In a Globe and Mail editorial “ Ontario is open for

In a Globe and Mail editorial “ Ontario is open for

In a Globe and Mail editorial “Ontario is open for business, but on the back of vulnerableworkers” the author discusses Ontario’s recently passed bill, Making Ontario Open for BusinessAct (“Ontario”). The author argues that the changes are primarily going to have a negativeimpact for non-unionized shift workers (“Ontario”). The arguments made throughout theeditorial have the basis of promoting feminist ideas but unfortunately fall short in terms ofexplicitly stating that the bill will have a negative impact on different groups of people based ondiffering individual factors such as gender, race, and ability. The main way in which thiseditorial promotes feminist ideas involves drawing attention to the negative impacts that changesmade to the economy by those in positions of power can have on those who are in subordinatepositions within a society’s power hierarchy. On the other hand, the damage that this editorialdoes to feminist topics is not in anything the author explicitly says, but rather in their lack ofacknowledgment of the true impact of this bill on marginalized groups in society.The author of the editorial discusses the Making Ontario Open for Business Act, whichwas passed under Ontario’s Progressive Conservative government headed by Doug Ford(“Ontario”). The Progressive Conservative’s cabinet consists of 21 ministers, including DougFord, of which seven are women, only one third (Rieti). Men in powerful political positions hasbeen the norm throughout history and continues to be the norm as evidenced by the gender ratiosin politics today. Looking at hegemonic masculinity, which is “the form of masculinity that isculturally dominant”, being hegemonic relates to roles of authority (Connell 190). Thisleadership that is inherently rooted in society’s perception of masculinity continues to function asa way to keep men in power positions, such as in the government. But not all masculinity isconsidered to be equal, as Connell points out, different groups of men have different privilegesassociated with their masculinity (190). Visible minorities are among those groups of men whosemasculinity does not carry the same admiration as the white hegemonic masculinity societypromotes (Connell 190). Alongside the lack of women sitting on the Progressive Conservative’scabinet there is also a lack of visible minorities, with only one minister being a visible minority(McQuigge). What the author of the editorial leaves out in the discussion of the new bill is thepeople in power who have approved it and who specifically will be most negatively impacted.The Making Ontario Open for Business Act includes getting rid of an anticipated dollarincrease in minimum wage, dropping two paid sick days, ending the requirements that part-timeand casual employees must be paid the same as full-time employees for the same work and thatemployees are entitled to 3 hours wages if their shift is cancelled within 48 hours (“Ontario”).The author of the editorial argues that the only change that is justified is the cancellation of theplan to increase minimum wage, stating that the minimum wage in Ontario had been increasedtoo quickly under the former Liberal government (“Ontario”). All of these changes will benefitbusiness owners who now can pay their part-time and casual employees less and thus will bemotivated to hire more part-time and casual workers over full-time in order to save money onlabour (“Ontario”).Those who will suffer the most from this new bill are the 623,000 people in Ontario whorely on shift work and earning the minimum wage to survive (“Ontario”). According to theeditorial of these 623,000 people the majority are single parents and people over 55 years of age(“Ontario”). The editorial does not elaborate anymore on the demographics of those 623,000people, but research from the Wellesley Institute confirmed that between the years of 2003 to2011 those who were most likely to be working for minimum wage in Ontario include women,racialized employees, and recent immigrants (Block 4). The Canadian Research Institute for theAdvancement of Women (CRIAW) has found that one in seven women in Canada live inpoverty (65). Minimum wage and poverty are two things that are very closely linked, withminimum wage not necessarily being adequate to cover the cost of living in many places,especially in cities (Syed). When women are more likely to be making minimum-wage than menit is easy to make the connection that women are more likely to be living in poverty than menare. The editorial leaves this pertinent piece of information out, that the likelihood is that this billwill have a greater negative impact on women than it will for men, which is a point that relates tofeminism but simply does not get acknowledged.Not all women will experience the impact of this bill, or the realities of poverty, in thesame way. Mia McKenzie highlights the differences in economic inequality that different groupsof women will experience in her paper The Myth of Shared Womanhood and How It PerpetuatesInequality (62). The broadest statistic regarding gender and how it influences income is thatwomen will make 77 cents to every dollar a man makes (McKenzie 62). This fact, like some ofthe ones in the editorial, is simply too general to truly be able to gain a real understanding of thecomplexities of life among women who do not share anything more than a gender. McKenziedelves into this statistic by bringing others to light, that black women only make 70 cents to themale dollar and that Latino women only make 55 cents for every dollar a white man makes (62).These statistics highlight the jarring reality that race and gender can intersect in areas such aseconomics that can make people incredibly vulnerable in a highly capitalistic society. Theeditorial does mention the way the bill will exploit economically vulnerable workers, whichbrings to light the idea that it is important to look at the ways a society is structured and howthose structures negatively impact certain groups while helping other groups (“Ontario”).However, the editorial does not state who the economically vulnerable workers are, whichunfortunately helps keep people in the dark about the realities of how personal factors, such asrace and gender, that play no role in the capabilities of a person continue to influence people inways that the everyone in society may not even recognize.The women and visible minorities, and especially women who are also visible minorities,who will face the brunt of these unfortunate changes to Ontario’s labour policies are almostentirely excluded from the cabinet in which these decisions come from. With only seven womenand one visible minority sitting on the council that is making decisions that statistically willaffect the groups that they belong to the most it is easy to see how their voices could beovershadowed by the 13 others (McQuigge; Rieti). As McKenzie points out, those with theloudest voices often do not allow the less-heard voices to speak and bring in the perspective oftheir own experiences (63). This editorial brings forward feminist topics regarding economicallyvulnerable workers but unfortunately falls flat in outright stating who the economicallyvulnerable workers are most likely to be. Intersectional feminism looks at the variances inprivilege within differing populations in a society, taking into consideration aspects such asgender and race when looking at issues such as poverty and economic class differences (CRIAW66). What the author of this editorial did not do was highlight the factors that play into who is aneconomically vulnerable worker, outside of simply stating that single-parents and people overage 55 were the most common groups of people to rely on shift work and minimum wage tosurvive (“Ontario”). This editorial managed to get in some valuable points about powerdifferentiations, which could easily lead into a conversation about the intersectionality ofeconomics, gender, and race, but ultimately it did not elaborate into those topics.Works CitedBlock, Sheila. Who Is Working For Minimum Wage In Ontario? Wellesley Institute, October2013, https://www.wellesleyinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Who-MakesMinimum-Wage.pdf.Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women. “Intersectional FeministFrameworks: A Primer.” Gender and Women’s Study: Critical Terrain. Edited byMargaret Hobbs and Carla Rice, 2nd ed., Women’s Press, 2018, pp. 63-9.Connell, Raewyn. “Understanding Masculinities: The Work of Raewyn Connell.” Gender andWomen’s Study: Critical Terrain. Edited by Margaret Hobbs and Carla Rice, 2nd ed.,Women’s Press, 2018, pp. 190-1.McKenzie, Mia. “The Myth of Shared Womanhood and How It Perpetuates Inequality.” Genderand Women’s Study: Critical Terrain. Edited by Margaret Hobbs and Carla Rice, 2nd ed.,Women’s Press, 2018, pp. 62-4.McQuigge, Michelle. “Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s cabinet criticized for lack of diversity.”Global News, 29 June 2018. https://globalnews.ca/news/4306035/doug-ford-ontariocabinet-diversity/Rieti, John. “Ontario PC cabinet puts big-name politicians in top roles.” CBC, 29 June 2018.https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-pc-cabinet-1.4728145.Syed, Fatima. “Minimum-wage earners in Toronto do not make enough money to thrive, reportsays.” The Star, 3 October 2017. https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/10/03/torontoresidents-do-not-make-enough-money-to-thrive-report-says.html

"You need a similar assignment done from scratch? Our qualified writers will help you with a guaranteed AI-free & plagiarism-free A+ quality paper, Confidentiality, Timely delivery & Livechat/phone Support.

Discount Code: CIPD30

Click ORDER NOW..