Employment Insurance Monitoring and Assessment Report 2014/2015   Chapter II - 6. Employment Insurance benefits and firms

6.2.1 Firms and Employment Insurance Regular Benefits, by Firm Location

Table 62 shows that in 2013 87.0% of firms in Canada were located in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia and Alberta. Comparing the provincial and territorial distribution of firms (column 1) to that of their workforce (column 2), we see that British Columbia and Alberta were overrepresented in their number of firms, while Ontario and Quebec were underrepresented, indicating that firms in Ontario and Quebec are relatively larger in terms of their workforce than firms in other provinces.

Table 62 also shows that the Atlantic provinces and Quebec were overrepresented as EI regular claimants (column 3) compared to their workforce (column 2). For example, while the Atlantic provinces represented 12.4% of EI regular claimants, they only accounted for 5.9% of the workforce. All other provinces were underrepresented when comparing their workforce to their EI regular claimants.

Comparing the distribution of EI regular claimants based on where their firm is located (column 3) and where they resided (column 4) indicates that individuals employed by firms in Ontario and Alberta were overrepresented relative to where the individuals resided. In 2013, 33.6% of EI regular claimants worked for a firm located in Ontario while only 30.2% of EI regular claimants resided in that province. Similarly, Alberta firms represented 8.4% of EI regular claimants compared to 6.4% of EI regular claimants who resided in Alberta. All other provinces were underrepresented.

• Note: Totals may not add up due to rounding.
• ¹ The location of the firm, the firm’s workforce and the firm’s EI regular claimants are based on the location of the firm’s headquarters, which is determined by the Business Register of Statistics Canada. If the firm’s headquarters is located outside Canada, then the location of the firm is based on the location of the job based on T4 data.
• ² The number of workers in a firm is the number of individuals with employment income in that firm, as indicated on a T4 form. The number of workers is adjusted so that each individual in the labour force is only counted once and individuals who work for more than one firm are taken into account. For example, if an employee earned $25,000 in firm 1 and $25,000 in firm 2, then he or she was recorded as 0.5 employee at the first firm and 0.5 employee at the second firm.
• ³ These are the number of people receiving EI regular benefits in 2013.
• ⁴ The residence-based location of an EI regular claimant is where the EI claimant resided when he or she filed for a claim.
• Source: ESDC, Employment Insurance administrative data. Data are based on a 100% sample of EI data; CRA administrative data. CRA data are based on a 100% sample.

6.2.2 Firms and Employment Insurance Regular Benefits, by Firm Size

Small-sized firms represented 90.7% of all firms in Canada in 2013. ^{Footnote 165} The remainder of the firms were small-to-medium-sized firms (7.8%), medium-to-large-sized firms (1.3%) and large-sized firms (0.3%). These figures are similar to those of 2012.

Table 63 indicates that workers in large-sized firms were underrepresented among EI regular claimants as they represented 43.1% of workers but only 30.5% of EI regular claimants. All other categories of firms were overrepresented among EI regular claimants. For example, small-sized firms represented 21.7% and 27.7% of workers and EI regular claimants, respectively. These results are similar to those of the last two years.

• Note: Totals may not add up due to rounding.
• ¹The location of the firm, the firm’s workforce and the firm’s EI regular claimants is based on the location of the firm’s headquarters, which is determined by the Business Register of Statistics Canada. If the firm’s headquarters is located outside Canada, then the location of the firm is based on the location of the job based on T4 data.
• ²The number of workers in a firm is the number of individuals with employment income in that firm, as indicated on a T4 form. The number of workers is adjusted so that each individual in the labour force is only counted once and individuals who work for more than one firm are taken into account. For example, if an employee earned $25,000 in firm 1 and $25,000 in firm 2, then he or she was recorded as 0.5 employee at the first firm and 0.5 employee at the second firm.
• ³ These are the number of people receiving EI regular benefits in 2013.
• Source: ESDC, EI administrative data. Data are based on a 100% sample of EI data; CRA administrative data. CRA data are based on a 100% sample.

