catalyse better working conditions for those who need them most. And so I think, you know, triggers these conversations about working conditions in low paying jobs, for instance, that is happening and also about wages. So overall, this is an exciting time to talk about how to change the world of work.

MG: And certainly is. Clementine, it's great to speak with you. Thank you very much.

CLEMENTINE VAN EFFENTERE: Thank you so much.

MG: Clementine Van Effentere, is an assistant professor of economics at the University of Toronto.

[Music: Dolly Parton - 9 to 5]

MG: Your Tuesday morning is better already. Dolly Parton. How about that? You think about a four day workweek if you are an employee or an employer, we would love to hear from you? Does the idea of working four days out of five sound fantastic, terrible, something in between. If you have this arrangement what is it like for you? What are you able to do? What has it done for your business? Let us know. You can email us Thecurrent@cbc.ca. Find us on Twitter @thecurrentcbc.

[Music: Dolly Parton - 9 to 5].

MG: Dolly knew. Coming up after your regional update.

MALE VOICE: The theme of the exercise really is building relationships with other security partners in the Arctic. The conflict in Ukraine didn't result in the scheduling of this exercise, but certainly it perhaps highlights the importance.

MG: Suddenly, Arctic sovereignty is back on the desks of politicians in the South. We'll talk to a politician in Canada's north about why it's never been far from his mind. My name is Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current. We're back in 90 seconds. Stay with us.

Nunavut premier calls for infrastructure investment in Canada’s North

Guests: P.J. Akeeagok and Will Greaves

MG: Hi, I'm Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current. Later this week, the federal budget will be tabled and in advance of that on Thursday morning, we will focus this program on the rising cost of living, including rent prices.

FEMALE SPEAKER: SOUNDCLIP: [It makes me nervous. The more luxury condos go up, the more they pull up the market. I am worried that even getting an education and getting a, you know, a good paying job and you know, you're doing everything that you're told to do, it may not be enough soon. I know some of my classmates, they were living in inns, two couples to an apartment because of the prices going up. I pay one thousand four hundred and fifty dollars a month for this four bedroom house and I couldn't get a two bedroom for that amount of money right now. I couldn't. Twice what I'm paying right now, and I make the same money, right? I don't know about maths, but it spells impossible. It's so corrupt that we are being charged that.

MALE SPEAKER: I love living in this building. And at 72, where am I going to go? The guy next door, it's a new place. He pays eighteen hundred a month plus hydro. He's paying a thousand dollars more rent than me for the same thing if I stop work tomorrow. All I have is my pension. Who can afford sixteen, seventeen hundred a month?]

MG: Of course, rent isn't the only thing going up the price of groceries, heating, clothes, gas. Life is getting much more expensive. So we want to hear how those prices are biting into your own budget and how you are managing to make ends meet. Have you changed routines? Cutting back on certain things to pay for other things? What does the rising cost of living mean to your daily life? Let us know, please. You can write to us at thecurrent@cbc.ca or on Twitter we are @thecurrentcbc. And again, the reason that we're doing this is because the budget will be tabled on Thursday and Thursday morning we'll focus the entire program on the rising cost of living again. Get in touch. You can email us thecurrent@cbc.ca. Arctic sovereignty has long been the subject of discussion in Canada, but Russia's invasion of Ukraine has some politicians thinking about Arctic security and sovereignty. Much more, urgently, the premiers of Canada's three northern territories have been petitioning Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to discuss exactly that. They got that meeting on Monday evening. I'm joined now by P.J. Akeeagok. He is the premier of Nunavut. Premier, good morning.

P.J. AKEEAGOK: Good morning, Matt.

MG: As you've been watching what's been happening in Eastern Europe over the last month and a half, what concerns did that raise for you about the security of Canada's North?

