Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

You're probably right though... Quebec has had pretty much the lowest unemployment rate in Canada most of the time for several years now, and it's not really related to extremely high(er) immigration in the ROC because it began before the latest waves of new people were a big phenomenon.

This had never happened before in the recorded history of employment statistics in Canada.

GDP per capita is another story of course, but in all honestly I never expected Quebec to have unemployment lower than the Canadian average one day, much less for it to be lower than every other province.

I'm not sure unemployment rate is a very meaningful metric though. Low unemployment rate could be due to high inactivity. We see it in the US with their opium epidemic.

A more meaningful stat is percentage of the working-age population that is in employment.

[New Brisavoine]

Here are the data from Statcan for March 2024:

Employment rate of the population age 25 to 44:
- Québec : 85.0% (i.e. 85.0% of the people in Québec whose age is 25-44 are working)
- Manitoba: 84.6%
- Alberta: 84.4%
- Saskatchewan: 84.0%
CANADA: 83.6%
- British Columbia: 83.5%
- Ontario: 83.0%
- New Brunswick: 81.6%
- Prince Edward Island: 81.4%
- Nova Scotia: 81.3%
- Newfoundland and Labrador: 79.9%

Employment rate of the population age 45 to 64:
- Saskatchewan: 77.3%
- British Columbia: 75.8%
- Alberta: 74.9%
- Québec: 74.5%
CANADA: 74.3%
- Ontario: 74.2%
- Manitoba: 74.2%
- Prince Edward Island: 73.6%
- Nova Scotia: 70.9%
- New Brunswick: 69.0%
- Newfoundland and Labrador: 63.7%

With these sorts of high figures for Québec, one has to wonder why is Québec's GDP per capita still be so low (relatively speaking) compared to ROC. Labor productivity in Québec must be quite low. How can?

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

With these sorts of high figures for Québec, one has to wonder why is Québec's GDP per capita still be so low (relatively speaking) compared to ROC. Labor productivity in Québec must be quite low. How can?

Per HEC Montreal - severe under-investment in machinery, technology and other non-residential productivity drivers:
https://cpp.hec.ca/wp-content/uploads/20...Qml6aVhWaUVBUFM5UFZqSHNaa09PZyUzRCUzRA..

Graphs are from 2019, but situation on the ground hasn't improved much since then...relative to France the metrics are pretty bad:

[New Brisavoine]

Are salaries in Québec lower than in the rest of Canada? That's what these numbers (higher employment rate but lower GDP per capita) should entail.

[Acajack]

At least part of it is that employers know or think they can pay a bit less in Quebec due to cost of living being lower, especially housing.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Acajack

At least part of it is that employers know or think they can pay a bit less in Quebec due to cost of living being lower, especially housing.

Employers don't pay less because the cost of living is lower unless it impacts the supply of workers. Quebecers do have less leverage than other Canadians because of language. Both Francophones who have less abilty or desire to leave and Anglophones who are a captive market as well. Unilingual Anglophones in Montreal were a bit source of call center scams for many years. They had no other job prospects.

Bit productivity isn't dictated by wages it is the other way around. The nature of the economy is less efficient and it's probably the largest welfare state in North America which makes effort less rewarded. That's a choice and when the rest of Canada has made relative to the United States as well. Biking from work to an affordable apartment in the Plateau it's hard to argue the better option is more money and siting in traffic on the way to a bigger house in a Houston suburb.

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Are salaries in Québec lower than in the rest of Canada? That's what these numbers (higher employment rate but lower GDP per capita) should entail.

Yes it's on the lower end of the national average, especially compared to Alberta. Ontario's somewhat higher but the gap is closing, as Ontario suffers from the same productivity problems. It's a nationwide existential threat that the Trudeau government does not seem to be concerned about, and keeps making it worse with his reckless mass immigration policies.

[Acajack]

Canada in general has very bad private business investment numbers and Québec is even worse.

I wonder if it has something to do with the fact that even today a large share of the people who control Québec's economy have little attachment to the place.

[wg_flamip]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Canada in general has very bad private business investment numbers and Québec is even worse.

I wonder if it has something to do with the fact that even today a large share of the people who control Québec's economy have little attachment to the place.

In my experience, the biggest issue with Canadian employers—across multiple industries, in both public and private sectors and in both official languages—is a stubborn refusal to properly resource process improvements and training/development. Our leaders often see the latter as an employee perk rather than an business investment, and we lag our peer nations significantly on funding/worker.

There's also this pervasive attitude that understanding/being able to navigate convoluted organizational structures with unintuitive processes and outdated tools protects experienced workers in their jobs. Many leaders get ahead precisely because they thrive in these environments and therefore have no motivation to push for change.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

it's probably the largest welfare state in North America which makes effort less rewarded.

Wrong explanation as per the employment rate which is higher than in the rest of Canada.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

It's a nationwide existential threat that the Trudeau government does not seem to be concerned about, and keeps making it worse with his reckless mass immigration policies.

Same as in the UK. High immigration pushes labour productivity down. But in both cases we know why they want high immigration: silly old 19th century quest for more power in international relations by having a larger population and economy (although in Canada's case there's also the appeal of "look how open and liberal we are, we welcome everybody", which is more the Trudeau approach to immigration, but Canadian Conservatives are more into the old hard power approach of the UK).

In France the approach to immigration is totally different: "we have to close the doors, otherwise we're going to be submerged" and "our unemployment rate is too high, we can't have more people in, that will make unemployment even worse".

It's funny how different countries can have totally different views of immigration.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by wg_flamip

In my experience, the biggest issue with Canadian employers—across multiple industries, in both public and private sectors and in both official languages—is a stubborn refusal to properly resource process improvements and training/development. Our leaders often see the latter as an employee perk rather than an business investment, and we lag our peer nations significantly on funding/worker.

There's also this pervasive attitude that understanding/being able to navigate convoluted organizational structures with unintuitive processes and outdated tools protects experienced workers in their jobs. Many leaders get ahead precisely because they thrive in these environments and therefore have no motivation to push for change.

Or perhaps, plus prosaïquement, Canada is suffering from the good old natural ressource curse. When you have easy money flowing in from tar sands oil, you don't have much of an incentive to invest in other industries.

That being said, it's a general problem for Canada, but doesn't explain Québec's peculiarly low labour productivity compared to ROC.

[New Brisavoine]

I was looking in the OECD stats. This is labor productivity in 2019.

Gross value added per worker in 2019, in PPP USD dollars:
- USA: 131,551
- Switzerland: 115,499
- France: 107,836
- Sweden: 101,879
- Australia: 98,785
- The Netherlands: 98,177
- Italy: 97,607
- Germany: 96,336
- Canada: 92,637
- Spain: 91,964
- UK: 88,015
- Québec: 80,767
- Czech Republic: 79,657
- New Zealand: 78,440
- South Korea: 75,719
- Turkey: 75,368
- Poland: 72,214
- Portugal: 68,025
- Greece: 61,812
- Chile: 49,347
- Mexico: 44,219
- Colombia: 32,873

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Same as in the UK. High immigration pushes labour productivity down. But in both cases we know why they want high immigration: silly old 19th century quest for more power in international relations by having a larger population and economy (although in Canada's case there's also the appeal of "look how open and liberal we are, we welcome everybody", which is more the Trudeau approach to immigration, but Canadian Conservatives are more into the old hard power approach of the UK).

In France the approach to immigration is totally different: "we have to close the doors, otherwise we're going to be submerged" and "our unemployment rate is too high, we can't have more people in, that will make unemployment even worse".

It's funny how different countries can have totally different views of immigration.

The idea of being submerged is almost an alien concept to ROC Canadians.

[Acajack]

Quebec was an economic laggard for such a long time, that part of the explanation could be that it's simply one of a number of indicators where it still has a lot of catching up to do.

https://www.lapresse.ca/affaires/chroniq...e-quebec-poursuit-son-net-rattrapage.php

BTW this journalist is a really good one when it comes to analysing statistics, especially economic ones.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

BTW this journalist is a really good one when it comes to analysing statistics, especially economic ones.

Good paragraph:

Vous voulez des hausses de salaire durables ? Militez pour une meilleure productivité. Parce qu’autrement, les entreprises devront réduire leur marge de profit pour y parvenir ou encore hausser le prix de leurs produits, ce qui les rendra moins concurrentielles, et tous y perdront.

You never read that in the French press. The economic debate in France is stuck in the past, with Jurassic era unions which still parrot old stupidities from the 1920s about "the rich" that need to be taxed to extinction, the "patronat" that oppresses the poor "travailleurs", etc. The new female leader of the CGT union (the largest one in France) is a typical example of how ridiculous the French unions can be. She wouldn't be out of place in Maduro's Venezuela.

[Acajack]

Ironic that the rate of worker unionization in Quebec is 4 times as high as it is in France (40% vs 10%).

[New Brisavoine]

It's not ironic. There's a direct correlation. Low unionization because these unions don't attract workers (they survive only thanks to public subsidies from the French government which they nonetheless accuse of all ills), and extremist unions because only a fringe of the most radicalized workers are union members.

The remedy has been known for years (mandatory affiliation to a union, end of public subsidies to the unions), but all governments have refused to implement it, because they fear the "pouvoir de nuisance" of these unions, especially in public transport (they could totally paralyze French transports for 2 months if they wanted to).

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by wg_flamip

In my experience, the biggest issue with Canadian employers—across multiple industries, in both public and private sectors and in both official languages—is a stubborn refusal to properly resource process improvements and training/development. Our leaders often see the latter as an employee perk rather than an business investment, and we lag our peer nations significantly on funding/worker.

There's also this pervasive attitude that understanding/being able to navigate convoluted organizational structures with unintuitive processes and outdated tools protects experienced workers in their jobs. Many leaders get ahead precisely because they thrive in these environments and therefore have no motivation to push for change.

I've mentioned it before but I find the Canadian business mindset is largely oriented towards building something just big enough so that a bigger fish will buy you out and you won't have to work another day in your life. It's not really the ambitious go-getter mindset where you're never satisfied and are always looking to get bigger and better.

If you look at the largest corporations in Canada the list is top-heavy with heavyweights that are in sectors protected by the Canadian government from foreign involvement. It so happens that for those there is little incentive or even a possibility to take a buy out from a larger entity, especially since it's usually going to be American.

Big Canadian-owned corporations that are unsheltered by our government and that have staying power out there on the global free market are extremely rare.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

It's not ironic. There's a direct correlation. Low unionization because these unions don't attract workers (they survive only thanks to public subsidies from the French government which they nonetheless accuse of all ills), and extremist unions because only a fringe of the most radicalized workers are union members.

The remedy has been known for years (mandatory affiliation to a union, end of public subsidies to the unions), but all governments have refused to implement it, because they fear the "pouvoir de nuisance" of these unions, especially in public transport (they could totally paralyze French transports for 2 months if they wanted to).

Viewed externally it's a bit shocking to see how much outsized power French unions have when you consider the small percentage of the workforce they represent. But of course as you say they happen to be concentrated in sectors that are very névralgique to society.