EI regular benefits were received by employees of 20.9% of small-sized firms in 2013. In comparison, 76.8%, 96.0% and 99.5% of small-to-medium, medium-to-large and large-sized firms had employees who received EI regular benefits, respectively.

In addition, among firms with employees who were in receipt of EI regular benefits, roughly one-third of employees (31.5%) in small-sized firms received EI regular benefits. With 14.4% of employees receiving regular benefits, small-to-medium firms also recorded figures above the national average of 11.2%. Although almost all medium-to-large and large-sized firms had employees in receipt of EI regular benefits in 2013, 10.3% and 6.5% of workers in these firms received EI regular benefits, respectively. These figures are consistent with those of 2012.

Overall, this analysis of the utilization of EI regular benefits by firm size suggests that various factors contribute to the overrepresentation of small and underrepresentation of large firms among firms with EI regular benefit claimants. In the case of smaller firms, it may be due to the fact that fewer smaller firms utilized EI regular benefits; however, given their small size, it is more likely that a higher proportion of their employees will be in receipt of EI regular benefits. Meanwhile, there is a higher probability that larger firms will have employees who are in receipt of EI regular benefits, but they will represent a smaller percentage of their employees.

6.2.3 Firms and Employment Insurance Regular Benefits, by Industry

Analysis by industry shows discrepancies between distribution of firms, distribution of firm’s workforce and distribution of firm’s EI regular claimants. Table 64 shows that firms in the Construction industry, the Business, Building and Other Support Services industry and the Other Services industry represented 12.4%, 12.4% and 9.7% of all firms in Canada in 2013. The goods-producing industries represented 22.0% of all firms while Services-producing industries accounted for the remaining 78.0%.

Workers in the goods-producing sector were overrepresented as EI regular claimants: while they represented 20.1% of workers, they accounted for 38.0% of EI regular claimants. The overrepresentation of EI regular claimants in the goods-producing industries is mainly driven by the Construction industry: while they represented 6.9% of the workforce, they accounted for 20.1% of EI regular claimants in 2013. To a lesser extent, workers in the Manufacturing industry and in the Agriculture, Fishing, Forestry and Hunting industry were also overrepresented as EI regular claimants with 9.4% and 1.7% of workers and 11.5% and 4.1% of EI regular claimants, respectively.

By contrast, workers from the services-producing sector were underrepresented as EI regular claimants in 2013 with only 62.0% of EI regular claimants but 79.9% of workers. More specifically, workers in the Public Administration industry, the Retail Trade industry and in Information, Cultural and Recreation industry represented 9.8%, 11.4% and 8.3% of workers but only 5.1%, 7.0% and 4.1% of EI regular claimants, respectively.

• Note: Totals may not add up due to rounding.
• ¹ The location of the firm, the firm’s workforce and the firm’s EI regular claimants is based on the location of the firm’s headquarters, which is determined by the Business Register of Statistics Canada. If the firm’s headquarters is located outside Canada, then the location of the firm is based on the location of the job based on T4 data.
• ² The number of workers in a firm is the number of individuals paid employment income by that firm, as indicated on a T4 form. The number of workers is adjusted so that each individual in the labour force is only counted once and individuals who work for more than one firm are taken into account. For example, if an employee earned $25,000 in firm 1 and $25,000 in firm 2, then he or she was recorded as 0.5 employee at the first firm and 0.5 employee at the second firm.
• ³ These are the number of people receiving EI regular benefits in 2013.
• ⁴ This industry comprises the industries with codes 55 (Management of Companies and Enterprises) and 56 (Administrative and Support, Waste Management and Mediation Services) from the North American Industry Classification System.
• ⁵ This industry comprises the industries with codes 51 (Information and Cultural Industries) and 71 (Arts, Entertainment and Recreation) from the North American Industry Classification System.
• Source: ESDC, EI administrative data. Data are based on a 100 % sample of EI data; CRA administrative data. CRA data are based on a 100% sample.

6.3.1 Firms and Employment Insurance Special Benefits, by Firm Location

Comparing the distribution of the workforce to EI special claimants, Table 65 shows that the Atlantic provinces were overrepresented as EI special claimants with 9.2 % versus 5.9 % of the workforce. As opposed to regular claimants (see section 6.2.1), Quebec is underrepresented as EI special claimants. This is explained by the fact that Quebec administers its own program for maternity and parental benefits.