P.J. AKEEAGOK: It's a pleasure to be on your program as a person who grew up in the most beautiful community you could imagine and the most northern settlement of Grise Fiord. I just want to put a bit of context. And so it's a very small settlement and it's a population of 120 people. So it's a very vibrant community, but it always doesn't have had a very positive history. It was a community that was created through relocation, really in the name of sovereignty and Canadian sovereignty. So as such, just the history just that not long ago is right there. So when the concerns of Arctic security did come up, it wasn't new at all. We've had some incredible respected elders, such as Larry [inaudible], who has been very outspoken and has always put the forefront of the importance of the people being there. So having grown up there really puts that perspective and it really hit home.

MG: Could you tell me more about that? I mean, again, the idea of sovereignty and security. Those are words that can seem far removed from people's individual lives. But you said the focus should be on the people. Tell me more about that.

P.J. AKEEAGOK: Oh, absolutely. Just the forced relocation of families to the high Arctic for the flag that we see and as a Canadian, as a very proud Canadian, that history is very dark. Although it is dark, I really see the importance of how we invest in people. So Grise Fiord and [inaudible] being two communities, amongst others. Having seen the impact on the forced relocation is something that is near and dear to me. So when we're talking really about how vibrant our communities are is really the strength as the Arctic nation that we've got. And so when you look across the territory and look at the investments that you do make, it. Really we're only as strong as the communities that we serve.

MG: And do you worry about the security of Canada's North? You signed a letter to the prime minister saying in part, as Russia's global investments and interests grow, we fear that Russia's aggression will inevitably present itself into Arctic affairs.

P.J. AKEEAGOK: That's the way we always have to be cognizant and take these steps very seriously. We have a very good working relationship between the three northern premiers and we stand united in terms of the threat. And we've had a very good discussion with the prime minister late afternoon, as well as with Minister Anand to be able to share our thoughts, to be able to share our concerns.

MG: What specifically were you looking for in that conversation with the prime minister and the defence minister?

P.J. AKEEAGOK: That any, any decision and any action of the North should be made by the North. And I think it's important that Nunavummiut and northerners play a crucial role in the decision process of these. And that to be able to share the importance of seeing investments in our communities. There's a huge infrastructure gap that we see right across the north, right across the Arctic, and it's crucially important and the timing is very important in terms of seeing those investments, strategic investments made, whether it be in housing or whether it be in telecommunications, whether it be expediting deep sea ports as an example in the communities that really allow us to be able to diversify our economies, the more vibrancy we see our communities thrive, the more Canada thrives when we're at the international stage. And it's really important that we start seeing these investments. I believe there's been investments made that really demonstrate as well, and we look forward to continuing to see those investments where they matter. And that is in housing or the deep seaports, amongst other areas.

MG: And did you get the commitments that you were looking for from the prime minister when it comes to... Those are long standing issues, but issues that, as you say, perhaps are even more top of mind now. Did you get those commitments from the prime minister? Will they present themselves, perhaps in the budget that will be tabled later this week?

P.J. AKEEAGOK: We'll be closely monitoring what's in the budget, so we don't know what's in the budget, but we're very optimistic to be able to see what will be presented there. But you're absolutely right, though the issues that we've seen have been long-standing some for decades, and they're very well reported in terms of the lack of investments in strategic areas. So with that in mind, I am very optimistic. Will hopefully see these and in the budget.

MG: When people talk about security, they think perhaps of an investment in the military. And we know that the defence minister has made promises, including a commitment to replace the North warning system, which was built back in the 1980s with something that's more modern. How important, from your perspective, is it that these warning sites are able to be upgraded, that they're able to detect the most modern of weapons?

P.J. AKEEAGOK: Yes, absolutely, it's equally important. I believe there's some goodwill where we've really seen the opportunity for us to be able to take part in those. Just recently, just an award of the maintenance of the NORAD with [inaudible] was a very good example of where northerners play a key role and a crucial role in seeing that. So investments in social infrastructure like housing is crucially important as well, because it really is the vibrancy of our communities that we're looking for. And really as strong as we are as an Arctic nation, it's really the health of our people. And that's such a defence, whether it's the navy ship, whether it's icebreakers or whether it's the modernisation of NORAD, its investments and people that are equally as important. And that can't be overshadowed really as we progress this discussion about Arctic security.

