Skip to main content

Union wage advantage grows by $1.71 per hour

Union wages compared to non-union wages

The gap between union and non-union wages in Ontario has grown significantly since the start of the recession in 2008, increasing by $1.71 per hour, Statistics Canada data indicates.

The hourly union advantage grew by 34 cents per hour each year on average.  For a full time worker, that means the advantage for having union coverage in your workplace is growing by about $663 per year. 

Compared to five years ago, that means the union wage advantage for an employee working full time hours has grown by $3,334 per year.

In July 2008, the union premium was already considerable at 26.5% ($25.75 average wage per hour for those with union coverage versus $20.35 for those without, a $5.40 an hour difference).

Five years later, in July 2013, the union premium had grown to 31.7%.  Union wages averaged $29.56 in 2013 versus $22.45 for workers without union coverage.  That is a $7.11 advantage for workers with union coverage.

Temporary Workers: the biggest advantage?
Unionized temporary employees are especially far ahead of their non-union counterparts, with the union premium growing from 55.1% in 2008 to 60.9% in 2013.  For permanent employees, the gap grew from  to 21.4% to 26.1%.

Women Workers Especially Benefit
The union premium is also especially marked for women workers.  The union advantage for women workers in Ontario was 37.9% in July 2008 and is now 41%.  That is $8.41 per hour extra.  For men the difference is less but still quite large, at 17.5% in 2008 and 24.3% now (with a $5.91 per hour premium in July 2013).

Canada-wide data
Across Canada, the union premium is not quite so marked, and the premium has grown more slowly over the last five years.

Still, with the gap growing from 23.7% to 25.1% (from a $4.65 per hour  premium to a $5.56 per hour premium) the union advantage is quite large and growing.

As in Ontario, temporary workers across Canada especially benefit from workplaces with union coverage.  The gap is currently $7.85 per hour.  For temporary workers, however, the dollar gap is only somewhat larger than 2008, when the union premium was $6.80.  As well, the percentage difference has slightly shrunk, from just over 49% to just under 49%.

The union premium across Canada for women workers is also especially large, but grew only slightly over the five years, from 35.1% to 35.7% (or from $6.06 per hour to $7.09 per hour).

Union coverage means higher wages, especially for women and temporary workers
The gap between union and non-union wages is quite marked and it is growing.  The advantage of being employed in a unionized workplace is especially marked in Ontario and the benefit is growing especially quickly there.  Women and temporary workers especially benefit from union coverage, and, in Ontario, the union premium for women workers and temporary workers is growing at a significant pace.

Update: Someone asked me about if union dues offset the union advantage.  For the extra $1.71 an hour earned by unionized employees over the last five years compared to non-union employees, take off about 3 cents in union dues.  (If union dues are  1.5%, the exact amount would be  2.57 cents. With 2% union dues, the amount would be 3.42 cents.)  And a lot of that would be gained back as union dues are tax exempt.  

Photo: ecstaticist

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Health care funding falls, again

Real provincial government health care funding per-person has fallen again this year in Ontario, the third year in a row.  Since 2009 real funding per-person has fallen 2.6% -- $63 per person. 

Across Canada real per person funding is in its fourth consecutive year of increase. Since 2009, real provincial funding across Canada is up $89 -- 3.6%.
In fact the funding gap between Ontario and Canada as a whole has gown consistently for years (as set out below in current dollars).

Ontario funds health care less than any other province -- indeed, the province that funds health care the second least (B.C.) provides $185 more per person per year, 4.7% more.  
Provincial health care spending in the rest of Canada (excluding Ontario) is now  $574 higher per person annually than in Ontario. 

 Ontario has not always provided lower than average health care funding increases-- but that has been the general pattern since 2005.
Private expenditures on health care have exceeded Ontario government increases …

Ontario long-term care staffing falls far short of other provinces

CUPE and others are campaigning for a legislated minimum average of four worked hours of nursing and personal care per resident per day in long-term care (LTC) facilities.  New research indicates that not only is LTC underfunded in Ontario, it is also understaffed compared to the other provinces. 
LTC staffing falls short:  The latest data published by the Canadian Institute for Health Information (and based on a mandatory survey undertaken by Statistics Canada) indicates that staffing at long-term care (LTC) facilities falls far short of other provinces. 
Part of this is driven by a low level of provincial funding for LTC.





Ontario has 0.575 health care full-time equivalent employees (FTEs) per bed staffed and in operation.[1]  The rest of Canada reports 0.665 health care FTEs.[2] The rest of Canada has 15.7% more health care staff per bed staffed and in operation than Ontario.[3] 


No other province reports fewer LTC health care staff per resident (or per bed) than Ontario.[4]

Occupancy r…

Six more problems with Public Private Partnerships (P3s)

The Auditor General (AG) has again identified issues in her annual reportwhich reflect problems with Ontario health care capacity and privatization.   First, here are six key problems with the maintenance of the 16 privatized P3 ("public private partnership") hospitals in Ontario:
There are long-term ongoing disputes with privatized P3 contractors over the P3 agreements, including about what is covered by the P3  (or “AFP” as the government likes to call them) contract.The hospitals are required to pay higher than reasonable rates tothe P3 contractor for  maintenance work the contractor has deemed to be outside of the P3 contract. Hospitals are almost forced to use P3 contractors to do maintenance work the contractors deem outside of the P3 contract or face the prospect of transferring the risk associated with maintaining the related hospital assets from the private-sector company back to the hospitalP3 companies with poor perf…