Similarly to what was observed in section 6.2.1, comparing distribution of EI special claimants based on where their firm is located and where they resided indicates that individuals employed by firms in Ontario and Alberta were overrepresented relative to where the individuals resided. In 2013, 43.1 % of EI special claimants worked for a firm located in Ontario while only 35.5 % of them resided in Ontario. To a lesser extent, Alberta firms represented 11.0 % of EI special claimants compared to 10.7 % of EI special claimants residing in Alberta. All other provinces were underrepresented, especially Quebec: 17.4 % of EI special claimants worked for a firm located in that province while 20.6 % of EI special claimants resided there.

• Note: Totals may not add up due to rounding.
• ¹ The location of the firm, the firm’s workforce and the firm’s EI special claimants is based on the location of the firm’s headquarters, which is determined by the Business Register of Statistics Canada. If the firm’s headquarters is located outside Canada, then the location of the firm is based on the location of the job based on T4 data.
• ² The number of workers in a firm is the number of individuals paid employment income by that firm, as indicated on a T4 form. The number of workers is adjusted so that each individual in the labour force is only counted once and individuals who work for more than one firm are taken into account. For example, if an employee earned $25,000 in firm 1 and $25,000 in firm 2, then he or she was recorded as 0.5 employee at the first firm and 0.5 employee at the second firm.
• ³ These are the number of people receiving EI special benefits in 2013.
• ⁴ The residence-based location of an EI special claimant is where the EI claimant resided when he or she filed for a claim.
• Source: ESDC, EI administrative data. Data are based on a 100 % sample of EI data; CRA administrative data. CRA data are based on a 100 % sample.

6.3.2 Firms and Employment Insurance Special Benefits, by Firm Size

As seen in section 6.2.2, small-sized firms represented 90.7% of all firms in Canada in 2013, ^{Footnote 166} while large-sized firms represented only 0.3% of firms. Whereas section 6.2.2 showed large differences in the distribution of the workforce and EI regular claimants, Table 66 indicates that the picture differs for EI special claimants. The distribution of the firm’s workforce and EI special claimants were pretty similar by firm size, the largest percentage point difference (2.6) coming from small-sized firms.

While large firms were slightly underrepresented among EI special claimants (43.1% of the workforce vs 42.3% of EI special claimants), the magnitude of the underrepresentation was much lower than that found under EI regular claimants. Small firms were underrepresented among EI special claimants: while they represented 21.7% of workers, they represented only 19.1% of EI special claimants. Small-to-medium sized firms and medium-to-large firms were overrepresented among EI special claimants, as was the case for EI regular claimants (see section 6.2.2).

• Note: Totals may not add up due to rounding.
• ¹ The location of the firm, the firm’s workforce and the firm’s EI special claimants is based on the location of the firm’s headquarters, which is determined by the Business Register of Statistics Canada. If the firm’s headquarters is located outside Canada, then the location of the firm is based on the location of the job based on T4 data.
• ² The number of workers in a firm is the number of individuals paid employment income by that firm, as indicated on a T4 form. The number of workers is adjusted so that each individual in the labour force is only counted once and individuals who work for more than one firm are taken into account. For example, if an employee earned $25,000 in firm 1 and $25,000 in firm 2, then he or she was recorded as 0.5 employee at the first firm and 0.5 employee at the second firm.
• ³ These are the number of people receiving EI special benefits in 2013.
• Source: ESDC, EI administrative data. Data are based on a 100% sample of EI data; CRA administrative data. CRA data are based on a 100% sample.

In summary, the section on firms has revealed several interesting facts: 1) large firms were well underrepresented when comparing the distribution of the workforce to that of EI regular claimants, while the opposite holds true for small-sized firms; 2) goods-producing industries were overrepresented as EI regular claimants compared to their workforce, while services-producing industries were underrepresented; and 3) large discrepancies exist between the distribution of firms’ workforce and the distribution of EI special claimants by province.