MG: How do you think that will be impacted by climate change? This is in some ways also just about access to the North. And as we see Arctic ice start to clear because of climate change, we know that there's growing interest, for example, in the Northwest Passage as an international trade route. So for the people of Nunavut, what will that mean?

P.J. AKEEAGOK: Yeah, it's very important. I've had the pleasure of working on conservation areas such as [inaudible], which is directly in relation to the Northwest Passage, and we know how vital that area is not only from the world but from the Inuit lens of how we rely so heavily on the wildlife that is teeming in that area. But as such, we realize that the climate change will play a crucial role. I've seen firsthand glaciers right across my community of Grise Fiord melt at very unprecedented rates as well, and I think the work of Sheila Watt-Cloutier really puts the face of Inuit to be the front and centre of the impact we do see and does happen first and foremost in the Arctic. So as such, I really see the strength in terms of our need and our ability, how this Arctic security will play front and centre moving forward with the opening of the passage in the coming years.

MG: Just finally, you use the phrase an Arctic nation earlier and Canada can think of itself as an Arctic nation, but we know, you know, that decisions in the South can be, you know, literally and figuratively made many, many, many kilometres, hundreds, thousands of kilometres away from those Arctic communities. What do we need to do? Do you see this as an opportunity in some ways to take advantage of the fact that we are an Arctic nation to stress that we are an Arctic nation to build on that idea?

P.J. AKEEAGOK: Absolutely. I think the work of our very incredible governor general, Mary Simon, was instrumental in creating the Arctic Council as an example where as an Arctic nation, it really allows us to be able to think differently again of how important the Arctic is not only to the northerners but to the rest of Canada. And it's important that we really put the human face to the discussion that we're talking about because it's easy to get lost when you start seeing investments in NORAD or the fighter jets and amongst other things, which are crucially important as well. But it allows us to be able to really put that face really to the lived experience of northerners of Inuit that really have made Canada an Arctic nation. So I do really see that as an opportunity moving forward.

MG: Premier, I'm really glad to talk to you about this. This is important and we'll talk again in the meantime. Thank you for joining us this morning.

P.J. AKEEAGOK: Thank you for having me, Matt.

MG: P.J. Akeeagok is the premier of Nunavut, speaking about the issue of Arctic sovereignty and security in the face of what's unfolding in Eastern Europe. Will Greaves is an assistant professor of international relations at the University of Victoria. Will, good morning to you.

WILL GREAVES: Good morning, Matt. Thanks for having me on.

MG: Thanks for being here. Given what we've seen Russia doing in Europe over the last month and a half, how concerned should Canada be about the security of its Arctic?

WG: Well, certainly the crisis in Ukraine and Russia's aggressive behaviour is a very bad thing for Arctic cooperation generally, and it's certainly a bad thing in terms of Canada's interests in the Arctic region. I don't think that means that there are direct threats, at least in the near term from Russia towards Canada's Arctic territory or its Arctic sovereignty. But that doesn't mean that the regional security situation in the Arctic hasn't deteriorated and been clearly been negatively affected by the current events in Europe.

MG: I guess one of the reasons why people might point to that and the premier was talking from his own experience about what he sees in the North. But people have pointed to the fact that Russia reactivated a number of Cold War era military bases in its Arctic over the last decade or so, and that that might be a sign, perhaps of things to come.

WG: That is something that we've heard about. I think that there's an important perspective on a lot of the investments that Russia has made in their own Arctic region, which is a little bit less menacing than is sometimes presented. Half of the Arctic is Russia's, half of the land, half of the water, half of the coastline, half the population. So Russia has legitimate interests in the Arctic and at the core of what Russia wants to do in its Arctic region is increase economic activity, increase resource extraction and increase shipping along the coastline, the Russian Arctic coastline called the Northern Sea Route. And so all of those things require different kinds of investments, require different kinds of capabilities. And Russia has invested significantly in those. What I think causes some people alarm is that in some cases, there are dual use applications of some of those infrastructure, which could potentially be used in a more offensive manner. But they need not be. And there's a very understandable alternative reason I think we could apply to why Russia would have invested in those kinds of things.

MG: Who does Canada have disputes with right now when it comes to the Arctic?

WG: So the Arctic overall is a well governed region. Notwithstanding the current crisis, we have been living through a period of really unprecedented Arctic cooperation and international institution building for the last 25 years plus which has been extremely positive across the region. But there are a number of outstanding disputes, particularly related to maritime boundaries within the region. I think most prominent something that some listeners might be familiar with are these questions around the high Arctic Ocean. So under the Law of the Sea, there's a mechanism for coastal states to essentially claim more maritime territory than they would otherwise be entitled to if they can demonstrate certain scientific facts about the bottom of the ocean floor. And through that process, we've seen overlapping claims within the high Arctic Ocean from a number of states, including Russia, Canada, Norway, Denmark, Greenland and the United States. However, separate from those kinds of concerns which are actually managed under the Law of the Sea process, there's a number of bilateral disputes that Canada particularly has with its Arctic neighbours. And this is something which is relatively unique to our situation. Canada has a maritime boundary dispute with the United States in the western North American Arctic, the Beaufort Sea region between Alaska and Yukon. Canada also has the only terrestrial or land boundary dispute in the entire circumpolar Arctic, which is with Denmark over Hans Island. So there are a number of existing disputes in the region, and Canada is implicated in several of them.

MG: You heard the premier talk about how he sees what we're talking about right now and the renewed focus on Arctic security and sovereignty as an opportunity to re-emphasise and perhaps invest further in the idea of Canada as an Arctic nation. What do you make of that?

WG: I think the premier is correct as I understand his statements and as I understand the statement coming out of the northern premiers meeting yesterday. What I think a lot of leaders in the territories and the federal government are focussed on is making sure that the necessary investments that Canada is in the process of making in the North in order to ensure Canadian Arctic sovereignty, ensure our national defence and security capabilities. I think what leaders are focussed on is making sure that those investments also serve many of the pressing interests of northern residents, of indigenous peoples, of Inuit specifically in Nunavut as the premier referred to, there's a long history of defence and military infrastructure in the North, not always doing that, and in fact, in some cases quite actively contributing to the worsening of the well-being of communities and peoples in the North. So I think there's a real desire now to learn from the lessons of the past and ensure that the kinds of investments that the Canadian government makes are serving multiple purposes, including those of northerners themselves.

MG: And he talked about issues of housing and beyond. You've written about this as well. Just briefly, what do you see as a couple of the most pressing issues that need to be addressed?

WG: Certainly in the realm of general politics and issues in the north. The real necessities of a healthy and resilient economy related to child care and early childhood education. Addressing the housing crisis, I mean, there's a housing crisis across this country at the moment. Southerners are well aware of this, but it's nowhere more acute than it is in the north, where the supply of housing stock is so limited and the challenges to building new housing or even greater than they are further south. So those real necessities are what needs to be the focus in many ways of northern policymaking. Another priority issue I know is getting better elder care within the territories themselves so that elders don't have to leave their communities and travel thousands of kilometres to the south just to receive care when they age. So those kinds of issues are really front and centre in terms of what northern leaders and indigenous leaders articulate as their highest priority concerns. But they recognize that those issues, I think, have to co-exist with the more globally oriented and national security and defence oriented concerns of the federal government.

MG: And again, the premier talked about the issue of a warming climate and the fact that the Arctic is warming. That could eventually mean a much more accessible Northwest Passage. What challenge does that present when it comes to Arctic sovereignty and security?

WG: It's a critical question. It's a critical question, and there's been a lot of focus on the Northwest Passage over recent years. One of the challenges is that there is no single Northwest Passage, so any transit route from one side to the other of the high Arctic archipelago to the Canadian Arctic can be considered the Northwest Passage. So it's just a way of referring to the ability to transit across the region. And just logically, the reduction in sea ice in particular, will make those waterways more accessible than they have historically been and potentially facilitate an increase in marine traffic. This poses a whole host of potential issues. I mean, to begin with, there's a legal dispute over the status of the Northwest Passage itself. So Canada makes a particular legal argument that the Northwest Passage comprises Canada's internal waters under international law. This is not a legal position that is currently supported by many other states in the international system, many of whom argued that the Northwest Passage is actually more like the Suez Canal or the Panama Canal, and should be designated what's called an international strait, which would give peaceful vessels from other countries the right to legally pass through. This is a really important subject of dispute for Canada, because if other countries vessels have a right to enter the Northwest Passage and Canada does not hypothetically have a legal right to prevent them, then it introduces much higher risk, of course, of, you know, some kind of nautical disaster or of fuel related spill or the release of onboard ship pollutants and effluent into Arctic waters. You know, species... contamination by invasive species, just a whole host of issues related to protecting the Arctic environment. And that's before you get at some of the questions of whether or not we could be confident that a particular vessel was actually conducting just peaceful or civilian activities. There are risks of foreign vessels, potentially those in the service of potential adversaries travelling through the Canadian Arctic in order to undertake surveillance or other kinds of activities that could be seen as harmful to Canada's national interest.

MG: We're just about at a time. One of the things that the premier also mentioned is that decisions about all of these issues that concern the North need to be made in the North. How willing do you think governments in the South will be to allow that to happen?

WG: I think we've seen huge progress from Ottawa in terms of the engagement with northern governments, and that includes territorial governments as well as indigenous governments. I think there is a much greater recognition today of a longstanding principle that it would be inappropriate for the government of Canada to make these policy decisions affecting northerners, affecting indigenous peoples without having them sit at the table without having them be a part of those decisions. So without suggesting that it's perfect because of course it isn't. I do think there's been huge progress that's been made, and there are new institutional structures such as the Crown/Inuit partnership committee, which brings together the leaders of Inuit organizations with federal leaders to collaborate and negotiate around some of these decisions. So without wanting to be too rosy about it, we've seen in the recent announcement of the upgrade to the North warning system, this radar line in the north and a $600 million upgrade that that announcement very clearly highlights the way in which the contracts have been distributed to Inuit based companies in the North so that there are local economic benefits from that investment in national defence.

MG: Will, it's fascinating to hear your perspective on this and good to talk to you. Thank you very much.

WG: My pleasure. Thank you, Matt.

MG: Will Greaves an assistant professor of international relations at the University of Victoria. That's The Current for this Tuesday, Q is up next on CBC Radio One. Before we go. We heard the premier of Nunavut P.J. Akeeagok talking about his family's forced relocation by ship to Grise Fiord in the name of Arctic sovereignty. There are many families that went through the same, including that of Madeleine Allakariallak. Like her grandparents, Minnie and Johnny, along with their small children, were forcibly relocated to Resolute Bay from Inukjuak northern Quebec. In the 1950s, the federal government had promised homes and food and the choice to go back home. That was a lie. Many Inuit died from starvation. They had to collect wood from the dump to build shelters to survive the extreme cold, and they waited every summer for the ship to pick them up and take them back home. Madeline tells that story in this song with her singing partner and cousin, Phoebe. This is Tudjaat singing Kajusita, "When my ship comes in". I'm Matt Galloway thanks for listening to The Current. We'll talk to you tomorrow.

[Music: Kajusita by Tudjaat]

Tuesday April 05, 2022 Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode