Skip to content | Skip to institutional links

Common menu bar links

Final Report

Appendices

Appendix A — Evaluation framework
[ PDF Format, 57Kb]

Appendix B — Document review
[ PDF Format, 163Kb]

Appendix C — Report on interviews
[ PDF Format, 158Kb]

Appendix D — Report on surveys
[ PDF Format, 432Kb]

Executive Summary

Introduction

The Status of the Artist Act (hereinafter known as the Act) received Royal Assent in June 1992 and was brought fully into force in May 1995. The legislation recognizes the importance of artists in Canadian society and establishes a framework to govern professional relations between artists and producers.

The Status of the Artist Act is comprised of two main parts. Part I establishes the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist, whose purpose is to act as an advisory body to the Minister of Canadian Heritage. Broadly speaking, the Council is responsible for supporting and promoting the professional status of artists in Canada through such activities as information gathering, advising the Minister, and liaising with artists' associations. Part II of the Act establishes the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal (CAPPRT or the Tribunal), a labour board responsible for administering the provisions of the Act that govern relations between self-employed artists and producers in the Canadian cultural sector, within federal jurisdiction. The Tribunal reports to Parliament through the Minister of Labour. Responsibility for the cultural aspects of the Act (Part I) lies with the Department of Canadian Heritage.

The Act contains a provision requiring that the Minister of Canadian Heritage, in consultation with the Minister of Labour, undertake a review of the legislation in the seventh year after its coming into force. The purpose of the review is to assess the effectiveness of both parts of the legislation, and to identify what, if any, amendments are required. Prairie Research Associates (PRA) Inc. was engaged by the Department of Canadian Heritage to undertake an evaluation of the legislation as a first step in this review. This report presents the evaluation findings, offers conclusions, and provides recommendations for legislative and operational changes.

Methodology

We used four data collection methods in this evaluation:

document review
interviews with key informants representing artists' associations, government, federal producers, and others (n=65)
survey of artists who are members of artists' associations, both certified and non-certified (n=296)
survey of federal producers (n=8).

This report consolidates the findings obtained through these methods.

Findings

Relevance

Those whose opinions we canvassed in this evaluation affirmed the value and ongoing relevance of the Status of the Artist Act, both for its statements of principle in Part I and for the legal framework it establishes in Part II to govern collective bargaining between associations of self-employed professional artists and producers within federal jurisdiction.(1) The Act's provision of a legal foundation for collective bargaining relationships that were previously voluntary, without foundation in law, and (at least in theory) vulnerable to prosecution under the Competition Act is widely seen as invaluable, although some producers and producers' associations believe the legislation is unnecessary because voluntary collective agreements were the norm in their industries prior to the Act's implementation.

Although the Status of the Artist Act was strongly endorsed by almost all of those whom we consulted in this evaluation, there was also a consensus that the legislation by itself is insufficient to bring about significant change in artists' socio-economic circumstances. The Act's restriction to federal producers, the fact that it addresses only labour relations, and the fact that it does not apply to producers sub-contracted by producers within federal jurisdiction are seen as its main shortcomings. There was general agreement that other kinds of measures are necessary if the socio-economic circumstances of self-employed artists are to improve. Artists themselves perceive other kinds of measures to be at least as important as the legal right to collective bargaining. Respondents to the artists' survey rated this right as the least important of ten existing and potential measures to improve artists' economic circumstances, and gave measures such as deductions for business expenses, copyright, income averaging, and government grants a considerably higher rating of importance.

The preference expressed by artists for measures that benefit them as individuals may reflect the reality that collective bargaining is not equally relevant or easily applicable to all categories of artistic and cultural workers. Collective bargaining is most effective as a means of advancing the economic interests of collectivities or groups of workers, but it is less effective at advancing the interests of individuals who, by the very nature of their chosen pursuit, work alone. Two examples from the arts and cultural sector can serve to illustrate the point: the relevance of collective bargaining to the members of a symphony orchestra seems clear enough, but its relevance to a novelist or to a visual artist is not as immediately obvious.

This is not to say that the Status of the Artist Act is irrelevant to certain categories of artists, but merely that other kinds of initiatives, especially those that treat the self-employed artist as entrepreneur rather than as employee, may benefit a larger number and greater variety of artists. Moreover, a variety of other measures could potentially be implemented that would benefit all self-employed artists.

Implementation

Part I of the Status of the Artist Act mandates the existence of the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist as an advisory body to the Minister of Canadian Heritage. A temporary Council consisting of twelve full-time professional artists was appointed in 1991 prior to implementation of the legislation. However, its existence was never made official by the Governor-in-Council as required by the legislation, and it effectively ceased to function in 1996, approximately one year after the Act was implemented.

There are several related explanations for the early demise of the Council, including lack of time and expertise on the part of the Council's members and lack of direction from the Department of Canadian Heritage. Perhaps most importantly, establishing the Council as an official entity was at odds with the federal government's wish to avoid creating new entities and to eliminate overlap and duplication among existing ones. Indeed, the mandate of the Council is somewhat similar to that of existing advocacy organizations, particularly the Canadian Conference of the Arts and the Canada Council for the Arts. One possibility would be to amalgamate the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist with organizations of similar purpose. Alternatively, some key informants suggested amending Part I of the legislation to eliminate the Council entirely, given that the federal government already funds several arts organizations that play advisory roles similar to the one mandated for the Council.

Part II of the Status of the Artist Act establishes a legal framework to govern professional relations between associations of self-employed artists and federal producers, and creates the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal (CAPPRT or the Tribunal) to administer it. After seven years of operation, the Tribunal has largely accomplished its primary function of certifying artists' associations for the purpose of collective bargaining with federal producers; since May 1995, it has defined 23 sectors as suitable for collective bargaining and certified 21 associations to represent those sectors. The Tribunal has, however, been less active in carrying out other aspects of its mandate, such as hearing matters dealing with failure to bargain in good faith and complaints of unfair labour practices. While the Tribunal's volume of work in the latter area may increase in the future, some key informants said that the structure

of the Tribunal may be too elaborate for the work it is required to do and suggested that its functions be transferred to an existing labour relations board, such as the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB).

Merging CAPPRT with another federal labour board or tribunal could have several benefits, including more efficient use of expert staff resources, greater coherence and consistency of decisions relating to labour relations, improved client service through a single access point and faster turnaround, and reduced costs. However, key informants cautioned that such a merger may not be well received by the arts community, which believes that CAPPRT is more informed about and therefore more sensitive to the concerns of artists than are existing labour relations boards. A transfer of CAPPRT's functions to the CIRB could therefore be contemplated, key informants emphasized, only if specialized training were provided to CIRB personnel or if CAPPRT personnel were retained.

The administrative provisions and procedures set out in Part II of the Act are generally regarded as appropriate by the parties concerned. However, negotiation requires significant expenditure of time and financial resources that can be burdensome, particularly for the smaller artists' associations. Key informants identified two potential changes to the legislation that would help to mitigate this difficulty and lead to more successful negotiations. First, the legislation should include a provision for first contract negotiation within a stipulated time frame and provide for arbitration if the parties are unable to come to an agreement within that period. Such a change would help to avoid lengthy mediation processes and would make the Status of the Artist Act consistent with the Canada Labour Code and provincial status of the artist legislation in Québec. Second, the legislation should contain a mechanism to encourage federal producers to form associations for the purpose of collective bargaining. In this context, there is considerable support among artists' associations, government representatives, and federal departments and agencies for the creation of a single, centralized bargaining authority for all federal government departments. This could lead to reductions in the time and expense that artists' associations and producers alike must devote to negotiation, and would considerably rationalize the collective bargaining process.

There were two other suggestions for minor amendments to the administrative provisions of the Act. Some key informants said that section 46 of the legislation should be amended so that the right to apply pressure tactics in first agreement situations is linked to the date of notice to bargain, rather than the date of certification; the provision as written enables artists' associations, at least in theory, to apply pressure tactics without first sending notice to bargain. Secondly, a few key informants suggested that the legislation should be amended so that any question may be put to the Tribunal for a determination or declaration outside a proceeding.

Two main issues related to the clarity of the legislation and its interpretation by CAPPRT emerged from this evaluation. At the root of the first is a fundamental philosophical disagreement over the meaning of the term "artist." Some key informants believe the Tribunal has gone too far in categorizing certain cultural workers as artists, while others believe it has been suitably forward-thinking in this regard. With the exception of a few key informants who recommended revising the Professional Category Regulations to include a wider range of artistic functions, no clear suggestions for changes to the legislation were offered.

The second issue was a perceived lack of clarity regarding the appropriate scope and content of scale agreements that may be negotiated pursuant to the Act, particularly with respect to copyright. While most key informants do not perceive any conflict, either real or potential, between the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act, some parties, including some federal government departments, argue that certain Tribunal decisions have led to uncertainty over which statute governs copyright and the fixing of royalties payable for the use of copyright works. Despite the Federal Court of Appeal's dismissal of the Attorney-General of Canada's application to set aside a Tribunal certification decision with respect to pre-existing work, the issue remains unresolved from the perspective of various interested parties, which maintain that the current interpretation puts the Status of the Artist Act in direct conflict with the Copyright Act. Despite strong opinions on both sides of the issue, the matter is really one for the courts, and not for this evaluation, to decide. However, the situation will certainly continue to evolve over time.

Impacts

As previously noted, there is consensus that the Status of the Artist Act has accomplished its primary objective of providing a legal framework for collective bargaining between artists' associations and federal producers. Although such collective bargaining had been occurring for decades prior to implementation of the legislation, it was on a voluntary basis only and had no foundation in law. The Status of the Artist Act has rectified this situation by creating a legal foundation for collective bargaining that previously did not exist.

To date, the legislation has had its most significant impact on professional artists' associations. Certified artists' associations we interviewed reported that certification gives their organizations a legitimacy and credibility they otherwise would not have. Artists' associations value the Act highly for giving them the ability to "speak with one voice" with employers and to bring economic pressure to bear; many associations said that in the absence of the legislation, their ability to represent the interests of their members would be seriously compromised. Overall, many key informants agree that artists' associations are now better organized than when the legislation was first implemented and better able to work on behalf of their members.

On the other hand, with very few exceptions, artists' associations reported that the Act has so far had little effect on the socio-economic circumstances and working conditions of their members.

Artists' associations offered three main explanations for the Act's limited impact in this area. First, many of the larger, more established associations already had voluntary scale agreements in place with federal producers; second, most of the smaller and more recently established associations have not yet negotiated any scale agreements under the Act; and third, the majority of artistic and cultural production falls under provincial jurisdiction.

Producers, for their part, reported that the Act has so far had little, if any, impact on their organizations. Some were involved in collective bargaining with artists' associations on a voluntary basis prior to implementation of the Act; others said that the impact of the Act has been negligible because they do not employ a large number of self-employed artists. Some producers did, however, have concerns about the legislation and its potential implications for their organizations. Concerns were expressed about the appropriateness of collective bargaining for third party organizations, about the applicability of the legislation to certain artistic sectors, and about what some producers perceived as the Tribunal's bias in favour of artists' associations.

At the same time, it should be noted that several producers acknowledged the importance of the legislation for providing a legal framework for collective bargaining and for clarifying the respective roles of artists' associations and producers with respect to professional relations. These ideas were echoed by artists' associations and government representatives, who also praised the Act for providing a democratic process that allows the parties involved to come to their own agreements and for creating predictability and stability within the labour market by establishing normal pay rates.

Recommendations

1. The Status of the Artist Act serves a useful purpose in recognizing the importance of artists in Canadian society and in providing a legal framework for collective bargaining between associations of self-employed artists and federal producers. The Department of Canadian Heritage may also wish to explore other policies and programs to improve the socio-economic circumstances of self-employed artists.

2. Given that the federal government funds arts organizations that provide advocacy and advice on behalf of Canadian artists, consideration should be given to whether these organizations could fulfill the role of the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist while respecting the intent of Part I of the Status of the Artist Act.

3. The Department of Human Resources Development Canada, in consultation with the Department of Canadian Heritage, should consider ways of streamlining the administration and service delivery structure of the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal while remaining sensitive to the concerns of artists and artists' associations. Consideration should be given to a variety of options, ranging from the status quo to amalgamation of CAPPRT with another federal labour board or tribunal.

4. Part II of the Status of the Artist Act should be amended to include a provision for ensuring first contract negotiation and arbitration. Such a change would make the legislation consistent with the Canada Labour Code and provincial status of the artist legislation in Québec.

5. Section 46 in Part II of the Status of the Artist Act should be amended to link the right to apply pressure tactics in first agreement situations to the date of notice to bargain, rather than to the date of certification. Such a change would align the legislation with standard labour relations practices.

6. Possible mechanisms to increase the efficiency of the collective bargaining process should be explored. To this end, consideration should be given to establishing one bargaining authority for all federal government departments.

7. The Department of Human Resources Development Canada, in consultation with the Department of Canadian Heritage, should consider how the Professional Category Regulations defining the categories of cultural workers eligible for coverage under the Status of the Artist Act should be reviewed.

8. The Department of Canadian Heritage may wish to undertake more research to explore and clarify the relationship between the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act.

Notes

Producers in the federal jurisdiction include all broadcasting undertakings under the jurisdiction of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, federal government departments, and the majority of federal government agencies and Crown corporations.

Introduction

Purpose of the evaluation

Prairie Research Associates (PRA) Inc. was engaged by the Department of Canadian Heritage to undertake an evaluation of the Status of the Artist Act as a first step in this review. In designing and carrying out the research, we were guided by the evaluation framework in Appendix A (see Volume II of this report).

This report presents the evaluation findings, offers conclusions, and provides recommendations for legislative and operational changes.

Structure of the report

This report is divided into several sections. Section 2.0 describes the methodology we used to carry out the evaluation, while Section 3.0 describes the policy context that led to implementation of the Status of the Artist Act. The evaluation findings are presented in Section 4.0. Section 5.0 concludes and provides recommendations. Four appendices accompany this report and have been bound separately in Volume II. These include the evaluation framework that guided the study, as well as three interim reports (Appendices B, C, and D) submitted over the course of the evaluation. The appendices are as follows:

Appendix A -- Evaluation Framework
Appendix B -- Document Review
Appendix C -- Report on Interviews
Appendix D -- Report on Surveys.

Although findings from the interim reports have been integrated to form the final report, the interim reports themselves should be consulted for more detailed information

Methodology

We used four data collection methods in this evaluation:

document review
key informant interviews (n=65)
survey of artists (n=296)
survey of federal producers (n=8).

We prepared all data collection instruments with input from the Department of Canadian Heritage and the Department of Human Resources Development Canada. This report consolidates the findings obtained through these methods.

Document review

The document review (see Appendix B, Volume II) provides contextual information for the evaluation as a whole and responds directly to some of the evaluation issues and questions. It describes the economic challenges confronting professional artists, as well as the policy context that led to implementation of the legislation; it also describes the legislation in detail, including key players and their respective roles, as well as Tribunal procedures. Furthermore, it provides an overview of activities to date and reviews some of the key issues that have emerged in the seven years since the Act was implemented.

We reviewed a wide range of documents in order to prepare the document review, including:

CAPPRT web site and documents
independent research reports and journal articles
status of the artist legislation and regulations (federal and province of Québec)
relevant Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture
relevant House of Commons Debates
reports of several federal commissions and task forces on arts and culture
web sites and publications of a variety of arts and cultural organizations.

A complete bibliography is included with the document review in Appendix B.

Key informant interviews

We conducted in-depth interviews with 65 key informants through a combination of individual and group interviews. We prepared a separate report on the interview findings, which can be found in Appendix C, Volume II.

The Department of Canadian Heritage identified appropriate individuals and mailed them letters of invitation to participate.

PRA then telephoned each individual to schedule a suitable time for the interview. In some cases, the person identified by Canadian Heritage was not available for an interview during the time period of the study or suggested another person within the organization as an alternate. In addition, a few key informants declined an interview or did not respond to our repeated attempts to contact them (we made at least three attempts per key informant).

We grouped key informants into four categories:

government
artists' associations(2)
federal producers
other key informants

and prepared a separate interview guide for each group. All key informants were given the opportunity to review the interview guide in advance and had the option of completing the interview in either English or French. We conducted the majority of interviews by telephone.

Survey of artists

We conducted a mail-out survey of self-employed professional artists who are members of certified and non-certified artists' associations. The Department of Canadian Heritage compiled an initial list of 36 associations and sent each one a letter explaining the survey and inviting their members to participate. The letter also requested the assistance of artists' associations in making their membership lists available to PRA for the purposes of the survey.

PRA followed up on the introductory letter with telephone calls to each association. As a result of these calls, 31 of the original 36 associations identified agreed to participate in the survey. Of these, 11 were prepared to provide us with their membership lists, while the remaining 20 agreed to distribute the survey to a sample of their members on our behalf.

Based on the size of each association's membership and their certification status, and given a total sample size of 1,000, we determined the number of surveys to be allocated to each association using the following formula:

Non-certified associations received 15 surveys each.
Certified associations with fewer than 1,000 members received 25 surveys each.
Certified associations with between 1,000 and 10,000 members received 50 surveys each.
Certified associations with more than 10,000 members received just over 90 surveys each, to make up a total sample of 1,000.

For the 11 associations that provided us with their membership lists, we selected a random sample of their members and mailed each one a package containing the survey, an introductory letter, and a self-addressed, stamped return envelope. For the remaining 20 associations (those that wished to distribute the surveys themselves), we prepared an appropriate number of survey packages and sent these to the relevant associations along with instructions for their distribution to a random sample of their members. In addition, we invited all associations to inform their members that if they did not receive a copy of the survey in the mail but still wished to participate, they could access the PRA web site to request a copy. All survey recipients received the survey in both English and French. Individuals who accessed the PRA web site could request the survey in the language of their choice. It should be noted that although one non-certified association was sent 15 surveys for distribution to its members, these were returned to PRA due to an incorrect mailing address. PRA telephoned this association and left a message requesting that the association contact us should it wish to be included in the survey. However, we received no response to this call. Some 985 surveys (rather than 1,000) were initially distributed to artists, either directly by PRA or by an artists' association. In addition, we received six requests for a survey through our web site. Overall, a total of 991 surveys were therefore distributed to artists, of which we received 296 in return, resulting in a response rate of 29.9%. We suspect that some survey recipients may have felt that they were not sufficiently knowledgeable about the legislation to respond to the survey. Table 1 on the next page shows the associations that participated in the survey, the size of their membership, the number of surveys allocated to each, the number of surveys received from each, and the response rate for each. Key findings from the survey of artists have been incorporated into this report. It should be noted that large proportions of survey respondents did not respond to certain survey questions or indicated having no opinion. This was especially true of questions related to the impact of the legislation and its strengths and weaknesses. Although detailed results from the survey of artists can be found in Appendix D, Volume II, the final report focuses on survey questions that a majority of respondents were able to answer--that is, mainly on questions related to the relevance of the legislation.

Context for the legislation

When it came into force in 1995, the Status of the Artist Act was intended to express the federal government's commitment to improving the working conditions and economic circumstances of artists. The legislation was meant to rectify what was perceived as insufficient recognition of Canadian artists and their working and living conditions compared to other workers. It had been acknowledged for some time that professional artists were among the highest educated but lowest paid individuals in the country. Furthermore, artists were disproportionately engaged in part-time or seasonal work, and a disproportionate number were self-employed. As a consequence, many artists did not enjoy the same job security and employment benefits that were available to others.

During the several decades preceding the legislation, intense lobbying by the cultural community, along with a variety of government commissions and task forces, had brought the arts and the economic circumstances of professional artists to the forefront of public policy debate. The 1951 report of the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences (the Massey-Lévesque Commission) was the first to acknowledge that artists were unable to live by the sale of their work alone, and proposed a minimum subsistence wage as a possible solution.(1) More than two decades later, the federal government, in the "Disney Report," released the first comprehensive portrait of the economic difficulties facing Canadian artists. The report recommended introducing dual status for artists, which would give them self-employed status for taxation purposes while simultaneously permitting them access to programs such as employment insurance and the Canada Pension Plan.(2)

Although the federal government did not take action following the Disney Report, Canada signed the UNESCO recommendation on the status of the artist (the Belgrade Convention) in 1980. Shortly thereafter, Canada established the Federal Cultural Policy Review Committee (the Applebaum-Hébert Committee) to examine not only the status of the artist, but to perform a comprehensive review of all Canadian cultural institutions and cultural policy. When it reported in 1982, the Committee noted that despite decades of pressure from the arts community and despite artists' overwhelming contribution to Canadian life, [their] living conditions were virtually unchanged; the income of many if not most of these artists classifies them as highly specialized working poor.(3)

Several years later, another task force was established specifically to investigate the living and working conditions of Canadian artists and to make recommendations that could lead to improvements in these conditions. In 1986, the Task Force on the Status of the Artist released the results of its investigations (the Siren-Gélinas Report). Among its recommendations, the Report proposed changes to income tax legislation to offer more financial security to artists (including tax exemptions and income averaging); changes to copyright rules; and legislation that would recognize organizations representing self-employed professional artists as collective bargaining agents.(4)

One year after the release of the Siren-Gélinas Report, the Government of Québec enacted the Loi sur le Status professional et les conditions d'engagement des artistes de la scène, du disque et du cinéma. This legislation was the first to grant collective bargaining rights to associations of independent professional artists (in this case, those working in the fields of theatre, opera, music, dance, variety entertainment, film-making, and sound recording). In 1988, the province enacted similar legislation pertaining to artists who create works in the fields of visual arts, arts and crafts, and literature.

In November 1989, the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture established a Sub-Committee on the Status of the Artist and gave it a mandate to review previous reports on issues related to the status of the artist. When the Sub-Committee reported in February 1990, it gave a series of eleven recommendations, including implementation of status of the artist legislation that would recognize the professional status of artists and that would give certified associations representing self-employed artists working in areas of federal jurisdiction the right to collective bargaining. The Sub-Committee also recommended that the proposed legislation address a variety of other issues, including a presumption of self-employed status for artists for tax purposes; access to unemployment insurance; compensation for the free use of artistic works in libraries; bankruptcy protection; and the right to set aside part of artistic income in an "Artist Account" on which tax liability would be deferred.

The federal government responded to the Standing Committee Report in May 1990.(5) It committed to introducing legislation on the status of the artist that would give artists the right to form associations and negotiate minimum employment conditions. It also pledged to address some of the Standing Committee's other recommendations through administrative measures and changes to existing legislation. Among the issues the government proposed to address outside of the new legislation were bankruptcy protection; tax deductions for expenses incurred through artistic work; and tax treatment of charitable donations of works by visual artists.

The status of the artist legislation that was tabled in the House of Commons in December 1990 was therefore not as wide ranging as the Standing Committee had recommended. It had two main parts. Part I consisted of a statement of general principles concerning the status of the artist and mandating the existence of the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist, while Part II established a legal framework to govern professional relations between associations of self-employed artists and federal producers. The Status of the Artist Act received Royal Assent in June 1992. Part I was proclaimed in May 1993, while Part II was brought into force in May 1995.

Notes

Danielle Cliche. "Status of the Artist or of Arts Organizations? A Brief Discussion on the Canadian Status of the Artist Act." Canadian Journal of Communications 21 (2) (1996).
Cliche, ibid.
Report of the Federal Cultural Policy Review Committee, 1982, p. 4.
It should be noted that some artists' associations, such as the American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada, had been successful over the years in establishing and negotiating scale agreements with many producers. However, all such agreements were established on good faith and had no legal recognition in the courts. Furthermore, because the contract negotiations and agreements reached by associations of self-employed artists did not come under the ambit of the Canada Labour Code, artists' associations could become subject to investigation and prosecution under the Competition Act for conspiring to fix prices.
Government of Canada. Government Response to the Report of the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture Respecting the Status of the Artist. May 1990.

Findings

In this section, we present the aggregated findings from all data collection methods used in this research. We present the findings according to the issues in the evaluation framework (Appendix A).

Relevance

Among those whose opinions we canvassed in this evaluation, there is almost unanimous agreement that the circumstances that led the federal government to introduce the Status of the Artist Act still prevail. Virtually all key informants agreed that the socio-economic position and working conditions of self-employed artists have not changed substantially since 1995, although some qualified their remarks by saying that they lack evidence to substantiate their opinion.(9) The artists we surveyed expressed a similar opinion. Among survey respondents, more than half (52%) believe that the working conditions and economic circumstances of self-employed artists have not improved since 1995, and almost all (93%) believe that it is impossible for the majority of self-employed artists in Canada today to earn a living unless they supplement their art with non-artistic work.

Opinions on the relevance of the legislation reflected the different interests of the groups involved. Almost all of the artists we surveyed (93%) believe that measures to improve the economic circumstances of self-employed artists are necessary in Canada, and three-quarters believe that measures specifically intended to improve labour relations between artists' associations and producers are necessary. Similarly, most key informants affirmed the value and ongoing relevance of the Act, both for what they regard as its important statements of principle in Part I and for the legal framework it establishes in Part II to govern collective bargaining between associations of self-employed professional artists and federal producers. A small number of producers and representatives from producers' associations, however, expressed a dissenting view. They believe that the legislation is unnecessary, primarily because collective agreements were the norm in the industries they represent prior to the Act's implementation.

4.1.1 Limitations of the legislation

Despite the strong support expressed by key informants and artists for the Status of the Artist Act, there is a consensus that the legislation, by itself, is insufficient to bring about significant change in artists' socio-economic circumstances. Two main limitations of the legislation emerged from this study:

The Act is limited to the federal jurisdiction.

Key informants see the limited jurisdiction of Part II of the Act as the most significant factor limiting its ability to bring about changes in artists' socio-economic circumstances. Although the majority of artistic and cultural production occurs outside the scope of the federal legislation, none of the provinces and territories, with the exception of Québec, currently has similar legislation in place.(10) CAPPRT itself, in its latest performance report, noted that compared to the total amount of work in the cultural sector in Canada, the amount of work offered to self-employed artists by producers within its jurisdiction is modest.(11)Self-employed artists working in the cultural sector therefore do so, for the most part, without the collective bargaining rights that are available to them under the federal Act. Many of the individuals we interviewed advocated the introduction of complementary legislation at the provincial level.

The Act is limited to labour relations.

A second perceived shortcoming of the Status of the Artist Act is the fact that it is limited to a statement of general principles and the establishment of a legal framework for collective bargaining. Most key informants believe that other measures, in addition to the Status of the Artist Act, must be implemented if the economic circumstances of self-employed artists are to improve, and three-quarters of the artists we surveyed expressed a similar opinion. Key informants and some artists recommended introducing a variety of other measures in the pursuit of this objective, including income averaging, tax exemptions on a proportion of copyright income, and access to employment insurance and other social benefits. A few key informants criticized the federal government for what they perceive as its failure thus far to articulate a comprehensive and coherent policy vis-à-vis artists. They argued that although Part I of the Status of the Artist Act sets out important statements of principle, few concrete measures have been introduced to put those principles into practice.

Respondents to the survey of artists perceive other kinds of measures to be at least as important as the legal right to collective bargaining established by the Status of the Artist Act. In fact, survey respondents rated the legal right to collective bargaining as the least important of ten existing and potential measures to improve the economic circumstances of artists, and gave measures such as deductions for business expenses, copyright, and income averaging a considerably higher rating of importance. Of the four potential measures that respondents were asked to rate (income averaging, tax exemptions on copyright income, protection from producer bankruptcy, and access to employment insurance and other social programs), all four are seen as more important than the legal right to collective bargaining. See Table 2 for the details.

Table 2: Artists' rating of measures to improve economic circumstances of artists
Measure -- Very important/Important	% (n=296)
Existing measures
Deductions for business expenses under the Income Tax Act	95%
Protection of the economic rights of creators (copyright)	92%
Creation, production, and touring grants from arts councils and government departments	87%
Program of payments to Canadian authors for their eligible books catalogued in Canadian libraries (Public Lending Right)	79%
Compensation for public display of art works (exhibition rights)	76%
Legal right to collective bargaining	69%
Potential measures
Income averaging	88%
Tax exemption on copyright income	81%
Protection from producer bankruptcy	78%
Access to employment insurance and other social programs	77%

Although the jurisdiction of the Act and its restriction to labour relations are seen, by far, as the most significant limits on the Act's ability to achieve improvements in artists' socio-economic status, key informants also identified two other constraints. First, the provisions set out in Part II do not apply to third party contractors. Key informants pointed out that sub-contracting is increasingly common in artistic and cultural production, including among federal producers. Second, key informants said that artists who are not members of certified associations can not benefit from the legislation.(12)

These caveats notwithstanding, it bears repeating that with the exception of some producers, there is considerable support for the Status of the Artist Act. The Act is widely viewed as a necessary, though not a sufficient, measure to improve artists' socio-economic status. Furthermore, the Act's provision of a legal foundation for collective bargaining relationships that were previously voluntary, without foundation in law, and (at least in theory) vulnerable to prosecution under the Competition Act is seen as invaluable.

Implementation

4.2.1 Part I: General Principles

Part I of the Status of the Artist Act ("General Principles") recognizes the contribution that artists make to Canadian cultural, social, economic, and political life, and establishes a policy on the professional status of the artist that is based on the right of artists and producers to freedom of association and expression; the right of associations representing artists to be recognized in law and to promote the professional and socio-economic interests of their members; and the right of artists to have access to advisory forums in which they may express their views on their status and on any other questions concerning them.

4.2.2 Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist

Part I also establishes the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist (hereinafter CCSA or the Council), whose mandate is:

to provide information and advice to the Minister of Canadian Heritage in order to ensure the highest quality of decision-making in respect of artists in Canada
to defend and promote the professional status of artists in Canada
to maintain close contacts with associations representing artists across Canada in various disciplines of the arts in order better to assess artists' needs and propose useful responses
to propose measures, based on research and studies, to improve the professional working conditions of artists
to carry out such studies as the Minister of Canadian Heritage may direct.

The legislation specified that the Council was to consist of seven to twelve members appointed by the Governor-in-Council on the recommendation of the Minister of Communications.(13) Members of the Council were to sit on a part-time basis.

The federal government announced the creation of a provisional Council in February 1991, following the tabling of the Bill on the Status of the Artist in the House of Commons in December of the previous year. In April 1991, the Minister of Communications appointed twelve full-time professional artists, representing diverse artistic disciplines and regions of the country, as members of the Council.(14) The membership of the temporary Council was to be confirmed by the Governor-in-Council upon enactment of the legislation.

For several years following their (interim) appointment, members of the Council met occasionally and engaged in consultations with the artistic community, preparation of policy briefs, and related activities. However, the official nomination of CCSA members by the Governor-in-Council did not materialize. By the time the legislation was implemented in May 1995, a new government had been elected and was engaged in a fundamental process of reform related to streamlining the number of advisory committees, boards, and Governor-in-Council appointees for which it was responsible. Part of that reform would have seen the Council on the Status of the Artist move from the Governor-in-Council appointments (which require Cabinet approval) to appointments made directly by the Minister of Canadian Heritage. The omnibus legislation dealing with this matter died on the Order Paper, and the federal government simply continued to renew Council members' contracts at the end of March of each year. Eventually, the Council's membership was allowed to lapse; it effectively ceased to function in 1996, approximately one year after the Act was implemented. The matter of appointments has never been resolved.

Given the economic environment, the early and mid-1990s were a difficult time for the establishment and operation of new advisory bodies, including the Council. Establishing the Council as an official entity was perceived as contrary to other federal priorities; more specifically, it was at odds with the federal government's wish to avoid creating new entities and to eliminate overlap and duplication among existing ones. Furthermore, the mandate of the Council was perceived as somewhat similar to that of existing organizations, particularly the Canadian Conference of the Arts and the Canada Council for the Arts. In fact, amalgamating the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist with one of the other two organizations was considered to be an option. Potential advantages of amalgamation included reduced appearance of overlap between the mandates of the Council and the organizations, greater independence for the Council from the Minister, and reallocation of funds.

Key informants who commented on the Council (there were very few) offered several related explanations for its early demise. First, they said that the full-time professional artists who made up the Council's membership had neither the time nor the expertise (despite their best intentions) to deal with what were essentially policy and bureaucratic issues. As a consequence, the Council relied heavily on public servants within Canadian Heritage to prepare its recommendations. There was also concern that Canadian Heritage did not provide the Council with the leadership and direction that it required to function effectively; some key informants were strongly critical of the federal government for allowing the Council to lapse.

Key informants identified three possible courses of action with respect to the Council:

appoint a new Council with a more varied membership (representatives from artists' associations as well as government and policy) and a direct link to the Minister
transfer the mandate and functions of the Council to an existing body; it was noted that the Canadian Conference of the Arts has expressed a willingness to assume the Council's role
revise the Act to eliminate the Council entirely since the federal government already funds several arts organizations that play advisory roles quite similar to the one mandated for the Council.

4.2.3 Part II: Professional Relations

Part II of the Status of the Artist Act establishes a legal framework to govern professional relations between associations of self-employed artists and producers in federal jurisdiction. The Act grants collective bargaining rights to several categories of artists:

authors of artistic, dramatic, literary, or musical works within the meaning of the Copyright Act (such as writers, photographers, and music composers)
directors responsible for the overall direction of audio-visual works
performers (such as actors, musicians, singers, and dancers)
other professionals who contribute to the creation of a production and fall within a professional category prescribed by regulation.

The Professional Category Regulations, which came into force in April 1999, define the additional categories of "other professionals" eligible for coverage under the Act. Under the Regulations, practitioners who contribute directly to the creative aspects of a production by carrying out one or more of the following activities are eligible for coverage:

category 1 -- camera work, lighting, and sound design
category 2 -- costumes, coiffure and make-up design
category 3 -- set design
category 4 -- arranging and orchestrating
category 5 -- research for audio-visual productions, editing and continuity.

With respect to federal producers, the Act applies to broadcasters regulated by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), to federal government departments and ministries of state, and to the majority of federal government agencies and Crown corporations.

4.2.4 Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal

The Status of the Artist Act establishes a labour board, the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal (CAPPRT), to administer the collective bargaining provisions under Part II. Charged with a mandate to "encourage constructive professional relations between artists, as independent entrepreneurs, and producers in the federal jurisdiction," the Tribunal's responsibilities are threefold. It is responsible for:

defining the sectors of cultural activity within federal jurisdiction that are suitable for collective bargaining
certifying artists' associations to represent these sectors
hearing and deciding complaints of unfair practices filed by artists, artists' associations, or producers, and prescribing appropriate remedies.

The Tribunal is composed of a Chairperson, a Vice-chairperson, and from two to four full-time or part-time members, all of whom are appointed by the Governor-in-Council on the recommendation of the Minister of Labour in consultation with the Minister of Canadian Heritage. The Chairperson is appointed for a term not exceeding seven years; the Vice-chairperson and any full-time member for a term not exceeding five years; and any other member for a term not exceeding three years. The Tribunal has a staff that currently numbers eleven. CAPPRT reports to Parliament through the Minister of Labour.

Key informants who commented on CAPPRT's organization and service delivery structure generally agree that these are adequate to meet the Tribunal's legislated responsibilities under the Status of the Artist Act. They reported that the Tribunal has largely accomplished its primary function of certifying artists' associations for the purpose of collective bargaining with federal producers, but has been less active in carrying out other aspects of its mandate, such as hearing matters dealing with failure to bargain in good faith and complaints of unfair labour practices.

Since it began operating in May 1995, CAPPRT has defined 23 sectors as suitable for collective bargaining under the Act and has granted certification to 21 artists' associations (two associations are certified to represent two sectors). The bulk of the Tribunal's certification activity occurred in the first three years of its existence. Since December 31, 1998, only three new certifications have been granted.

Table 3: Certified artists' associations
Association	Date of issue*
Société des auteurs de radio, télévision et cinéma	January 30, 1996
Union des écrivaines et écrivains québecois	February 2, 1996
Canadian Actors' Equity Association	April 25, 1996
Association québecoise des auteurs dramatiques	April 26, 1996
Canadian Association of Photographers and Illustrators in Communications	April 26, 1996
Société professionelle des auteurs et des compositeurs du Québec	May 17, 1996
Periodical Writers' Association of Canada	June 4, 1996
Writers' Guild of Canada	June 25, 1996
Association of Canadian Television and Radio Artists	June 25, 1996
Union des artistes	August 29, 1996
Playwrights Union of Canada	December 13, 1996
American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada	January 16, 1997
American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada	January 16, 1997
Guilde des musiciens du Québec	January 16, 1997
Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels du Québec	April 15, 1997
Conseil des métiers d'art du Québec	June 4, 1997
Association des réalisateurs et réalisatrices du Québec	December 30, 1997
Union des Artistes (re: stage directors)	July 24, 1998
The Writers' Union of Canada	November 17, 1998
Canadian Artists' Representation	December 31, 1998
Editors' Association of Canada	September 27, 2001
Associated Designers of Canada	January 4, 2002
Association des professionnels des arts de la scène du Québec	January 4, 2002
*Note that some certifications have since been amended. Descriptions of the certifications can be found at the CAPPRT web site, under "Certification Register." Available at capprt-tcrpap.ic.gc.ca/decisions/registreaccre/index.html

The Tribunal had received six complaints as of March 31, 2001, of which four were withdrawn or resolved without the need for a hearing. A few key informants believe that the Tribunal will likely hear more complaints in the future as certified associations increasingly pursue negotiations with producers, and will likely also be called upon to review existing certifications and to certify associations to represent emerging sectors. However, a larger number believe that the structure of the Tribunal may be too elaborate for the work it is required to do and suggested that its functions be transferred to an existing labour relations board, such as the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB).

The concept of an administrative merger of CAPPRT with the CIRB is not new. In fact, during the standing committee hearings on the status of the artist bill, there was considerable debate over an appropriate structure to administer Part II of the Act. At issue was whether the Canada Labour Relations Board (CLRB)(15) or a new, entirely separate board should administer these provisions. The decision to create a separate board was made specifically in order to respond to the unique circumstances and characteristics of self-employed workers.(16)

The possibility of merging CAPPRT with other federal labour boards and tribunals was re-examined in a 1998 discussion paper.(17) The paper recommended consolidating the CLRB, the Public Service Staff Relations Board (PSSRB), and CAPPRT into one new board that would have one chairperson but separate divisions, and that would assume responsibilities for duties assigned under the Canada Labour Code Part I, the Public Service Staff Relations Act, and the Status of the Artist Act. Among the anticipated benefits of such a merger, the discussion paper cited more efficient use of expert staff resources; greater coherence and consistency of decisions relating to labour relations; improved client service through a single access point and faster turnaround; and reduced costs in the magnitude of $3 million to $4 million per year. The discussion paper said that some opposition to the proposed merger from the artistic community could be expected but ventured that any concerns could be mitigated by assurances that CAPPRT personnel would be transferred to the new board.

Similarly, key informants who advocated a merger of CAPPRT with the CIRB pointed out that such a change would not be well received by the arts community, which believes that CAPPRT is more informed about and therefore more sensitive to the concerns of artists than existing labour relations boards. A transfer of CAPPRT's functions to the CIRB could be contemplated, key informants emphasized, only if specialized training were provided to CIRB personnel or if CAPPRT personnel were retained.

4.2.5 Administrative provisions and procedures

The administrative provisions and procedures set out in Part II of the legislation are perceived differently by artists' associations, depending on their size and their experience with collective bargaining. In general, the larger, more established associations with a history of collective bargaining regard the provisions and procedures as relatively straightforward -- or at least not any more onerous than those to which they were previously accustomed. The smaller associations and those that are new to collective bargaining see these provisions and procedures as somewhat more onerous.

Application for certification

Most of the certified associations we interviewed, with the exception of those from Québec, said that the application process required a significant commitment of time and/or financial resources and diverted them from their other activities and responsibilities. The different opinion expressed by Québec associations may be due to their past experiences with the certification process under the Québec legislation.

Almost all of the certified associations said that the application process is relatively simple and straightforward. In most but not all cases, artists' associations retained legal counsel; those that did not retain counsel tended to find the application process more difficult. However, these associations reported that the Tribunal was extremely helpful in assisting them through the application process.

Serving notice to bargain

Approximately half of the certified artists' associations we interviewed reported that they have served notice to bargain to federal producers since being certified, and for the most part, these interviewees see the process of serving notice to bargain as relatively straightforward. Associations that have not yet served notice to bargain have not done so for a variety of reasons, including a lack of financial and other resources to undertake negotiation; successful voluntary negotiation of scale agreements with federal producers (i.e., no need to serve notice to bargain); and certifications currently or imminently under review.

Negotiations

Of the certified associations we interviewed, approximately half reported having entered into negotiations with federal producers since certification, and of this group, about half reported having negotiated a new scale agreement (several have renegotiated existing agreements). There is a general consensus among artists' associations that the negotiation process is typically arduous, time-consuming, and costly. In most but not all cases, artists' associations retain legal counsel to negotiate on their behalf.

At present, CAPPRT has no control over whether the parties pursue negotiations after certification or over the results achieved in negotiations. Nonetheless, successful negotiations are among the expected results of the regime it administers; in fact, one of the Tribunal's performance measures is that all certified artists' associations should have negotiated at least one first scale agreement within five years of certification. This target, however, has proven elusive. CAPPRT's Performance Report for 2000-2001 reports that as of March 31, 2001, and of 15 associations that had been certified for five years, seven had negotiated a total of 10 first agreements. Three others had served notice to bargain a first agreement to at least one producer but had not yet negotiated agreements, while five had not yet issued a notice to bargain.(18)

According to key informants, the legislation has two main shortcomings that hamper negotiation:

The legislation contains an obligation for federal producers to negotiate in good faith but no obligation to conclude a first agreement. As a consequence, key informants told us, producers often resort to mediation processes that can take years to conclude, in effect defeating the intent of the legislation. Key informants advocated a provision ensuring the signing of an initial agreement within a stipulated time frame and providing for arbitration if the parties are unable to come to an agreement within that period. Many noted that both the Canada Labour Code and provincial status of the artist legislation in Québec contain such a provision. However, it should be noted that producers were not among those making this recommendation.

The legislation contains no mechanism to encourage federal producers to form associations for the purpose of collective bargaining. The legislation does contain a provision permitting federal producers to form associations, but producers have, for the most part, elected not to do so. As a result, artists' associations must serve notice to and negotiate with each producer separately, which requires significant expenditure of time and money and which can be especially burdensome for the smaller associations. Some federal departments and agencies also believe that the current arrangements are unnecessarily complex and recommended the establishment of a single bargaining authority to represent them in negotiations. Indeed, there is considerable support among artists' associations, government representatives, and these producers for the creation of a single, centralized bargaining authority for all federal government departments.

Revising the Status of the Artist Act to include a provision for first contract negotiation and arbitration and a provision encouraging producers to form associations would, in the opinion of many key informants, facilitate negotiation of scale agreements, thus enabling the legislation to better achieve its objectives.

Other procedures and provisions

A small number of key informants suggested other changes to the administrative provisions of the Act. Several suggested revising section 46 so that the right to apply pressure tactics in first agreement situations is linked to the date of notice to bargain, rather than the date of certification, since the provision as written enables artists' associations, at least in theory, to apply pressure tactics without first sending notice to bargain. In addition, a few key informants recommended revising the legislation so that any question may be put to the Tribunal for a determination or declaration outside a proceeding. As it is currently written, the legislation limits the questions the Tribunal can deal with in this manner (sections 30, 33(5), 41, 47, and 48).

4.2.6 Issues of clarity and interpretation

The majority of those who were asked to comment on the clarity of the Status of the Artist Act either believe that it is clearly written, contains no areas of ambiguity, and has not been subject to inconsistent interpretation, or had no comment on the subject. Two main concerns related to the clarity of the legislation and its interpretation by CAPPRT nonetheless emerged from our evaluation.

The definition of an "artist" for the purpose of the legislation is unclear. Some key informants criticized the Tribunal for what they regard as its over-inclusive definition of an artist. According to this line of argument, the Tribunal has gone too far in categorizing some cultural workers as artists, such that the term now encompasses what they regard as non-artistic aspects of the creative process. However, others believe that the Tribunal has been suitably forward-thinking in its broad interpretation of the term. These key informants believe that artistic production is a collaborative process and that, therefore, the term "artist" legitimately refers to a wide range of cultural workers. In a related vein, some key informants argued that the Professional Category Regulations accompanying the Act do not consider some of the artistic functions that should be addressed by the legislation and should be revised. In particular, representatives from some artists' associations believe that the Tribunal erred in certifying editors as "joint authors" under the legislation. These associations believe that editors should be certified as editors, rather than as joint authors. However, this is not possible under the current Regulations.

The appropriate scope and content of scale agreements is unclear, particularly with respect to copyright. The definition of a scale agreement in section 5 of the Act refers to "an agreement in writing between a producer and an artists' association respecting minimum terms and conditions for the provision of artists' services and other related matters." In recent years, some disagreement has arisen over what is meant by "other related matters," and whether, in particular, the term includes copyright. More broadly, a small number of key informants, as well as some respondents to the producer survey, said that certain Tribunal decisions have resulted in uncertainty over which statute properly governs copyright and the fixing of royalties payable for the use of copyright works. This issue is discussed in greater detail below.

4.2.7 Jurisdictional issues vis-à-vis the Copyright Act

Concern about concurrent or overlapping jurisdiction between the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act arose in the context of several applications for certification that came before the Tribunal, but came to the fore in 1998, when The Writers' Union of Canada (TWUC) and the League of Canadian Poets (LCP) filed jointly for certification to represent "authors of literary works" for collective bargaining purposes. The Departments of Canadian Heritage and Public Works and Government Services Canada, which were granted intervener status in the certification hearings, argued that the proposed sector was defined too broadly. More precisely, it was defined in such a way as to enable the artists' association to bargain in respect of pre-existing works.

The interveners argued that whereas the Status of the Artist Act is essentially labour relations legislation that establishes a framework for collective bargaining with respect to artists' services, the Copyright Act is essentially property legislation. The interveners observed that authorship involves both a service component (the labour to produce a work) and a property component (the final product) and noted that CAPPRT in its decisions to date had not clearly delineated the jurisdictional spheres of the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act. They urged the Tribunal to make a clear pronouncement on the matter by revising the sector definition to exclude pre-existing work.

In its certification decision, the Tribunal declined to make the proposed modification. It agreed that the Status of the Artist Act is essentially labour relations legislation but rejected the implication that this limits the subject matter that can be bargained under its aegis.(19) An application by the Attorney-General of Canada with the Federal Court of Appeal to set aside CAPPRT's certification decision with regard to pre-existing work was subsequently dismissed.(20) In its judgment, the Federal Court noted that "nothing in the certification order indicates the scope of actual bargaining or whether pre-existing works may be included or excluded," and further, that the Tribunal's powers "extend only to the certification of a sector, and not to limiting or expanding matters for subsequent negotiations."(21)

Notwithstanding the Federal Court's position, the issue remains unresolved from the perspective of various interested parties (such as the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada, and certain federal government departments). These parties maintain that the current interpretation puts the Status of the Artist Act in direct conflict with the provisions of the Copyright Act that prescribe that the only remedy for compensation available to a copyright owner is through a collective society that has tariffs approved by the Copyright Board.(22)

Most interviewees, however, do not perceive any conflict, either real or potential, between the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act. In the majority view, the two statutes treat distinctly separate aspects of artistic production.(23) In fact, the Status of the Artist Act is generally regarded as a unique piece of legislation that complements the Copyright Act, the Canada Labour Code, and the Province of Québec's status of the artist legislation.

4.2.8 Role of other bodies

This evaluation found no controversy over the respective mandates and functions of Canadian Heritage and Human Resources Development Canada. With respect to Federal Mediation and Conciliation Services (FMCS), which provides mediation assistance under Ministerial appointment to parties involved in collective bargaining under the Status of the Artist Act, key informants reported that the service is not often used. To date, FMCS has provided mediation assistance in two instances under the Act. It has also carried out preventive mediation functions, including providing several Interest Based Negotiations and problem solving workshops.

Key informants believe that the mandate and functions of FMCS are still appropriate insofar as FMCS has the necessary expertise to provide dispute resolution services. However, some re-emphasized the lack of a provision for arbitration or conciliation in the legislation itself.

Impacts

There is consensus that the Status of the Artist Act has accomplished its primary objective of providing a legal framework for collective bargaining between artists' associations and federal producers. Although such collective bargaining had been occurring for decades prior to implementation of the legislation, it was on a voluntary basis only and had no foundation in law. As a result, the legality of these agreements and bargaining relationships was open to challenge under the Competition Act. The Status of the Artist Act has rectified this situation by creating a legal foundation for collective bargaining that previously did not exist.

On the other hand, with very few exceptions, artists' associations reported that the Act has so far had little effect on the socio-economic circumstances and working conditions of their members. As for the opinions of artists who are members of these associations, many of those we surveyed were unable to answer questions about the impact of the legislation. In fact, although forty-five percent of survey respondents had heard of the Status of the Artist Act before they received the survey, just as many had not. Thus, although almost half (47%) of respondents believe that the legislation has made no difference to their own economic circumstances, one-quarter do not know or did not respond. Similarly, only about one in six (17%) respondents believes that the legislation has improved the economic circumstances of professional artists in Canada in general, but almost half do not know or did not respond. The suspicion, expressed in interviews by some artists' associations, that their membership remains largely unaware of or unknowledgeable about the legislation appears therefore to be confirmed by the survey results.

Artists' associations offered three main explanations for the Act's limited impact on artists' socio-economic circumstances. First, many of the larger, more established associations already had voluntary scale agreements in place with federal producers. For these associations, the primary effect of the Act has been to give legal standing to these voluntary agreements. Second, the smaller and more recently established associations, for the most part, have not yet negotiated any scale agreements under the Act. Third, and perhaps most significantly, many artists' associations reiterated that the Act is limited in its ability to achieve improvements in socio-economic status because the majority of artistic and cultural production falls under provincial jurisdiction.

Producers, for their part, reported that the Act has so far had little, if any, impact on their organizations. Some were involved in collective bargaining with artists' associations on a voluntary basis prior to implementation of the Act; others said that the impact of the Act has been negligible because they do not employ a large number of self-employed artists. Some producers did, however, have concerns about the legislation and its potential implications for their organizations. The opinion was expressed that collective bargaining is inappropriate for contracting organizations and that the applicability of the legislation to certain artistic sectors is questionable (the visual arts were specifically singled out). There was also concern that the legislation does not allow for adequate representation of or consultation with producers and that the Tribunal, in its decisions, does not balance the interests of all stakeholders.

Notes

Pending the release of 2001 Census data, data from the 1996 Census are the most current figures available on artists' earnings.
The Province of Saskatchewan has recently tabled and will debate status of the artist legislation.
CAPPRT. Performance Report. For the period ending March 31, 2001. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada, 2001.
Note that artists' associations are certified to represent artistic sectors, not just their members.
The Minister of Communications has since become the Minister of Canadian Heritage.
Department of Communications. Marcel Masse names members of Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist. News Release, April 9, 1991.
Now the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB).
Lorraine Farkas. "Self-employed Workers and Collective Bargaining." Workplace Gazette 2 (2) (Summer 1999).
Consolidation of Federal Labour Boards: Considerations and Recommendation. Discussion Paper. March 1998.
A complete list of notices to bargain and scale agreements is available on CAPPRT's web site at www.capprt-tcrpap.ic.gc.ca.
Decision of the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal No. 028. In the Matter of an Application for Certification Filed by The Writers' Union of Canada and the League of Canadian Poets. November 17, 1998.
The CAPPRT, l'Union des écrivaines et écrivains québécois, the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada, the Writers' Guild of Canada, and the Playwrights Union of Canada all had intervener status in this matter.
Judgment of the Court. File No. A-750-98. The Attorney-General of Canada (Applicant) and The Writers' Union of Canada and the League of Canadian Poets (Respondents). November 15, 2000.
Memorandum of Fact and Law of the Intervener: Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada (SOCAN). File NO. A-750-98. The Attorney-General of Canada (Applicant) and The Writers' Union of Canada and the League of Canadian Poets (Respondents).
Despite strong opinions on both sides of the issue, the matter is really one for the courts to decide

Conclusions and recommendations

The Status of the Artist Act is unique legislation whose value and ongoing relevance was affirmed by those whose opinions we canvassed in this evaluation. It is valued both for its important statements of principle in Part I and for the legal framework it establishes in Part II to govern collective bargaining between associations of self-employed artists and federal producers. However, the Act's ability to improve the socio-economic circumstances of self-employed artists is limited by its restriction to federal producers, by the fact that it addresses only labour relations, and by the fact that it does not apply to producers sub-contracted by producers within federal jurisdiction.

Just as importantly, it needs to be recognized that the legislation, and collective bargaining in particular, is not equally relevant or easily applicable to all categories of artistic and cultural workers. The legislation applies best to artists who work in companies (such as ballet corps and symphonies), but it is less applicable to those who, by the very nature of their chosen pursuit, work alone (such as novelists and visual artists). Furthermore, many artists do not view themselves as cultural "workers," but rather as entrepreneurs who seek to create an asset that they can copyright or brand. For these reasons, initiatives other than the Status of the Artist Act may benefit a larger number and greater variety of artists. In order to achieve significant change in artists' socio-economic circumstances, the Department of Canadian Heritage may wish to explore other policy and program approaches, including increased grants and commissions for original work. Other suggested measures, such as income averaging, clarification of eligible business cost deductions, and access to employment insurance and other social benefits, would require consultations with and interventions by other departments and agencies.

Nonetheless, several amendments to the Status of the Artist Act would improve its operation and clarify its application. On the operational side, the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist essentially ceased to function soon after the Act was implemented, and its advisory role is already being fulfilled by other organizations. The Department of Canadian Heritage may therefore wish to consider whether organizations with similar purpose could fulfill the role of the Council while respecting the intent of Part I of the legislation. As for CAPPRT, ways of streamlining its administrative and service delivery structure may be worth exploring, given its light workload. Finally, several relatively straightforward procedural amendments would help to clarify the legislation and improve its operations, including successful negotiation of scale agreements.

Recommendations

8. The Department of Canadian Heritage may wish to undertake more research to explore and clarify the relationship between the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act.

Appendix A -- Evaluation framework

Evaluation Framework -- Evaluation of the Provisions and Operations of the Status of the Artist Act
Issues and questions	Information sources	Information gathering strategy
Relevance What conditions and circumstances led the federal government to introduce status of the artist legislation? Do these same conditions and circumstances still prevail today? To what extent are the objectives and general principles of the Act still relevant? Are the legislated mandates and functions of the various bodies involved in administering the Act still relevant? Are these mandates and functions still appropriate, legitimate, and realistic today? What, if any, changes would help the Act to better achieve its objectives? Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal (CAPPRT) Department of Human Resources Development Canada Department of Canadian Heritage Federal Mediation Conciliation Services. Is the legislation adequate to achieve the objectives of the Act? What, if any, changes would help it to better achieve its objectives? Are there alternatives to the Act that would be more effective at achieving	Reports of task forces and commissions Status of the Artist Act; similar legislation (Province of Québec) Parliamentary Debates Canadian Heritage Standing Committee Report, Client Feedback Report on the Performance of CAPPRT, and other related documents Performance and Annual Reports Tribunal web site and resources Key stakeholders including: Professional artists' associations (certified and non-certified) Artists Producers Government managers Arbitrators/mediators Cultural Human Resources Council Canadian Conference of the Arts	Document and literature review Survey of artists Survey of producers Key informant interviews with government managers, artists' associations, key producers, mediators/arbitrators, others
Implementation Is the organization and service delivery structure of the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist adequate to meet its legislated responsibilities under the Act? If not, how could they be improved? Are there other possible focuses for the Council's work? Are the organization and service delivery structure of CAPPRT adequate to meet its legislated responsibilities under the Act? If not, how could they be improved? Are the administrative mechanisms under Part II of the Act adequate? What are the strengths of these mechanisms? What are the shortcomings? Is the legislation clearly written? Are there any ambiguities? Have there been any inconsistencies in interpretation? What changes wouldhelptoclarifythe legislation? What changes in the cultural sector contribute to difficulties with applying the legislation? What changes in the cultural sector require a change to the legislation? Does the legislation adequately permit professional artists, professional artists' associations, and artistic sectors to be recognized? To enter into negotiations with producers? To negotiate scale agreements with producers? Are there any legislative impediments to recognition? To entering into negotiations? To successful negotiation? Are there any other impediments? Are the rights and responsibilities conferred by the Status of the Artist Act manageable for artists' associations? Do these rights and responsibilities create a burden for these associations? Do they interfere with the other activities/responsibilities of these associations? Is there any conflict between the rights granted to a certified artists' association by the Status of the Artist Act and those of a copyright collective formed pursuant to the Copyright Act? Is there any conflict between the respective mechanisms for determining entitlement to, and enforcement of, payment for copyright established pursuant to the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act?	Status of the Artist Act; similar legislation (Province of Québec) Tribunal web site and resources Performance and Annual Reports Marketing/communications strategies Key stakeholders including: Professional artists' associations (certified and non-certified) Artists Producers Government managers Arbitrators/mediators Cultural Human Resources Council Canadian Conference of the Arts CanCopy Intellectual Property Institute of Canada Society of Composers, Authors, and Music Publishers of Canada(SOCAN) Neighbouring Rights Copyright Collective Society for reproduction rights of authors, composers, and publishers in Canada (SODRAC) Writers' Union Union des écrivains et écrivaines québécois (UNEQ)	Document and literature review Survey of artists Survey of producers Key informant interviews with government managers, artists' associations, key producers, mediators/arbitrators, others
Impacts What impacts, both intended and unintended, has the Act had on artists? On professional artists' associations? On federal producers in general? On broadcasters in particular? To what extent has the legislation met its objectives? Has it improved labour relations? Has it improved artists' socio-economic status? To the extent that the Act has been successful in meeting its objectives, what aspects of the legislation have contributed to this success? To the extent that the Act has been unsuccessful in meeting its objectives, what factors account for this failure?	Performance and Annual Reports and related documentation Key stakeholders including: Professional artists' associations (certified and non-certified) Artists Producers Government managers Arbitrators/mediators Cultural Human Resources Council Canadian Conference of the Arts	Survey of artists Survey of producers Key informant interviews
Efficiencies In what manner, and to what extent, does the Act or its legislated components supplement/complement, duplicate/overlap, or work at cross-purposes with other legislation, both federal and provincial? With other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies? Are the mandates and functions of the various bodies involved in administering the Act already being fulfilled by another body (e.g., Canadian Conference of the Arts, Cultural Human Resources Council, departmental staff of Arts Policy Branch at PCH)? Are there efficiencies that could be introduced into the functions of the Council? Are there efficiencies that could be introduced into the functions of the Tribunal? Are resources adequate for the Tribunal, the Council, and PCH to deliver satisfactorily against their mandates and produce the expected results?	Documentation Key stakeholders including: Professional artists' associations (certified and non-certified) Artists Producers Government managers Arbitrators/mediators Cultural Human Resources Council Canadian Conference of the Arts	Survey of artists Survey of producers Key informant interviews

Appendix B -- Document review

Introduction

Purpose of the document review
Methodology

Context for the legislation

Socio-economic context
Policy context

Implementation of the Status of the Artist Act

Part I: General Principles
Part II: Professional Relations

Current issues

Jurisdiction of the legislation
Scope of the legislation
Implications of globalization and technological change
Potential merger of CAPPRT with other labour boards
Jurisdictional issues vis-à-vis the Copyright Act
Artists' associations lack resources and expertise
Other issues

Summary

Annex A -- Bibliography

Introduction

The Status of the Artist Act (hereinafter known as the Act) received Royal Assent in June 1992 and was brought into force in May 1995. The legislation recognizes the importance of artists in Canadian society and establishes a framework to govern professional relations between artists and producers.

Purpose of the document review

Prairie Research Associates (PRA) Inc. was engaged by the Department of Canadian Heritage to undertake an evaluation of the Status of the Artist Act as a first step in the legislative review. This report provides contextual information for the evaluation as a whole and responds directly to some of the evaluation issues and questions. It will form a technical appendix to the final report, and elements of it will be integrated into that report.

The document review:

describes the economic challenges confronting professional artists, as well as the historical and policy context that led to implementation of the legislation
describes the legislation in detail, including key players and their respective roles, as well as Tribunal procedures
provides an overview of activities to date
reviews some of the key issues that have emerged in the seven years since the Act was implemented.

Methodology

PRA Inc. reviewed a wide range of documents in order to prepare this report, including:

the CAPPRT web site and documents
independent research reports and journal articles
status of the artist legislation and regulations (federal and province of Québec)
relevant Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture
relevant House of Commons Debates
reports of several federal commissions and task forces on arts and culture
web sites and publications of a variety of arts and cultural organizations.

A complete bibliography can be found in Annex A. Findings from the document review have been organized according to the issues and questions identified in the evaluation framework.

Context for the legislation

This section describes the socio-economic and policy context in which the federal Status of the Artist Act was conceived, developed, and implemented.

2.1 Socio-economic context

Despite the importance of the arts and cultural sector to the Canadian economy, it is not precisely known how many artists there are in Canada.(1) One study by the Canada Council for the Arts noted several reasons why this is so, including the lack of a widely accepted definition of which occupations qualify; the lack of a single well-defined Statistics Canada occupation category for artists; and the fact that many artists hold multiple jobs and are therefore counted in statistics under a non-artistic occupation.(2)

The same study, which included over 114,000 artists, selected nine occupations from Statistics Canada's 1991 Standard Occupation Classification in order to prepare a profile of artists in the labour force in Canada based on the 1996 Census (i.e., one year after the coming into force of the Status of the Artist Act).(3) Using this categorization scheme, artists make up approximately one-quarter of the cultural labour force and 0.8% of the Canadian labour force as a whole; and "artist" is the fastest growing occupation category in the overall labour force.

It has been argued for some time that professional artists face poorer working and living conditions compared to other workers and that they are not compensated in a manner reflective of their contribution to Canadian cultural and economic life. The Canadian Conference of the Arts, quoting a Statistics Canada publication, has recently noted that Canada's artists are among the highest educated but lowest paid individuals in the country.(4) Indeed, in six of the artist occupations in the above study, average employment income is significantly below the average for the labour force as a whole. Furthermore, although artists' unemployment rate is lower than the labour force average (5.3% compared to 7%), their work is often part-time or seasonal. Moreover, more than half of Canadian artists are self-employed professionals or independent contractors - a rate about four times the level for the labour force as a whole. As a consequence of their self-employed status, many artists do not enjoy the same job security and employment benefits that are available to others who are employed by the public or private sectors.

2.2 Policy context

During the several decades preceding the legislation, intense lobbying by the cultural community, together with a variety of government commissions and task forces, had brought the arts and the economic circumstances of professional artists to the forefront of public policy debate. The report of the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences (better known as the Massey-Lévesque Commission), released in 1951, was instrumental in making the Canadian public aware of the need for public support of the arts. Among its other recommendations, the Commission for the first time acknowledged that artists were unable to live by the sale of their work alone and proposed a minimum subsistence wage as a possible solution.(5) However, it was not until 1978 that the federal government, in the "Disney Report," released the first comprehensive portrait of the economic difficulties facing Canadian artists. The report recommended introducing dual status for artists, which would give them self-employed status for taxation purposes while simultaneously permitting them access to programs such as employment insurance and the Canada Pension Plan.(6)

Although the federal government did not take action following the Disney Report, Canada signed the UNESCO recommendation on the status of the artist (the Belgrade Convention) in 1980, which encouraged all signatory states to undertake measures addressing the professional and social status of artists. Shortly thereafter, Canada established the Federal Cultural Policy Review Committee (the Applebaum-Hébert Committee) to examine not only the status of the artist, but to perform a comprehensive review of all Canadian cultural institutions and cultural policy. When it reported in 1982, the Committee noted that despite decades of pressure from the arts community and despite artists’ overwhelming contribution to Canadian life, [their] living conditions were virtually unchanged; the income of many if not most of these artists classifies them as highly specialized working poor.(7)

changes to income tax legislation to offer more financial security to artists (including tax exemptions and income averaging)
changes to copyright rules to better compensate artists for their work
legislation that would recognize organizations representing self-employed professional artists as collective bargaining agents, as well as the necessary administrative mechanisms required to apply such legislation.(8)

Following the Siren-Gélinas Report, the federal Department of Communications created the Canadian Advisory Committee on the Status of the Artist. The Committee produced a document in 1988 entitled Canadian Artists' Code that addressed the entire range of issues related to the status of the artist that fell within the jurisdiction of the federal government. The Department of Communications also commissioned a study to provide empirical information on the socio-economic conditions of artists and to assess the likely impacts of legislative, policy, or program reforms.(9)

The latter study confirmed that all of the problems noted by previous commissions and task forces did indeed exist, although they had perhaps been overstated. While the study found significant evidence to support the view that artists are disadvantaged in terms of their social status, it also found that their basic economic needs were being met; indeed, the study reported that the gross personal incomes of Canadian professional artists were considerably higher than many had previously claimed. On the other hand, the study observed that many artists' net artistic incomes were about half of gross personal incomes. Furthermore, many artists had to supplement their income from art with secondary employment in order to meet their needs. The study concluded by confirming the need, recommended by the Task Force on the Status of the Artist, for the introduction of income averaging and dual employment status for artists. It also confirmed the need for the extension of unemployment insurance benefits to the artistic community.

In the meantime, the government of Québec in 1987 enacted the Loi sur le Status professional et les conditions d'engagement des artistes de la scène, du disque et du cinéma. This legislation was the first to grant collective bargaining rights to associations of independent professional artists (in this case, those working in the fields of theatre, opera, music, dance, variety entertainment, film-making, and sound recording). In 1988, the province enacted similar legislation pertaining to artists who create works in the fields of visual arts, arts and crafts, and literature.

In November 1989, the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture established a Sub-Committee on the Status of the Artist and gave it a mandate to review previous reports on issues related to the status of the artist. When the Sub-Committee reported in February 1990, it gave a series of eleven recommendations, which are summarized on the next page. Among its recommendations, the Sub-Committee reconfirmed a need for status of the artist legislation that would recognize the professional status of artists and that would give certified associations representing self-employed artists working in areas of federal jurisdiction the right to collective bargaining. The Sub-Committee also recommended that the proposed legislation address a variety of other issues, including a presumption of self-employed status for artists for tax purposes; access to unemployment insurance; compensation for the free use of artistic works in libraries; bankruptcy protection; and the right to set aside part of artistic income in an "Artist Account" on which tax liability would be deferred.

Summary of recommendations of the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture Respecting the Status of the Artist (February 1990)

The federal government should:

improve the socio-economic condition of Canadian artists by adapting legislation and programs to their unique conditions of work
initiate and promote policies and programs to develop arts awareness in Canada
establish status of the artist legislation to recognize the professional status of the artist and to give professional associations representing self-employed artists working in federal jurisdiction the right to collective bargaining
include in the proposed legislation a presumption of self-employed status for income tax purposes for artists represented by certified associations
include in the proposed legislation the right to be an employee for unemployment insurance purposes on that part of income generated from salaried employment, for artists represented by certified associations, and amend the Unemployment Insurance Act accordingly
examine the demand for and viability of establishing private group benefit plans for creative artists
include in the proposed legislation a provision recognizing the principle that Canadian authors, translators, and illustrators should receive fair compensation by the government for the free use of their works in Canadian libraries
provide financial incentives through the tax system for visual artists to make charitable donations of their works
include in the proposed legislation a provision for bankruptcy protection for self-employed artists
include in the proposed legislation a provision giving self-employed artists the right to set aside a part of their artistic income in an "Artist Account" on which tax liability would be deferred, and amend the Income Tax Act accordingly
give the highest priority to the drafting and tabling of legislation on the status of the artist and to other associated measures.

Source: Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture, including the Second Report to the House: Status of the Artist. Issue No. 5 (February 22, 1990).

The federal government responded to the Standing Committee Report in May 1990.(10) It committed to introducing legislation on the status of the artist that would officially recognize the specific working conditions of artists and give them the right to form associations and negotiate minimum employment conditions. It also committed to addressing some of the Standing Committee's other recommendations through a series of administrative measures and changes to existing legislation, rather than through the proposed new status of the artist legislation. Among the issues the government proposed to address outside of the new legislation were bankruptcy protection; tax deductions for expenses incurred through artistic work; and tax treatment of charitable donations of works by visual artists.

The status of the artist legislation that was tabled in the House of Commons in December 1990 was therefore not as wide-ranging as the Standing Committee had recommended. It had two main parts. Part I consisted of a statement of general principles concerning the status of the artist and mandating the existence of the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist, while Part II established a legal framework to govern professional relations between associations of self-employed artists and federal producers. The Status of the Artist Act received Royal Assent in June 1992. Part I was proclaimed in May 1993, and Part II was brought into force in May 1995.

3.0 Implementation of the Status of the Artist Act

3.1 Part I: General Principles

Part I of the Status of the Artist Act ("General Principles") recognizes the contribution that artists make to Canadian cultural, social, economic, and political life and establishes a policy on the professional status of the artist that is based on the right of artists and producers to freedom of association and expression; the right of associations representing artists to be recognized in law and to promote the professional and socio-economic interests of their members; and the right of artists to have access to advisory forums in which they may express their views on their status and on any other questions concerning them.

Part I also establishes the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist (hereinafter CCSA or the Council), whose mandate is:

to provide information and advice to the Minister of Canadian Heritage in order to ensure the highest quality of decision-making in respect of artists in Canada
to defend and promote the professional status of artists in Canada
to maintain close contacts with associations representing artists across Canada in various disciplines of the arts in order better to assess artists' needs and propose useful responses
to propose measures, based on research and studies, to improve the professional working conditions of artists
to carry out such studies as the Minister of Canadian Heritage may direct.

The legislation specified that the Council was to consist of seven to twelve members appointed by the Governor-in-Council on the recommendation of the Minister of Communications. Members of the Council were to sit on a part-time basis.

The federal government announced the creation of a provisional Council in February 1991, following the tabling of the Bill on the Status of the Artist in the House of Commons in December of the previous year. In April 1991, the Minister of Communications appointed twelve full-time professional artists, representing diverse artistic disciplines and regions of the country, as members of the Council.(11) The membership of the temporary Council was to be confirmed by the Governor-in-Council upon enactment of the legislation.

For several years following their (interim) appointment, members of the Council met occasionally and engaged in consultations with the artistic community, preparation of policy briefs, and related activities. However, the official nomination of CCSA members by the Governor-in-Council did not materialize. Instead, the federal government simply renewed Council members' contracts at the end of March of each year. By the time the legislation was implemented in May 1995, a new government had been elected and was engaged in a fundamental process of reform related to streamlining the number of advisory committees, boards, and Governor-in-Council appointees for which it was responsible. Part of that reform would have seen the Council on the Status of the Artist move from the Governor-in-Council appointments (which require Cabinet approval) to appointments made directly by the Minister of Canadian Heritage. The omnibus legislation dealing with this matter died on the Order Paper, and the federal government simply continued to renew Council members' contracts at the end of March of each year. Eventually, the Council's membership was allowed to lapse; it effectively ceased to function approximately one year after the Act was implemented. The matter of appointments has never been resolved.

Given the economic environment, the early and mid-1990s were a difficult time for the establishment and operation of new advisory bodies, including the Council. Establishing the Council as an official entity was perceived as contrary to other federal priorities; more specifically, it was at odds with the federal government's wish to avoid creating new entities and to eliminate overlap and duplication among existing ones. Furthermore, the mandate of the Council was perceived as similar to that of existing organizations, particularly the Canadian Conference of the Arts (CCA) and the Canada Council for the Arts. In fact, amalgamating the CCSA with one of the other two organizations was considered to be an option. Potential advantages of amalgamation included reduced appearance of overlap between the mandates of the Council and the organizations, greater independence for the Council from the Minister, and reallocation of funds.

3.2 Part II: Professional Relations

authors of artistic, dramatic, literary, or musical works within the meaning of the Copyright Act (such as writers, photographers, and music composers)
directors responsible for the overall direction of audio-visual works
performers (such as actors, musicians, singers, and dancers)
other professionals who contribute to the creation of a production and fall within a professional category prescribed by regulation.

category 1 - camera work, lighting, and sound design
category 2 - costumes, coiffure, and make-up design
category 3 - set design
category 4 - arranging and orchestrating
category 5 - research for audio-visual productions, editing and continuity.

With respect to federal producers, the Act applies to broadcasters regulated by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC); to federal government departments and ministries of state (n=19); and to the majority of federal government agencies and Crown corporations (n=148).

3.2.1 Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal

The Status of the Artist Act establishes a labour board, the CAPPRT, to administer the collective bargaining provisions under Part II. Charged with a mandate to "encourage constructive professional relations between artists, as independent entrepreneurs, and producers in the federal jurisdiction," the Tribunal's responsibilities are threefold. It is responsible for:

defining the sectors of cultural activity within federal jurisdiction that are suitable for collective bargaining
certifying artists' associations to represent these sectors
hearing and deciding complaints of unfair practices filed by artists, artists' associations, or producers and prescribing appropriate remedies.

The Tribunal is composed of a Chairperson, a Vice-chairperson, and from two to four full-time or part-time members, all of whom are appointed by the Governor-in-Council on the recommendation of the Minister of Labour in consultation with the Minister of Canadian Heritage. The Chairperson is appointed for a term not exceeding seven years; the Vice-chairperson and any full-time member for a term not exceeding five years; and any other member for a term not exceeding three years. The Tribunal has a staff that currently numbers eleven and reports to Parliament through the Minister of Labour.

3.2.2 Administrative provisions and procedures

The administrative provisions and procedures of Part II of the Act are described in the legislation itself, and hard copy and electronic versions are available for the layperson.(12) Below, we provide an overview of the main provisions and procedures.

Certification of artists' associations (s. 23, 25-28)

The term "certification" is used to mean the recognition granted to an artists' association by the CAPPRT. Certification gives an artists' association the exclusive right to represent self-employed artists in a specific sector with respect to collective bargaining and their relations with producers. In order to be eligible to apply for certification, an artists' association must adopt by-laws that establish membership requirements for artists; give its regular members the right to take part and vote in the meetings of the association and to participate in a ratification vote on any scale agreement that affects them; and provide its members with the right of access to a copy of the association's financial statement to the end of the previous fiscal year.

In considering the merits of an application for certification, the Tribunal must determine the scope of the sector that is suitable for collective bargaining, and then it must decide whether the applicant is the organization "most representative" of artists in the sector.(13) The Tribunal considers the following factors when determining the suitability of a sector for bargaining:

whether the independent artists in the proposed sector have common interests
whether there is a history of professional relations among those artists and the producers to whom they provide services
whether any scale agreements regarding terms of engagement already exist
any relevant geographic and linguistic criteria.

Once it has identified the sector that is suitable for collective bargaining, the Tribunal then decides whether the applicant is "most representative" of the artists working in that sector. In making this determination, the Tribunal is unlike the Canada Industrial Relations Board, which must satisfy itself that a majority of the employees in a bargaining unit wish to have the applicant trade union represent them. The Tribunal, on the other hand, has complete discretion as to how it assesses representativeness.(14)

Generally, however, it considers the size of the sector, the size of the applicant's membership, and whether there are any competing applicants for certification. To be granted certification, the artists' association need not represent a majority of artists working in that sector. The Tribunal may also conduct a representation vote but to date has only done so on one occasion.(15) Under the legislation, artists and artists' organizations affected by the application have the right to be heard by the Tribunal on the issue of representativeness, but producers do not.

Section 29 of the legislation sets out the circumstances in which an artist in a sector may apply to the Tribunal for an order revoking an association's certification in respect of that sector.

Associations of producers (s. 24)

The legislation entitles producers to form associations for the purpose of bargaining and entering into scale agreements with artists' associations and outlines a relatively informal process for doing so. In order to obtain the exclusive right to bargain on behalf of its members, an association of producers must simply file a copy of its membership list with the Tribunal, keep it up to date, and send a copy of the list to every certified artists' association from whom it has received a notice to bargain or with whom it has entered into a scale agreement.

Notice to bargain (s. 31)

Once certified, artists' associations are entitled to issue a notice requiring federal producers who engage artists in the sector to bargain. Producers are also entitled to issue a notice requiring an artists' association certified in respect of a sector to begin bargaining. The objective of these negotiations is to reach a scale agreement, which the Act defines as:

an agreement in writing between a producer and an artists' association respecting minimum terms and conditions for the provision of artists' services and other related matters.(16)

Any party that issues a notice to the other party to begin bargaining is required to send a copy of the notice to the Minister of Labour.

Duty to bargain (s. 32)

The legislation imposes on the parties a duty to bargain where a notice to bargain has been issued, stipulating that the parties:

...shall without delay, but in any case within twenty days after the notice was issued, unless they otherwise agree, (i) meet, or send authorized representatives to meet, and begin to bargain in good faith, and (ii) make every reasonable effort to enter into a scale agreement.

The federal Act expects the parties to negotiate in good faith; however, unlike Québec's status of the artist legislation, it does not impose on them any obligation to conclude a first agreement. Nor does it contain any provision for arbitration if the parties fail to come to an agreement within a specified time frame.

Section 32 also stipulates that a producer shall not alter, without the consent of the artists' association, any term or condition of engagement contained in a scale agreement, until such time as pressure tactics are permitted.

Duty of fair representation (s. 35)

Section 35 of the legislation outlines a duty of fair representation for artists' associations. An artists' association that is certified in respect of a sector, or a representative thereof,

...shall not act in a manner that is arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith in the representation of any of the artists in the sector in relation to their rights under the scale agreement that is applicable to them.

Content and interpretation of scale agreements (s. 36-43)

The legislation requires every scale agreement to contain a provision for final settlement without pressure tactics, by arbitration or otherwise, of all differences between the parties or among artists bound by the agreement, regarding its interpretation, application, administration, or alleged contravention. In the event that a scale agreement does not contain the required provision for final settlement, the difference is to be submitted to an arbitrator selected by the parties or appointed by the Minister for final settlement.

Pressure tactics (s. 46-48)

Pressure tactics are defined by the legislation to include:

a cessation of work or a refusal to work or to continue to work by artists or artists' associations...and a slowdown of work or other concerted activity....done to compel a producer to agree to terms or conditions of engagement, or

the closing of a place of work, a suspension of production or a refusal to continue the engagement of one or more artists by a producer, done to compel artists....to agree to terms or conditions of engagement.

The legislation authorizes pressure tactics in two circumstances: either beginning thirty days after a binding scale agreement expires and ending on the day that a new scale agreement is entered into; or beginning six months after the date of certification of an artists' association and ending on the day that a scale agreement is entered into, where there is no scale agreement binding the producer and the association in respect of that sector.

The Tribunal may declare pressure tactics on the part of either artists' associations or producers to be unlawful, following an application from the party making the allegation, and may order the party engaged in pressure tactics to cease and to resume work or permit the resumption of work, as applicable.

Complaints (s. 53-54)

The procedure for making a complaint to the Tribunal is described in sections 53 and 54 of the legislation. Complaints may be made by any person or organization within six months of the date that the complainant first knew or ought to have known of the action or circumstance that gave rise to the complaint.

The following provisions of the legislation may form the basis of a complaint:

the duty to bargain in good faith and make every reasonable effort to enter into a scale agreement and the duty not to change the terms and conditions of a scale agreement (s. 32)
the duty of fair representation (s. 35)
any of the obligations and prohibitions described in sections 50, 51, and 52 (unfair practices).

Upon receiving a complaint, the Tribunal may appoint one of its members or an officer of its staff to meet with the complainant and the respondent in order to resolve the complaint. If it does not attempt to resolve the complaint in this way or if the resolution efforts are unsuccessful, the Tribunal will proceed to consider the complaint, render a decision, and if appropriate, prescribe a remedy.

3.2.3 Tribunal activity to date

Since it began operating in May 1995, the CAPPRT has defined 23 sectors as suitable for collective bargaining under the Act and granted certification to 21 artists' associations (two of the associations are certified to represent two sectors).(17) Table 1 provides a list of the certified associations and the date of certification. The bulk of the Tribunal's certification activity occurred in the first three years of its existence. Since December 31, 1998, only three new certifications have been granted.

The Tribunal has no control over whether the parties pursue negotiations after certification or over the results achieved in any negotiations, but successful negotiations are among the expected results of the regime it administers. One of the Tribunal's performance measures is that all certified artists' associations should have negotiated at least one first scale agreement within five years of certification. This target, however, has proven elusive. The CAPPRT's Performance Report for 2000-2001 reports that as of March 31, 2001, 15 artists' associations had been certified for five years. Of these, seven had negotiated a total of 10 first agreements. Three others had served notice to bargain a first agreement to at least one producer but had not yet negotiated agreements. Five other associations had not yet issued a notice to bargain.(18)

In addition to defining the sectors of cultural activity within federal jurisdiction that are

suitable for collective bargaining and certifying artists' associations to represent these sectors, the Tribunal also hears and decides complaints of unfair practices filed by artists, artists' associations, or producers and prescribes appropriate remedies. As of

March 31, 2001, the Tribunal had received six complaints, of which four were withdrawn or resolved without the need for a hearing.

Table 1: Certified artists' associations
Association	Date of issue*
Société des auteurs de radio, télévision et cinéma	January 30, 1996
Union des écrivaines et écrivains québecois	February 2, 1996
Canadian Actors' Equity Association	April 25, 1996
Association québecoise des auteurs dramatiques	April 26, 1996
Canadian Association of Photographers and Illustrators in Communications	April 26, 1996
Société professionelle des auteurs et des compositeurs du Québec	May 17, 1996
Periodical Writers' Association of Canada	June 4, 1996
Writers' Guild of Canada	June 25, 1996
Association of Canadian Television and Radio Artists	June 25, 1996
Union des artistes	August 29, 1996
Playwrights Union of Canada	December 13, 1996
American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada	January 16, 1997
American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada	January 16, 1997
Guilde des musiciens du Québec	January 16, 1997
Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels du Québec	April 15, 1997
Conseil des métiers d'art du Québec	June 4, 1997
Association des réalisateurs et réalisatrices du Québec	December 30, 1997
Union des Artistes (re: stage directors)	July 24, 1998
The Writers' Union of Canada	November 17, 1998
Canadian Artists' Representation	December 31, 1998
Editors' Association of Canada	September 27, 2001
Associated Designers of Canada	January 4, 2002
Association des professionnels des arts de la scène du Québec	January 4, 2002
*Note that some certifications have since been amended. Descriptions of the certifications can be found at the CAPPRT web site, under "Certification Register." Available at capprt-tcrpap.ic.gc.ca/decisions/registreaccre/index.html

In recent years, the possibility of amalgamating the CAPPRT with existing labour board(s) has been explored in policy discussion papers and elsewhere; we discuss this possibility in section 4.0 below.

Current issues

Several issues have emerged in the seven years since the Status of the Artist Act was implemented, and they are reviewed in the sections that follow. Note that we have discussed the issues surrounding the CCSA earlier in this report and do not repeat that discussion here.

4.1 Jurisdiction of the legislation

One of the main issues that has arisen with respect to the federal legislation is its limited jurisdiction. The Tribunal itself, in its latest performance report, has noted that compared to the total amount of work in the cultural sector in Canada, the amount of work offered to self-employed artists by producers within its jurisdiction is modest.(19) The vast majority of work in the cultural sector falls under provincial jurisdiction, but only the province of Québec currently has similar legislation in place. Therefore, self-employed artists working in the cultural sector do so, for the most part, without the collective bargaining rights that are available to them under the federal Act.

The federal government, in its response to recommendations made by the Ninth Report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage in 1999, declared its support for complementary or similar legislation to Part II of the federal Status of the Artist Act enacted at the provincial and territorial level.(20) It also announced that it would encourage presentations on the subject at Federal-Provincial-Territorial Meetings of Ministers of Culture and Heritage, in order to encourage the provinces and territories to examine the adoption of similar legislation. The CCA, in a 1999 report, echoed the theme, recommending that governments in provinces without status of the artist legislation move to develop and implement such legislation.(21)

In this context, it should be noted that the province of Saskatchewan recently tabled and will debate status of the artist legislation. Furthermore, a coalition of Ontario artists' associations was formed in 1999 and has framed a Statement of Principles for future legislation that would govern bargaining for the cultural sector.(22) This Statement of Principles has been discussed with the Ontario Ministry of Culture, and there appeared to be support in principle.

4.2 Scope of the legislation

Some observers have criticized the federal Status of the Artist Act for its limited scope. These critics argue that whereas measures dealing with tax regime, copyright, access to employment insurance and to the Canada Pension Plan, and access to training programs are required if there is to be any real improvement in the economic circumstances of self-employed artists, the Act itself is limited to collective bargaining.

This limitation exists in spite of the federal government's promise, in its response to the December 1989 Second Report to the House on the Status of the Artist by the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture, to introduce a variety of measures to improve the economic circumstances of artists, as per the report's recommendations. As described earlier in this report, the promised measures included taxation provisions, protection for artists from the bankruptcy of producers, compensation for public use of art works, and access to social benefit programs. The legislation that was eventually enacted did not address these issues, but rather was restricted to a statement of general principles and the establishment of a legal framework for collective bargaining.

The CCA has been a vocal proponent of some of the measures enumerated above. For example, in its recent pre-budget submission to the Standing Committee on Finance,(23) the CCA advocated a number of changes to the tax regime with respect to self-employed artists, including:

Income averaging - Self-employed artists tend to receive income sporadically and in variable amounts. As a result, they are subject to high marginal tax rates in years when they receive a large income. According to the CCA, self-employed artists would be treated more fairly and equitably under a tax regime in which they are allowed to average their income over several years.(24) It should be noted that Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, France, Luxembourg, the United Kingdom, and Greece already practise income averaging for self-employed artists.
Tax exemption on copyright income - The CCA advocates the introduction of a tax exemption on copyright income. Such an exemption was the subject of a private member's motion in 2000 and received considerable support in principle. The province of Québec introduced such an exemption into its Income Tax Act in 1995. The Québec legislation entitles artists to an annual exemption on copyright income of up to $30,000. The CCA also notes that the Irish government has introduced a tax exemption that applies to all income earned through the sale of "original and creative works generally recognised as having cultural or artistic merit." Unlike the Québec model, the Irish exemption has no upper limit.

As described earlier in this report, a variety of other measures, particularly access to employment insurance and other social benefit programs and protection for artists from the bankruptcy of producers, have likewise been advanced by task forces and in commission reports and elsewhere as means of improving artists' socio-economic circumstances.

4.3 Implications of globalization and technological change

In its latest performance report, the CAPPRT noted that convergence of broadcasting and telecommunications technologies has led to horizontal and vertical integration in the media production, programming, and distribution industries. The Tribunal notes that in this environment of organizational upheaval, negotiating scale agreements can be challenging to all parties involved. Moreover, in such a context, it is increasingly difficult to determine whether labour matters fall within federal or provincial jurisdiction.

In the same report, the Tribunal also notes that the emergence of the Internet has brought another important jurisdictional issue to the fore. The CRTC has determined that some Internet transmissions constitute broadcasting and therefore could be subject to the federal Status of the Artist Act. So far, however, it has exempted these transmissions from the need for a federal licence. Finally, the emergence of the Internet and other communications technologies is creating new art and cultural forms and, possibly, new categories of artists. There is some concern over whether these categories will be recognized as legitimate by the CAPPRT.(25)

4.4 Potential merger of CAPPRT with other labour boards

During the hearings of the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture on the status of the artist bill, there was considerable debate over an appropriate structure to administer Part II of the Act. At issue was whether the Canada Labour Relations Board (CLRB) or a new, entirely separate board should administer these provisions. The decision to create a separate board was made in order to respond to the unique circumstances of self-employed workers.(26) First, self-employed workers working for several engagers were perceived as having different characteristics than employees working for one employer. Second, labour relations in the artistic community were perceived as less adversarial, due in part to the fact that the producers and artists are both involved in the creative process and, on occasion, can take on the other's role.

The possibility of merging CAPPRT with certain other federal labour boards and tribunals was examined in a 1998 discussion paper that outlined the merits of consolidating three administrative tribunals dealing with labour relations, namely the CLRB (now the Canada Industrial Relations Board or CIRB), the Public Service Staff Relations Board (PSSRB), and the CAPPRT, into one new board.(27) The paper recommended the creation of a new board that would have one chairperson but separate divisions, and that would assume responsibilities for duties assigned under the Canada Labour Code Part I, the Public Service Staff Relations Act, and the Status of the Artist Act.

The discussion paper described several benefits that would result from an administrative merger of this kind, including:

greater coherence and consistency of decisions relating to labour relations and workplace disputes, as a result of internal cross-assignment of board members with diverse areas of expertise and experience
more efficient use of expert staff resources
greater visibility of the merged tribunal, resulting in improved service to clients through a single access point and faster turnaround
reduced costs in the magnitude of $3 million to $4 million per year.

The discussion paper went on to note that although the CAPPRT is closely modelled after the CLRB, it applies to a very specific group. It suggested that maintaining the CAPPRT as a separate, narrowly-focused tribunal may not be supportable given its small workload, which it predicted would decline in the future as the demand for certification requests subsides. The discussion paper anticipated some opposition to the proposed merger from the artistic community but ventured that any concerns could be mitigated by assurances that CAPPRT personnel would be transferred to the new board.

4.5 Jurisdictional issues vis-à-vis the Copyright Act

In recent years, concern has arisen about the possibility of concurrent or overlapping jurisdiction between the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act. In particular, disagreement has arisen over the appropriate scope and content of scale agreements that may be negotiated pursuant to the Act and whether copyright is among the issues that may be included in a scale agreement. The definition of a scale agreement in section 5 of the Act refers to:

an agreement in writing between a producer and an artists' association respecting minimum terms and conditions for the provision of artists' services and other related matters.

At issue, therefore, is whether the term "other related matters" includes copyright.

This issue arose in the context of several applications for certification that came before the Tribunal but came to the fore in 1998, when The Writers' Union of Canada (TWUC) and the League of Canadian Poets (LCP) filed jointly for certification to represent "authors of literary works" for collective bargaining purposes. The Departments of Canadian Heritage and Public Works and Government Services Canada, which were granted intervener status in the certification hearings, argued that the proposed sector was defined too broadly; more precisely, it was defined in such as way as to enable the artists' association to bargain in respect of pre-existing works. The interveners took the position that the sector, on the contrary,

must be defined in a manner which will not empower an artists' association to represent authors for the purpose of assigning and granting rights or licenses under the Copyright Act with respect to literary works already in existence and in respect of which assignments or licenses will subsequently be negotiated with producers.(28)

The interveners argued that whereas the Status of the Artist Act is essentially labour relations legislation that establishes a framework for collective bargaining over the minimal working conditions and remuneration of artists for their services, the Copyright Act is essentially property legislation. The interveners observed that authorship necessarily involves both a service component (the labour to produce a work) and a property component (the final product) and noted that the CAPPRT in its decisions to date had not clearly delineated the jurisdictional spheres of the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act. They urged the Tribunal to eliminate this uncertainty by making a clear pronouncement on the matter in the context of the TWUC/LCP application, by revising the sector definition to add the words "but not in respect of any work created before and independently of a contract for services entered into between the author and a producer."

In its certification decision, the Tribunal declined to make the modifications proposed by Canadian Heritage and Public Works and Government Services Canada. While it agreed that the Status of the Artist Act is essentially labour relations legislation, it rejected the implication that this limits the subject matter that can be bargained under its aegis.(29) From the Tribunal's point of view, if the members of an artists' association decide that it is appropriate for their association to seek to include matters related to their copyright in pre-existing works in a scale agreement, the choice is legitimately theirs because

[t]his collective bargaining activity does not make the artists' association the agent of the artist for the purpose of granting licenses or assignments of copyright for those works, but merely seeks to establish the minimum terms and conditions that would apply when an artist decides to license or assign a particular copyright to a producer who is a party to the scale agreement.

This interpretation of the Status of the Artist Act as complementary and supplementary to the Copyright Act, the Tribunal explained further, is consistent with the former statute's overall purpose of improving the socio-economic status of artists.

The Attorney-General of Canada subsequently filed an application with the Federal Court of Appeal to set aside the CAPPRT's certification decision, with regard to pre-existing work.(30) The applicant did not object to the recognition of TWUC as the appropriate representative of the designated authors, nor to the membership of the group that made up the defined sector. Rather, as the Federal Court observed in its judgment, the applicant's challenge to the Tribunal's decision was

based on the allegation that the Tribunal acted beyond its jurisdiction by declaring a sector suitable for bargaining in a manner which empowers the Association to bargain in respect of pre-existing works.(31)

The Federal Court dismissed the application, noting in its judgment that "nothing in the certification order indicates the scope of actual bargaining or whether pre-existing works may be included or excluded," and further, that the Tribunal's powers "extend only to the certification of a sector, and not to limiting or expanding matters for subsequent negotiations."

Notwithstanding the Federal Court's position, the issue remains unresolved from the perspective of various concerned parties (such as the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada and certain federal government departments). These parties maintain that the current interpretation puts the Status of the Artist Act in direct conflict with the provisions of the Copyright Act that prescribe that the only remedy for compensation available to a copyright owner is through a collective society that has tariffs approved by the Copyright Board.(32)

4.6 Artists' associations lack resources and expertise

In its last performance report, the CAPPRT noted that many artists' associations are small, lack financial resources, and have little or no experience in labour relations.(33)

This has implications for the certification process and for subsequent negotiations - both of which can be expensive, time consuming, and intimidating. It can be especially difficult for associations that are new to collective bargaining to successfully negotiate a first agreement. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that producers have, for the most part, failed to form associations for the purposes of collective bargaining under the legislation. Indeed, very few producers' associations exist, and their absence has made it difficult and expensive for certified artists' associations to negotiate agreements since they must negotiate with each producer individually.(34)

Because they lack sufficient time and resources, artists' associations have expressed the desire to negotiate with associations of producers rather than with individual producers. Similarly, some government producers would prefer to designate one department to negotiate with artists' associations on their behalf.

4.7 Other issues

Several other issuesemerged in the Client Feedback Report on the Performance of the CAPPRT, including:(35)

Arbitration mechanism. The lack of an arbitration mechanism in the case of first-time agreements could adversely affect the collective bargaining process.
Conciliation process. The absence of a conciliation process could lead to a walkout or a lockout, and could ultimately impede the successful conclusion of bargaining.
Definitions. There is a need for a definition of "producer" in the context of the practice of sub-contracting by producers in federal jurisdiction.
Bias. Some producers see the Act as biased in favor of artists' associations.
Lack of knowledge. There is a lack of knowledge of the adjudication process, of the CAPPRT's role, and of the services available among both artists' associations and producers.

5.0 Summary

Several broad issues have arisen with respect to the federal Status of the Artist Act in the seven years since it came into force. First, there is concern that the collective bargaining rights available to self-employed artists under the federal legislation do not apply to the large majority of work performed by artists in the cultural sector in Canada, which falls under provincial jurisdiction. Second, some observers have criticized the legislation for its limited scope, arguing that measures dealing with tax regime, copyright, access to employment insurance and to the Canada Pension Plan, and access to training programs are required if real improvements in the economic circumstances of self-employed artists are to be realized. Third, there are concerns that globalization and technological change may have implications for the collective bargaining regime set out in the legislation.

Issues have also arisen with respect to the mandates and structure of the two organizations established by the legislation. The CCSA has effectively ceased to function, and its amalgamation with another organization of similar purpose has emerged as a possible course of action. There are concerns, too, that the CAPPRT may have an insufficient workload to warrant its continuing existence as a separate labour board, and proposals for its merger with other existing labour boards have likewise surfaced in recent years.

In terms of the relationship of the Status of the Artist Act to other existing statutes, some interested parties maintain that the current interpretation of the Act puts it in direct conflict with the Copyright Act. From the perspective of these parties, the Tribunal has not clearly delineated the separate jurisdictional spheres of the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act.

A variety of other issues have also arisen. These include the difficulties with both the certification process and with subsequent negotiations faced by artists' associations because of a lack of resources and expertise in labour relations. Other issues include the lack of an arbitration mechanism in the case of first-time agreements, the lack of a conciliation process, the perceived need for a definition of a producer with respect to a third party, and a lack of knowledge of the adjudication process, of the CAPPRT's role, and of the services available.

Annex A -- Bibliography

Government publications and documents

Canadian Advisory Committee on the Status of the Artist. A Proposed Act on the Professional Status of the Artist: Canadian Artists' Code. Ottawa, 1988.
Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal. Annual Reports (1998-1999, 1999-2000, and 2000-2001). Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services.
Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal. Performance Reports (for the periods ending March 31, 2000 and March 31, 2001). Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services.
Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal. Report on Plans and Priorities: 2000-2001 Estimates.
Canadian Conference of the Arts. A Portrait of Canadian Arts Service Organizations in 1999. Ottawa: Canadian Conference of the Arts, 1999.
Canadian Conference of the Arts. Seeking Out the Creators - Equitable Taxation Treatment for Canada's Artists and Creators. Canadian Conference of the Arts Pre-Budget Submission to the Standing Committee on Finance. August 2000.
Canadian Conference of the Arts. On the Edge of a Revolution. Canadian Conference of the Arts Pre-Budget Submission to the Standing Committee on Finance. September 2001.
Canada Council for the Arts. Artists in the Labour Force. Arts Sector Profile #2, Summary. July 1999.
Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist. Brief Report from the Chairperson. Spring 1995.
Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist. Minutes of the Meeting of the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist, held December 11-12, 1992.
Department of Canadian Heritage. Facts and Figures: Cultural Development: Canada's Cultural Exports. Available at www.pch.gc.ca/culture/fact-info/english.htm.
Department of Communication. Federal Tax Issues of Concern to the Arts in Canada (Disney Report). Ottawa: Department of Communication, 1978.
Department of Communications. Marcel Masse names members of Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist. News Release, April 9, 1991.
Government of Canada. Connecting to the Canadian Experience: Diversity, Creativity and Choice. Government response to the Ninth Report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.
Government of Canada. Government Response to the Report of the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture Respecting the Status of the Artist. May 1990.
Government of Canada. House of Commons Debates. Volume 132, Numbers 45 and 156 (October 9, 1991 and June 11, 1992), Third Session, 34th Parliament. Official Report (Hansard).
Government of Canada. Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture. Issues No. 2, 5, and 16. Second Session, 34th Parliament.
Government of Canada. Status of the Artist Act 1992 c. 33. Received Royal Assent June 23, 1992.
Federal Cultural Policy Review Committee (Applebaum-Hébert). Report of the Federal Cultural Policy Review Committee. Department of Communications, 1982.
Federal Cultural Policy Review Committee (Applebaum-Hébert). Speaking of our Culture: Discussion Guide. Ottawa: Federal Cultural Policy Review Committee, 1980.
Federal Cultural Policy Review Committee (Applebaum-Hébert). Summary of Briefs and Hearings. Department of Communications, 1982.
Royal Commission on the National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences. Report of the Royal Commission on the National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences (Massey-Lévesque), 1951.
Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. A Sense of Place - A Sense of Being: The Evolving Role of the Federal Government in Support of Culture in Canada. Ninth Report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, June 1999.
Summary of Representations of the Interveners, Canadian Heritage and Public Works and Government Services Canada. In the Matter of an Application for Certification Filed by the Writers' Union of Canada and the League of Canadian Poets. Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal File No. 95-0014-A.
Task Force on the Status of the Artist (Siren-Gélinas). The Status of the Artist: Report of the Task Force. August 1986.
Author unknown. Consolidation of Federal Labour Boards: Considerations and Recommendation. Discussion Paper. March 1998.

Reviews, research reports, and evaluations

Cultural Enterprises International. Mireille Watson and Catherine Hurley, Principals. Client Feedback on the Performance of the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal. April 2000.
Cultural Enterprises International. Mireille Watson and Catherine Hurley, Principals. A Call to Action: A Year 2000 Research Report and Discussion Paper on the Status of the Artist Policy and Legislation in Canada. November 2000.
Direction de la recherche, de l'évaluation et des statistiques. Loi sur le statut professionel et les conditions d'engagement des artistes de la scène, du disque et du cinéma: rapport d'évaluation. Décembre 1995.
Ekos Research Associates Inc. Rethinking the Status of the Artist: Toward a Balance of Equity and Excellence. Ottawa: Department of Communications, March 1989.
The Strategic Review Group. Study of the Exhibition Right: Study Report. Department of Canadian Heritage, November 2000.

Articles and workshop proceedings

Blanchette, Sylvie. "La négociation collective chez des pigistes: l'expérience de l'Union des artistes." Proceedings from the workshop Élargir le Code du travail, held at the Université de Québec à Montreal in 1999.
Cliche, Danielle. "Status of the Artist or of Arts Organizations?: A Brief Discussion on the Canadian Status of the Artist Act." Canadian Journal of Communications 21 (2) (1996).
Farkas, Lorraine. "Self-employed Workers and Collective Bargaining." Workplace Gazette 2 (2) (Summer 1999).
Lussier, Hubert. "Aspects politiques du project de loi fédéral sur le statut de l'artiste." In Actes de la journée d'étude sur le statut de l'artiste. Montreal: Association littérairie et artistique canadienne inc (ALAI) Canada, 1992.
MacPherson, Elizabeth. "Collective Bargaining for Independent Contractors: Is the Status of the Artist Act a Model for Other Industrial Sectors?" Canadian Labour and Employment Law Journal 7 (355) (2000).

Federal Court of Appeal documents

Judgment of the Court. File No. A-750-98. The Attorney-General of Canada (Applicant) and The Writers' Union of Canada and the League of Canadian Poets (Respondents). November 15, 2000.
Memorandum of Fact and Law of the Respondents. File No. A-750-98. The Attorney-General of Canada (Applicant) and The Writers' Union of Canada and the League of Canadian Poets (Respondents).
Memorandum of Fact and Law of the Intervener: Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada (SOCAN). File No. A-750-98. The Attorney-General of Canada (Applicant) and The Writers' Union of Canada and the League of Canadian Poets (Respondents).
Reasons for Judgment of the Court. File No. A-750-98. The Attorney-General of Canada (Applicant) and The Writers' Union of Canada and the League of Canadian Poets (Respondents). November 15, 2000.

Web sites

Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal (CAPPRT). Found at http://capprt-tcrpap.ic.gc.ca.
Copyright Board of Canada. Found at http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca.
Web sites of certified and non-certified artists' associations.

Notes

In 1996-97, the arts and cultural sector contributed an estimated $22 billion to Canada's GDP (equivalent to 3.1%). Department of Canadian Heritage. Facts and Figures: Cultural Development: Canada's Cultural Exports. Available at www.pch.gc.ca/culture/fact-info/english.htm.
The Canada Council for the Arts. Arts Sector Profile #2: Artists in the Labour Force. July 1999.
The nine occupations selected were: writers; producers, directors, choreographers, and related occupations; conductors, composers, and arrangers; musicians and singers; dancers; actors; other performers; painters, sculptors, and related artists; and artisans and craftpersons.
Statistics Canada. Focus on Culture. Catalogue no. 87-004-XPB, vol. 12, no. 1. Cited in Canadian Conference of the Arts. On the Edge of a Revolution. Pre-Budget Submission to the Standing Committee on Finance, September 2001.
Danielle Cliche. "Status of the Artist or of Arts Organizations? A Brief Discussion on the Canadian Status of the Artist Act." Canadian Journal of Communications 21 (2) (1996).
Cliche, ibid.
Report of the Federal Cultural Policy Review Committee, 1982, p. 4.
It should be noted that some artists' associations, such as the American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada, had been successful over the years in establishing and negotiating scale agreements with many producers. However, all such agreements were established on good faith and had no legal recognition in the courts. Furthermore, because the contract negotiations and agreements reached by associations of self-employed artists did not come under the ambit of the Canada Labour Code, artists' associations could become subject to investigation and prosecution under the Competition Act for conspiring to fix prices.
Ekos Research Associates Inc. Rethinking the Status of the Artist: Toward a Balance of Equity and Excellence. Ottawa: Department of Communications, March 1989.
Government of Canada. Government Response to the Report of the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture Respecting the Status of the Artist. May 1990.
Department of Communications. Marcel Masse names members of Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist. News Release, April 9, 1991.
CAPPRT. Tribunal Procedures. Available at www.capprt-tcrpap.gc.ca/pubformulair/procedtribunal/index.html.
Elizabeth MacPherson. "Collective Bargaining for Independent Contractors: Is the Status of the Artist Act a Model for Other Industrial Sectors?" Canadian Labour and Employment Law Journal 7 (355) (2000).
Lorraine Farkas. "Self-employed Workers and Collective Bargaining." Workplace Gazette 2 (2) (Summer 1999).
MacPherson, op. cit.
Individual artists covered by the agreement retain the right to negotiate personal contracts that exceed these minimum terms and conditions.
CAPPRT. Annual Report 2000-2001. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada, 2001.
A complete list of notices to bargain and scale agreements is available on the CAPPRT's web site at www.capprt-tcrpap.ic.gc.ca.
CAPPRT. Performance Report. For the period ending March 31, 2001. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada, 2001.
Government of Canada. Connecting to the Canadian Experience: Diversity, Creativity and Choice. Response to the Ninth Report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, 1999.
Canadian Conference of the Arts. A Portrait of Canadian Arts Service Organizations. Ottawa: 1999.
Cultural Enterprises International. Mireille Watson and Catherine Hurley, Principals. A Call to Action: A Year 2000 Research Report and Discussion Paper on the Status of the Artist Policy and Legislation in Canada. November 2000.
Canadian Conference of the Arts. On the Edge of a Revolution. Pre-Budget Submission to the Standing Committee on Finance, September 2001.
Canadian Conference of the Arts, ibid.
See, for example, Cliche, op. cit.
Farkas, op. cit.
Consolidation of Federal Labour Boards: Considerations and Recommendation. Discussion Paper. March 1998.
Summary of Representations of the Interveners, Canadian Heritage and Public Works and Government Services Canada. In the Matter of an Application for Certification Filed by the Writers' Union of Canada and the League of Canadian Poets. CAPPRT File No. 95-0014-A.
Decision of the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal No. 028. In the Matter of an Application for Certification Filed by The Writers' Union of Canada and the League of Canadian Poets. November 17, 1998.
The CAPPRT, l'Union des écrivaines et écrivains québécois, the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada, the Writers' Guild of Canada, and the Playwrights Union of Canada all had intervener status in this matter.
Judgment of the Court. File No. A-750-09. The Attorney-General of Canada (Applicant) and The Writers' Union of Canada and the League of Canadian Poets (Respondents). November 15, 2000.
Memorandum of Fact and Law of the Intervener: Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada (SOCAN). File NO. A-750-98. The Attorney-General of Canada (Applicant) and The Writers' Union of Canada and the League of Canadian Poets (Respondents).
CAPPRT. Performance Report. For the period ending March 31, 2001. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada, 2001.
MacPherson, op. cit.
Cultural Enterprises International. Mireille Watson and Catherine Hurley, Principals. Client Feedback on the Performance of the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal. April 30, 2000

Appendix C -- Report on interviews

Introduction and methodology

Methodology

Findings

Relevance of the legislation
Implementation
Impact of the legislation
Efficiencies
Summary

Annex A -- List of Key Informants

Annex B -- Instruments

Introduction and methodology

In May 1995, the Status of the Artist Act was brought into force in Canada. The Act is federal legislation that recognizes the importance of artists in Canadian society and establishes a framework to govern professional relations between artists and producers in federal jurisdiction. The Act contains a provision requiring that the Minister of Canadian Heritage, in consultation with the Minister of Labour, undertake a review of the legislation in the seventh year after its coming into force, with the objective of determining the effectiveness of the legislation and identifying what, if any, amendments are required. Prairie Research Associates (PRA) Inc. was engaged by the Department of Canadian Heritage to carry out an evaluation of the provisions and operations of the Status of the Artist Act as a first step in this review.

PRA conducted a series of key informant interviews as part of this evaluation. This report summarizes the interview findings.

Methodology

We conducted in-depth interviews with 65 key informants through a combination of individual and group interviews. The Department of Canadian Heritage identified appropriate individuals and mailed them letters of invitation to participate.

We grouped key informants into four categories:

government
artists' associations(36)
federal producers
other key informants

and prepared a separate interview guide for each group. The instruments can be found in Annex B. All key informants were given the opportunity to review the interview guide in advance and had the option of completing the interview in either English or French. We conducted the majority of interviews by telephone.

Findings

Findings from the interviews with key informants have been organized according to the issues and questions in the evaluation framework.

1. Relevance of the legislation

Virtually all key informants believe that the circumstances that led the federal government to introduce the Status of the Artist Act still prevail. There is almost unanimous agreement among interviewees that the socio-economic position and working conditions of self-employed artists have not changed substantially since 1995.(37)

Opinions on the relevance of the legislation tended to reflect the different interests of the groups we interviewed. Overall, almost all key informants affirmed the value and ongoing relevance of the Act, both for what they regard as its important statements of principle in Part I, and for the legal framework it establishes in Part II to govern collective bargaining between associations of self-employed professional artists and federal producers. Among key informants representing producers and producers' associations, however, a small number expressed a dissenting view. They believe that the legislation is unnecessary, primarily because collective agreements were the norm in the industries they represented prior to the Act's implementation.

With these exceptions, nearly all key informants consider invaluable the Act's provision of a legal foundation for collective bargaining relationships that were previously voluntary, without foundation in law, and (at least in theory) vulnerable to prosecution under the Competition Act. Key informants told us, moreover, that the principles and objectives of the Act remain relevant inasmuch as the anticipated effects of the new labour relations regime -- improvements in artists' socio-economic status and in labour relations -- have for the most part not yet been realized.

Nevertheless, some key informants suggested changes to the legislation that would, in their opinion, enable it to better achieve its objectives. These are discussed in section 2.2.3 of this report.

2.1.1 Limitations of the legislation

Despite their strong support for the Status of the Artist Act, most key informants believe that the legislation by itself is insufficient to bring about significant change in artists' socio-economic circumstances. The limited jurisdiction of Part II of the Act is seen as the most significant factor limiting its ability to bring about changes in this area. Although the majority of artistic and cultural production occurs outside the scope of the federal legislation, only the province of Québec has similar legislation.(38)

Key informants differed on the most appropriate way to address this shortcoming. Many advocated the introduction of complementary legislation at the provincial level. However, a few questioned the appropriateness of multiple provincial frameworks for labour relations in an era marked by interprovincial and international cultural production, and advocated instead expanding the reach of the federal Act into areas currently within provincial jurisdiction -- recognizing, of course, the constitutional issues that such a proposition entails.

The fact that the Act only addresses labour relations is regarded by many key informants as another significant factor limiting its ability to achieve improvements in artists' socio-economic circumstances. Many key informants believe that additional measures such as income averaging, tax exemptions on a proportion of copyright income, and access to employment insurance and other social benefits are necessary if this objective is to be realized. In this context, a few interviewees criticized the federal government for what they perceive as its failure to articulate a comprehensive and coherent policy vis-à-vis artists. They argued that although Part I of the Act sets out important statements of principle, few concrete measures have been introduced to put those principles into practice.

Key informants also said that the ability of the Act to achieve significant improvements in artists' socio-economic status is limited because:

The provisions set out in Part II do not apply to third party contractors. Key informants pointed out that sub-contracting is increasingly common in artistic and cultural production, including among federal producers.
Many artists are not members of certified associations.(39)

In spite of these limitations, however, nearly all key informants said that the Status of the Artist Act is an invaluable piece of legislation that remains as relevant today as it was in 1995.

2. Implementation

2.2.1 Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist

For the most part, key informants were unfamiliar with the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist (CCSA). The majority, especially those representing artists' associations and federal producers, had either heard of the Council but were unfamiliar with its purpose and mandate, or had learned about it only as a result of the interview process. Most key informants were therefore unable to address interview questions pertaining to the relevance, mandate, and functions of the Council.

The small number of key informants who were familiar with the Council reported that it has never functioned as intended. In April 1991, four months after the Bill on the Status of the Artist was tabled in the House of Commons, the Minister of Communications appointed a temporary Council consisting of twelve members, all of whom were full-time professional artists. Generally speaking, the Council's mandate was to advise the Minister on all issues and policies relating to the status of the artist. The membership of the CCSA was to be confirmed by Governor-in-Council upon enactment of the legislation. However, the Order-in-Council never materialized; the CCSA was simply maintained on a provisional basis, and eventually its membership was allowed to lapse. Indeed, key informants reported that the Council effectively ceased to function approximately one year after the legislation was implemented.

Key informants offered several related explanations for the early demise of the Council. First, key informants said that the full-time professional artists who constituted the Council's membership had neither the time nor the expertise (despite their best intentions) to deal with what were essentially policy and bureaucratic issues. As a consequence, the Council relied heavily on public servants within Canadian Heritage to prepare its recommendations. There was also concern that Canadian Heritage did not provide the Council with the leadership and direction that it required to function effectively; some key informants were strongly critical of the federal government for allowing the Council to lapse.

Key informants suggested three possible courses of action with respect to the Council:

appoint a new Council with a more varied membership (representatives from artists' associations as well as government and policy) and a direct link to the Minister
transfer the mandate and functions of the Council to an existing body; it was noted that arts organizations (like the Canada Council for the Arts or the Canadian Conference of the Arts) could assume the Council's role
revise the Act to eliminate the Council entirely, inasmuch as the federal government already funds several arts organizations that play advisory roles quite similar to the one mandated for the Council.

Given the small number of key informants who commented on the Council, none of these possibilities emerged as a clear preference.

2.2.2 Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal

The Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal (CAPPRT or the Tribunal) is a permanent, stand-alone labour board composed of part-time commissioners with experience and expertise in both labour and cultural matters. Among key informants who commented on CAPPRT's organization and service delivery structure, there is general agreement that these are adequate to meet the Tribunal's legislated responsibilities under the Status of the Artist Act.(40)

These key informants reported that the Tribunal has largely accomplished its primary function of certifying artists' associations for the purpose of collective bargaining with federal producers. The Tribunal has been less active in carrying out other aspects of its mandate, such as hearing matters dealing with failure to bargain in good faith and complaints of unfair labour practices. However, a few key informants noted that such activity is likely to increase in the future as certified artists' associations increasingly pursue negotiations with federal producers. Some also noted that the Tribunal will likely be called upon to review existing certifications and to certify associations to represent emerging artistic sectors.

Nonetheless, some expressed concern that the structure of the Tribunal may be too elaborate for the work it is required to do and suggested that its functions be transferred to an existing labour relations board, such as the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) or, alternatively, a sub-committee of the CIRB.(41) At the same time, key informants pointed out that such a change would have its own drawbacks:

It would not be well received by the arts community, which believes that CAPPRT is more informed about and therefore more sensitive to the concerns of artists than existing labour relations boards. Key informants emphasized that a transfer of CAPPRT's functions to the CIRB could be contemplated only if specialized training were provided to CIRB personnel or if CAPPRT personnel were retained.(42)
The Tribunal was created as a stand-alone board specifically to give artists' associations a forum that was more informal and had simpler procedural rules than existing labour boards, and was therefore more easily accessible to them. For example, some key informants said that legal representation is not necessarily required for parties appearing before the Tribunal.(43)
Several key informants observed that while the structure of the Tribunal may be somewhat elaborate for the work it is required to do, it would not be prudent to alter that structure for the reasons just outlined.

2.2.3 Administrative provisions and procedures

The administrative provisions and procedures set out in Part II of the legislation are perceived quite differently by artists' associations, depending on their size and their experience with collective bargaining. Generally speaking, the larger and more established associations with a history of collective bargaining regard the administrative provisions and procedures as relatively straightforward -- or at least not any more onerous than those to which they were previously accustomed. The smaller associations and those that are new to collective bargaining, on the other hand, tend to regard these provisions and procedures as somewhat more onerous.

Application for certification

Most of the certified artists' associations we interviewed, with the exception of those from Québec, reported that the process of applying for certification required a significant commitment of time and/or financial resources, and diverted them from their other activities and responsibilities. The different opinion expressed by Québec associations may be due to their past experiences with the certification process under the Québec status of the artist legislation.

Almost all of the certified associations reported that the application process is relatively simple and straightforward. In most but not all cases, artists' associations retained legal counsel; those that did not retain counsel tended to find the application process more difficult. However, these associations reported that the Tribunal was extremely helpful in assisting them through the application process.

Serving notice to bargain

Approximately half of the certified artists' associations we interviewed reported that they have served notice to bargain to federal producers since being certified. These interviewees reported that, for the most part, the process of serving notice to bargain is relatively straightforward. However, a small number of artists' associations identified issues surrounding the process of serving notices to bargain. Three reported that the producers implicated in the notice refused to acknowledge that they fell under the jurisdiction of the Act or otherwise objected to the notice. One association said that it can be difficult to identify an appropriate individual within government departments with whom to deal. Finally, one association said that the requirement that the notice to bargain must be sent to the Minister of Labour is inefficient and that it would be preferable to deal solely with Canadian Heritage.

Associations that have not yet served notice to bargain have not done so for a variety of reasons, including a lack of financial and other resources to undertake negotiation; successful voluntary negotiation of scale agreements with federal producers (i.e., no need to serve notice to bargain); and certifications currently or imminently under review.

Negotiations with producers

Approximately half of the certified associations we interviewed reported having entered into negotiations with federal producers since certification, and of this group, about half reported having negotiated a new scale agreement (several have renegotiated existing agreements). There is a general consensus among artists' associations that the negotiation process is typically arduous, time-consuming, and costly. In most but not all cases, artists' associations retain legal counsel to negotiate on their behalf.

Key informants identified two main shortcomings of the legislation that in their view are obstacles to successful negotiation:

The legislation contains an obligation for federal producers to negotiate in good faith but no obligation to conclude a first agreement. As a consequence, producers often resort to mediation processes that can take years to conclude, in effect defeating the intent of the legislation. There is widespread support among representatives from artists' associations, government, and other key informants for inclusion of a provision for first contract negotiation in the legislation. More specifically, key informants advocated for a provision ensuring the signing of an initial agreement within a stipulated time frame and providing for arbitration if the parties are unable to come to an agreement within that period. Key informants noted that both the Canada Labour Code and provincial status of the artist legislation in Québec contain such a provision.
The legislation contains no mechanism to encourage federal producers to form associations for the purpose of collective bargaining. The legislation does contain a provision permitting federal producers to form associations for the purpose of collective bargaining, but producers have, for the most part, elected not to do so. As a result, artists' associations must serve notice to and negotiate with each producer separately, which requires significant expenditure of time and money and which can be especially burdensome for the smaller associations. In this context, there is considerable support among key informants representing both artists' associations, government, and some producers for the creation of a single, centralized bargaining authority for the entire Government of Canada.

In addition, a small number of artists' associations said that the Act should include a provision allowing artists' associations to access financial assistance to undertake negotiations with producers and pointed out that the Québec legislation contains such a provision.

Other procedures and provisions

A small number of key informants representing artists' associations and government had suggestions for other changes to the administrative provisions of the Act:

Section 46 specifies that the right to apply pressure tactics in first agreement situations is linked to the date of certification rather than the date of notice to bargain. The provision as written enables artists' associations, at least in theory, to apply pressure tactics without first sending notice to bargain. Although this has never happened, key informants believe that this section of the Act should be amended.
The legislation as written limits the questions that the Tribunal can deal with in determinations and declarations outside a proceeding (sections 30, 33(5), 41, 47, and 48). A small number of government key informants told us that the related provisions in the Canada Labour Code are broader and that any question may be put to a panel for determination or declaration; they recommended amending the Status of the Artist Act to make it consistent with the Canada Labour Code.

2.2.4 Clarity and interpretation of the Act

Many key informants either believe that the Status of the Artist Act is clearly written, contains no areas of ambiguity, and has not been subject to inconsistent interpretation, or had no comment on the subject. However, the following issues emerged from our interviews with key informants:

The definition of an "artist" for the purpose of the legislation is unclear. Some key informants criticized the Tribunal for what they regard as its over-inclusive definition of an artist. According to them, the Tribunal has gone too far in categorizing some cultural workers as artists, such that the term now encompasses what they regard as non-artistic aspects of the creative process. However, others believe that the Tribunal has been suitably forward-thinking in its broad interpretation of the term. These key informants believe that artistic production is a collaborative process and that, therefore, the term artist legitimately refers to a wide range of cultural workers. In a related vein, some key informants argued that the Regulations accompanying the Act do not consider some of the artistic functions that should be addressed by the legislation, and should be revised.(44)
The appropriate scope and content of scale agreements is unclear. Some key informants believe that the legislation does not make sufficiently clear the scope and content of scale agreements that may be negotiated pursuant to the Act. The definition of a scale agreement in section 5 of the Act refers to "an agreement in writing between a producer and an artists' association respecting minimum terms and conditions for the provision of artists' services and other related matters." Some disagreement has arisen over what is meant by "other related matters," and whether, in particular, the term includes copyright.(45)
More broadly, a small number of key informants expressed concern that certain Tribunal decisions have resulted in uncertainty over which statute properly governs copyright and the fixing of royalties payable for the use of copyright works. One key informant said further that since the coming into force of Phase Two of the Copyright Act (which covers performers), issues of overlap between the Copyright Act and the Status of the Artist Act have arisen. Finally, a few key informants saw at least a potential conflict between the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act. However, most interviewees do not perceive any conflict, either real or potential, between the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act. In the majority view, the two statutes treat distinctly separate aspects of artistic production. Although some key informants acknowledged that copyright issues have been included in some scale agreements, they argued that this is the outcome of the collective bargaining process and has nothing to do with the legislation itself.
Presumption of independent contractor status. Several artists' associations said that the legislation should be amended to include a presumption of independent contractor status for artists, following the Québec legislation. These artists' associations said that the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA) is increasingly defining artists as employees rather than self-employed, and said that such a provision would help to protect them in light of this development.

2.2.5 Role of other bodies

The respective mandates and functions of Canadian Heritage and Human Resources Development Canada are uncontroversial from the perspective of key informants. With respect to Federal Mediation and Conciliation Services (FMCS), which provides mediation assistance under Ministerial appointment to parties involved in collective bargaining under the Status of the Artist Act, key informants reported that the service is not often used. To date, FMCS has provided mediation assistance in two instances under the Act. Nonetheless, key informants believe that the mandate and functions of FMCS are still appropriate, insofar as FMCS has the necessary expertise to provide dispute resolution services. However, some key informants re-emphasized the lack of a provision for arbitration or conciliation in the legislation itself.

3. Impact of the legislation

Key informants agree that the Status of the Artist Act has accomplished its primary objective of providing a legal framework for collective bargaining between artists' associations and producers within federal jurisdiction. Although such collective bargaining had been occurring for decades prior to implementation of the legislation, it was on a voluntary basis only and had no foundation in law. As a consequence, the legality of these agreements and bargaining relationships was open to challenge under the Competition Act. The Status of the Artist Act was intended to rectify this situation by creating a legal foundation for collective bargaining that previously did not exist.

To date, key informants believe that the legislation has had its most significant impact on professional artists' associations. Certified artists' associations we interviewed reported that certification gives their organizations a legitimacy and credibility that they would not otherwise have. Artists' associations value the Act highly for giving them the ability to "speak with one voice" with employers and to bring economic pressure to bear; many associations said that in the absence of the legislation, their ability to represent the interests of their members would be seriously compromised. Overall, many key informants agree that artists' associations are now better organized than when the legislation was first implemented and better able to work on behalf of their members.

On the other hand, with very few exceptions, artists' associations reported that the Act has so far had little impact on the socio-economic circumstances and working conditions of their members, and offered three main explanations. First, many of the larger, more established associations already had voluntary scale agreements in place with federal producers. Second, the smaller and more recently established associations, for the most part, have not yet negotiated any scale agreements under the Act. Third, many artists' associations reiterated that the Act is limited in its ability to achieve improvements in these areas since the majority of artistic and cultural production falls under provincial jurisdiction.

Artists' associations reported very few unintended impacts as a result of the legislation. In a few instances, certification entailed an unanticipated commitment of time and resources or resulted in unanticipated disputes with other artists' associations.

Producers, for their part, reported that the Act has had little, if any, impact on their organizations. Some were involved in collective bargaining with artists' associations on a voluntary basis prior to implementation of the Act; others said that the impact of the Act has been negligible because they do not employ a large number of self-employed artists. Producers did not identify any unintended consequences resulting from the legislation.

In addition to the positive impacts of the legislation already discussed above, key informants said that the legislation:

provides a democratic process that allows the parties involved to come to their own agreements
clarifies the respective roles of artists' associations and producers with respect to professional relations
provides managers with greater predictability
creates stability within the labour market by establishing normal pay rates.

In spite of these positive developments, some key informants said that awareness and knowledge of the Act is an ongoing problem. Many artists' associations reported that their membership is largely unaware of the legislation and suggested that this is also true of some federal producers.

4. Efficiencies

For the most part, key informants believe that the Status of the Artist Act is a unique piece of legislation. Most regard the Act as complementary to the Copyright Act, the Canada Labour Code, and the Province of Québec's status of the artist legislation. Most key informants do not perceive any overlap or duplication between the Act and other legislation, administrative bodies, or independent adjudicative agencies; however, as already noted, several interviewees believe that the Act conflicts, at least potentially, with the Copyright Act. No key informants believe that the Status of the Artist Act works at cross-purposes with other legislation, administrative bodies, or independent adjudicative agencies.

Key informants believe that current resources are adequate for the Tribunal and Canadian Heritage to deliver against their mandates. As discussed elsewhere in this report, some believe that the mandate and functions of the Tribunal could potentially be transferred to the CIRB. However, key informants cautioned that such a change may not be prudent. Among the small group of key informants who commented on the CCSA, there was support for appointing a new Council; for transferring the mandate of the Council to an existing organization, such as the Canadian Conference of the Arts; and for eliminating the Council entirely from the legislation, inasmuch as several other arts organizations already play advisory roles similar to the one intended for the Council.

5. Summary

Relevance

Almost all key informants affirmed the value and ongoing relevance of the Status of the Artist Act, both for what they regard as its important statements of principle in Part I and for the legal framework it establishes in Part II to govern collective bargaining between associations of self-employed professional artists and federal producers. However, a small number of interviewees, representing producers and producers' associations, believe the Act is unnecessary because collective agreements were the norm in the industries they represent prior to the Act's implementation.

Key informants believe that the Act by itself is insufficient to bring about significant change in artists' socio-economic circumstances. The limited jurisdiction of Part II of the Act, the fact that it addresses only labour relations, and the fact that Part II does not apply to third-party contractors are seen as its most significant limitations.

Implementation

The small number of key informants who were familiar with the CCSA reported that it has never functioned as intended. They suggested either appointing a new Council with a more varied membership and a direct link to the Minister; transferring the mandate and functions of the Council to another organization; or revising the Act to eliminate the Council entirely, inasmuch as the federal government already funds several arts organizations that play advisory roles quite similar to the one mandated for the Council.

With respect to CAPPRT, key informants reported that the Tribunal has largely accomplished its primary function of certifying artists' associations for the purpose of collective bargaining with federal producers, but has been less active in carrying out other aspects of its mandate. While the Tribunal's volume of work in these areas is likely to increase in the future, there was some concern expressed that the structure of the Tribunal may be too elaborate for the work it is required to do, and the suggestion was made that its functions be transferred to an existing labour relations board, such as the CIRB. However, key informants cautioned that such a change would not be well received by the arts community, which believes that CAPPRT is more informed about and therefore more sensitive to the concerns of artists than are existing labour relations boards. Furthermore, the Tribunal was created as a stand-alone board specifically to give artists' associations a forum that was more informal and had simpler procedural rules than existing labour boards.

The Act's administrative provisions and procedures are generally regarded as appropriate, although the processes of applying for certification and negotiating with producers require significant expenditure of time and financial resources that can be burdensome, particularly for the smaller artists' associations. Key informants identified two main shortcomings of the legislation that in their view are obstacles to successful negotiation of scale agreements. First, the legislation contains an obligation for federal producers to negotiate in good faith but no obligation to conclude a first agreement. Second, the legislation contains no mechanism to encourage federal producers to form associations for the purpose of collective bargaining. There was considerable support among key informants for the addition of these two provisions to the legislation.

Many key informants either believe that the Status of the Artist Act is clearly written, contains no areas of ambiguity, and has not been subject to inconsistent interpretation, or had no comment on the subject. However, some believe that the definition of an "artist" for the purpose of the legislation is unclear, while others

said that the legislation does not make sufficiently clear the scope and content of scale agreements that may be negotiated pursuant to the Act. More specifically, the latter group expressed concern that certain Tribunal decisions have resulted in uncertainty over which statute properly governs copyright and the fixing of royalties payable for the use of copyright works. However, most interviewees do not perceive any conflict, either real or potential, between the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act. In the majority view, the two statutes treat distinctly separate aspects of artistic production.

Impacts

To date, the Status of the Artist Act has had its most significant impact on professional artists' associations. Certified artists' associations reported that certification gives their organizations a legitimacy and credibility that they would not otherwise have.

On the other hand, the Act has so far had little impact on artists' socio-economic circumstances and working conditions. Many of the larger, more established associations already had voluntary scale agreements in place with many federal producers, while those that are smaller and more recently established have, for the most part, not yet negotiated any scale agreements. Perhaps most importantly, key informants see the ability of the Act to achieve significant improvements in these areas as limited because the majority of artistic and cultural production occurs in provincial jurisdiction.

Beyond the positive impacts identified by artists' associations, key informants said that the legislation provides a democratic process that allows the parties involved to come to their own agreements; clarifies the respective roles of artists' associations and producers with respect to professional relations; provides managers with greater predictability; and creates stability within the labour market. Producers reported that the Act has had little impact on their organizations.

Efficiencies

For the most part, key informants believe that the Status of the Artist Act is a unique piece of legislation that complements the Copyright Act, the Canada Labour Code, and the Province of Québec's status of the artist legislation. A small group of key informants had concerns that the Act may conflict with the Copyright Act, but most interviewees do not perceive any overlap or duplication between the Act and other legislation, administrative bodies, or independent adjudicative agencies. Nor do any believe that the Act works at cross-purposes with any other legislation or body.

Annex A -- List of key informants

Note: We interviewed 65 individuals, using a combination of individual and group interviews.

Government

Mario Bouchard - Copyright Board of Canada
Robert Cook - Legal Services, Human Resources Development Canada
Josée Dubois - Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal
Jim Eadie - Treasury Board Secretariat, Division of Administrative Services
Sylvia Garcia Soria - Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, Human Resources Development Canada
Bruno Jean - Department of Canadian Heritage
Keith Kelly - Canada Council for the Arts
Jacques Lessard - Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, Human Resources Development Canada
Hubert Lussier - Department of Canadian Heritage
Elizabeth MacKinnon - Department of Canadian Heritage
Elizabeth MacPherson - Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, Human Resources Development Canada
Michael McDermott - former Assistant Deputy Minister, HRDC
Adam Ostry - Ontario Media Development Corporation
Richard Ouellet - Department of Commercial Law, Justice Canada
Arnold Powers and Jennifer Webster - Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, Human Resources Development Canada
Jeff Richstone - Department of Canadian Heritage
David Silcox - Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal
Don Stephenson - Director General, Trade Policy Bureau, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Cynthia White Thornley - Department of Canadian Heritage

Artists' Associations

Periodical Writers' Association of Canada
Association québécoise des auteurs dramatiques
Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels du Québec
Société professionelle des auteurs et des compositeurs québécois
American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada
Canadian Artists' Representation
Literary Translators' Association of Canada
Union des Artistes
The Writers' Union of Canada
Association des professionnels des arts de la scène du Québec
Canadian Association of Photographers and Illustrators in Communications
Associated Designers of Canada
Editors' Association of Canada
Association des réalisateurs du Québec
Union des écrivaines et écrivains du Québec
Société des auteurs de radio, télévision et cinéma
Professional Opera Companies of Canada
Writers Guild of Canada
Guilde des musiciens
Association of Canadian Cinema, Television, and Radio Artists
Canadian Actors' Equity Association
Canadian Alliance of Dance Artists (Ontario)
Canadian Conference of the Arts

Federal Producers

John Barrack - Canadian Film and Television Producers Association
Roch Carrier - National Library of Canada
Jerry Doiron - Professional Association of Canadian Theatres
Guy Gauthier - National Film Board
Lilly Koltun - National Archives of Canada
Joan Pennefather - Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Victor Rabinovitch - Canadian Museum of Civilization
Erica Redler - Canadian Association of Broadcasters
Irene Roy - Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
Monique Smith - Association of Canadian Publishers

Key Informants

Cultural Human Resources Council
Gaston Blais
Legal counsel for certain artists' associations
Garry Neil
Legal counsel for certain artists' associations
SOCAN
CANCOPY

Annex B -- Instruments

Evaluation of the Provisions and Operations of the Status of the Artist Act Interview Guide for Government Contacts

Background

1. Please tell me about your involvement with the federal Status of the Artist Act. What are, or what were, your roles and responsibilities with respect to the Act?

2. How familiar are you with the Status of the Artist Act? Please tell me what you know about:

the purpose and objectives of the legislation
the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist (Probe: mandate, functions)
the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal (Probe: mandate, functions).

Relevance

The federal Status of the Artist Act came into force in 1995. The Act was intended to improve the working conditions and economic circumstances of artists. Part I of the Act recognizes the importance of artists in Canadian society and establishes the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist, which is responsible for supporting and promoting the professional status of artists in Canada. Part II establishes a framework to govern collective bargaining between associations of self-employed professional artists and producers in federal jurisdiction. A labour board, the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal, oversees Part II of the Act. The overall objectives of the legislation are to improve the socio-economic status of self-employed professional artists, and to improve labour relations between artists' associations and producers.

3. Please comment on the working conditions and economic circumstances of self-employed artists in Canada today. In your view, do the conditions and circumstances that led the federal government to introduce status of the artist legislation still prevail? What, if any, changes have occurred?

4. In your view, are the objectives of the Act still relevant? Please explain why or why not.

5. In your view, are the legislated mandates and functions of the various bodies involved in administering the Act still appropriate, legitimate, and realistic? What, if any, changes should be introduced to help the Act to better achieve its objectives? Please discuss with reference to:

the Council
the Tribunal
HRDC
Canadian Heritage
Federal Mediation Conciliation Services.

6. Do you think the legislation in its present form is adequate to achieve its objectives? Please explain what, if any, changes to the Act are necessary. If you think the legislation is no longer needed, please explain why you think so.

7. In your view, are there any alternatives to the legislation that would be more effective at achieving the same objectives? If so, please explain why you think these alternatives would be more effective?

Implementation

8. Is the organization and service delivery structure of the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist adequate to meet its legislated responsibilities? What, if any, changes are necessary? Are there other possible focuses for the Council's work?

9. Is the organization and service delivery structure of the Tribunal adequate to meet its legislated responsibilities? What, if any changes are necessary?

10. Please comment on the mechanisms set out in Part II of the Act to govern professional relations between artists' associations and federal producers. What are the strengths and shortcomings of these mechanisms?

11. Does the legislation adequately permit professional artists, professional artists' associations, and artistic sectors:

to be recognized? Are there any legislative or other impediments to such recognition?
to enter into negotiations with producers? Are there any legislative or other impediments to entering into negotiations?
to negotiate scale agreements with producers? Are there any legislative or other impediments to successful negotiation?

12. To your knowledge, do the rights and responsibilities conferred by the Status of the Artist Act create a burden for artists' associations? Do they interfere with the other activities and responsibilities of these associations?

13. Is the legislation clearly written? Have there been any areas of ambiguity, or inconsistencies in interpretation? If so, please give specific examples. What changes would help to clarify the legislation?

Interview Guide for Government Contacts (continued)

14. In your view, is there any conflict between the rights granted to a certified artists' association by the Status of the Artist Act and those of a copyright collective formed pursuant to the Copyright Act? Please discuss.

15. In your view, is there any conflict between the mechanisms set out in the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act for:

determining entitlement to payment of copyright?
enforcing payment of copyright?

Impacts

16. What impact has the Act had on artists? On professional artists' associations? On federal producers? Has it had any unintended impacts for any of these groups?

17. Based on what you have observed, has the legislation improved labour relations? Has it improved artists' socio-economic status?

18. To the extent that the legislation has been successful in meeting its objectives, what aspects of it have contributed to this success? To the extent that the Act has been unsuccessful, what factors account for this failure?

Efficiencies

19. To your knowledge, does the Act or its components supplement or complement:

other federal legislation?
other provincial legislation?
other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies?

20. To your knowledge, does the Act or its components duplicate or overlap:

other federal legislation?
other provincial legislation?
other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies?

21. To your knowledge, does the Act or its components work at cross-purposes with:

other federal legislation?
other provincial legislation?
other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies?

22. To your knowledge, do the mandate and functions of the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist overlap with those of another body? Do the mandate and functions of the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal overlap with those of another body?

23. Are there any efficiencies that could be introduced into the functions of the Council? Of the Tribunal?

24. In your view, are current resources adequate for the Tribunal, the Council, and Canadian Heritage to deliver against their mandates and produce expected results?

Conclusion

25. Do you have any other comments?

Evaluation of the Provisions and Operations of the Status of the Artist Act Interview Guide for Representatives from Artists' Associations

Background

1. Please tell me something about [name of association]. When was it established? What is its mandate? What is its membership?

2. What issues are of particular concern to the membership of this association?

3. How familiar are you with the federal Status of the Artist Act? Please tell me what you know about:

the purpose and objectives of the legislation
the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist (Probe: mandate, functions)
the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal (Probe: mandate, functions).

Relevance

4. Please comment on the working conditions and economic circumstances of self-employed artists in Canada today. In your view, do the conditions and circumstances that led the federal government to introduce status of the artist legislation still prevail? What, if any, changes have occurred?

5. In your view, are the objectives of the Act still relevant? (Prompt: The objectives are improving the artists' socio-economic status and improving labour relations). Please explain why or why not.

6. Do you think the existing legislation is adequate to achieve its objectives? Please explain what, if any, changes to the Act are necessary. If you think the legislation is no longer needed, please explain why you think so.

7. In your view, are there alternatives to the legislation that would be more effective at achieving the same objectives? If so, please explain why you think these alternatives would be more effective.

Implementation

For certified associations

8. Prior to implementation of the Status of the Artist Act in June 1995, did your association have any scale agreements with producers? If so, with which ones? Briefly, please describe the nature and content of these agreements.

9. Please describe your association's experience with the application process for certification. What sector was your association seeking to represent? Were other associations seeking to represent the same sector at the same time? Why do you think your association was successful?

10. Overall, how would you characterize the application process? (Probe: Was the process easy to understand? Time-consuming? Did it require significant expenditure of time or resources? Did it require specialized resources?)

11. Since obtaining certification, has your association served any notices to bargain to federal producers? How many, and to what producers? If your association has not served producers with any notices to bargain, what factors are preventing it from doing so?

12. Overall, how would you characterize the process of serving notices to bargain? (Probe: Was the process easy to understand? Time-consuming? Did it require significant expenditure of time or resources? Did it require specialized resources?)

3. Since obtaining certification, has your association entered into negotiations with any federal producers? With what producers? If your association has not entered into negotiations, what factors are preventing it from doing so?

14. Since obtaining certification, has your association negotiated any scale agreements with federal producers? How many, and with what producers?

15. Overall, how would you characterize the negotiation process? (Probe: Was the process easy to understand? Time-consuming? Did it require significant expenditure of time or resources? Did it require specialized resources?)

16. In instances where your association has successfully negotiated scale agreements with federal producers, to what extent did your association achieve its objectives? Please discuss with reference to specific examples.

17. In instances where your association has entered into negotiations with producers, but has not concluded any scale agreements, what have been the impediments to successful negotiation? Please discuss with reference to specific examples.

18. Has your association ever been in a legal strike situation? Please describe the circumstances and outcome.

For non-certified associations

19. Has your association ever applied for certification under the Status of the Artist Act? Why or why not?

20. If yes, how would you characterize the application process? (Probe: Was the process easy to understand? Time-consuming? Did it require significant expenditure of time or resources? Did it require specialized resources?) Why do you think your association was unsuccessful in achieving certification?

21. If not, would your association ever consider applying for certification under the Act? Why or why not?

For all associations

22. Based on your understanding of and experience with the legislation, are there any areas of ambiguity, or inconsistencies in interpretation? What changes would you suggest to help clarify the legislation?

23. Since the Act was implemented in 1995, have there been any changes in the cultural sector that make it difficult to apply the legislation? What implications do these changes have for the legislation? How, if at all, should the legislation be changed?

24. In your view, is there any conflict between the rights granted to a certified artists' association by the Status of the Artist Act and those of a copyright collective formed pursuant to the Copyright Act? Please discuss.

25. In your view, is there any conflict between the mechanisms set out in the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act for:

determining entitlement to payment of copyright?
enforcing payment of copyright?

Impacts

26. What impact has the Act had for the members of this association? What impact has it had for this association in general? Has it had any unintended impacts?

27. Has the legislation improved labour relations between this association and federal producers? Has it improved the economic circumstances of members of this association? Why or why not?

28. To the extent that the legislation has been successful in meeting its objectives, what aspects of it have contributed to this success? To the extent that the Act has been unsuccessful, what factors account for this failure?

Efficiencies

29. To your knowledge, does the Act or its components supplement or complement:

other federal legislation?
other provincial legislation?
other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies?

30. To your knowledge, does the Act or its components duplicate or overlap:

other federal legislation?
other provincial legislation?
other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies?

31. To your knowledge, does the Act or its components work at cross-purposes with:

other federal legislation?
other provincial legislation?
other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies?

32. To your knowledge, is there any overlap between the role of the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist and the role of any other body? Is there any overlap between the role of the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal and any other body?

Conclusion

33. Do you have any other comments?

Evaluation of the Provisions and Operations of the Status of the Artist Act Interview Guide for Federal Producers

Background

1. Please describe your position within this organization. What are your roles and responsibilities with respect to labour relations? With respect to the Status of the Artist Act?

2. What kinds of artists does your organization employ? Are these artists employees or self-employed? Are they members of an association? Are they members of a certified association?

Relevance

As you know, the federal Status of the Artist Act came into force in 1995. The Act was intended to improve the working conditions and economic circumstances of artists. Part I of the Act recognizes the importance of artists in Canadian society and establishes the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist, which is responsible for supporting and promoting the professional status of artists in Canada. Part II establishes a framework to govern collective bargaining between associations of self-employed professional artists and producers in federal jurisdiction. A labour board, the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal, oversees Part II of the Act. The overall objectives of the legislation are to improve the socio-economic status of self-employed professional artists, and to improve labour relations between artists' associations and producers.

3. In your view, do the conditions and circumstances that led the federal government to introduce status of the artist legislation still prevail today? Have any new conditions, circumstances, or issues emerged?

4. In your view, are the objectives of the Act still relevant? (Prompt: The objectives are improving the artists' socio-economic status and improving labour relations). Please explain why or why not.

5. Do you think the existing legislation is adequate to achieve its objectives? Please explain what, if any, changes to the Act are necessary. If you think the legislation is no longer needed, please explain why you think so.

6. In your view, are there alternatives to the legislation that would be more effective at achieving the same objectives? If so, please explain why you think these alternatives would be more effective.

Implementation

7. Did implementation of the Status of the Artist Act have any immediate consequences for your organization? What were they?

8. Prior to implementation of the legislation, did your organization have any scale agreements with artists' associations? If so, with which ones? Please describe in general terms the nature of these agreements.

9. Since implementation of the legislation, has your organization been served with any notices to bargain? From which artists' associations? In how many of these cases did a notice to bargain result in entering into negotiations?

10. Since implementation of the legislation, has your organization negotiated any scale agreements with artists' associations? How many, and with which associations?

11. What has been the result of this/these negotiation(s) for your organization? To what extent did your organization achieve its objectives?

12. In instances where your organization has entered into negotiations with artists' associations, but has not concluded any scale agreements, what have been the impediments to successful negotiation? Please discuss with reference to specific examples.

13. Have the members of any certified artists' association in your employ ever been in a legal strike position (with respect to your organization)? Please describe the circumstances and outcome.

14. Based on your understanding of and experience with the legislation, are there any areas of ambiguity, or inconsistencies in interpretation? What changes would you suggest to help clarify the legislation?

15. Since the Act was implemented in 1995, have there been any changes in the cultural sector that make it difficult to apply the legislation? What implications do these changes have for the legislation? How, if at all, should the legislation be changed?

16. In your view, is there any conflict between the rights granted to a certified artists' association by the Status of the Artist Act and those of a copyright collective formed pursuant to the Copyright Act? Please discuss.

17. In your view, is there any conflict between the mechanisms set out in the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act for:

determining entitlement to payment of copyright?
enforcing payment of copyright?

Impacts

18. What impact has the Act had for your organization? For producers in general? Has it improved labour relations with artists' associations? Has it had any unintended impacts?

19. To the extent that the legislation has been successful in meeting its objectives, what aspects of it have contributed to this success? To the extent that the Act has been unsuccessful, what factors account for this failure?

Efficiencies

20. To your knowledge, does the Act or its components supplement or complement:

other federal legislation?
other provincial legislation?
other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies?

21. To your knowledge, does the Act or its components duplicate or overlap:

other federal legislation?
other provincial legislation?
other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies?

22. To your knowledge, does the Act or its components work at cross-purposes with:

other federal legislation?
other provincial legislation?
other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies?

23. What do you know about the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist? To your knowledge, is there any overlap between the role of the Council and the role of any other body? Is there any overlap between the role of the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal and the role of any other body?

Conclusion

24. Do you have any other comments?

Evaluation of the Provisions and Operations of the Status of the Artist Act Interview Guide for Key Informants

Background

1. Please tell me something about [name of association/organization]. What is its mandate? What issues are of particular concern to this organization?

2. How familiar are you with the federal Status of the Artist Act? Please tell me what you know about:

the purpose and objectives of the legislation
the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist (Probe: mandate, functions)
the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal (Probe: mandate, functions).

Relevance

4. In your view, are the objectives of the Act still relevant? (Prompt: The objectives are improving the artists' socio-economic status and improving labour relations). Please explain why or why not.

Implementation

Note questions 7-9 may not apply to all key informants

7. Has your association ever applied for certification under the Status of the Artist Act? Why or why not?

8. If yes, how would you characterize the application process? (Probe: Was the process easy to understand? Time-consuming? Did it require significant expenditure of time or resources? Did it require specialized resources?) Why do you think your association was unsuccessful in achieving certification?

9. If not, would your association ever consider applying for certification under the Act? Why or why not?

10. Based on your understanding of and experience with the legislation, are there any areas of ambiguity, or inconsistencies in interpretation? What changes would you suggest to help clarify the legislation?

11. Since the Act was implemented in 1995, have there been any changes in the cultural sector that make it difficult to apply the legislation? What implications do these changes have for the legislation? How, if at all, should the legislation be changed?

12. In your view, is there any conflict between the rights granted to a certified artists' association by the Status of the Artist Act and those of a copyright collective formed pursuant to the Copyright Act? Please discuss.

13. In your view, is there any conflict between the mechanisms set out in the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act for:

determining entitlement to payment of copyright?
enforcing payment of copyright?

Impacts

14. What impact has the Act had for the members of this association? What impact has it had for this association in general? Has it had any unintended impacts?

15. Has the legislation improved labour relations between this association and federal producers? Has it improved the economic circumstances of members of this association? Why or why not?

16. To the extent that the legislation has been successful in meeting its objectives, what aspects of it have contributed to this success? To the extent that the Act has been unsuccessful, what factors account for this failure?

Efficiencies

17. To your knowledge, does the Act or its components supplement or complement:

other federal legislation?
other provincial legislation?
other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies?

18. To your knowledge, does the Act or its components duplicate or overlap:

other federal legislation?
other provincial legislation?
other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies?

19. To your knowledge, does the Act or its components work at cross-purposes with:

other federal legislation?
other provincial legislation?
other administrative bodies or independent adjudicative agencies?

20. To your knowledge, is there any overlap between the role of the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist and the role of any other body? Is there any overlap between the role of the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal and any other body?

Conclusion

21. Do you have any other comments?

Notes

Although we invited both certified and non-certified artists' associations to participate in the interview process, only two non-certified associations agreed to an interview. A certified association is one that has been granted the sole right, under the Status of the Artist Act, to represent an artistic sector for the purpose of collective bargaining with producers in federal jurisdiction.
Some interviewees qualified their remarks by saying that they lack evidence to substantiate their opinion. Pending the release of 2001 Census data, data from the 1996 Census are the most current figures available on artists' earnings.
In its Speech from the Throne delivered March 14, 2002, Saskatchewan announced that it will table and debate status of the artist legislation.
Note that artists' associations are certified to represent artistic sectors, not just their members.
Although all key informants were asked to comment on the administrative provisions of Part II of the Act and on the clarity of the legislation (see sections 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 of this report), only government key informants were asked to comment on the adequacy of CAPPRT's organization and service delivery structure.
One key informant, who strongly recommended rethinking the Tribunal, suggested amalgamating it with the Copyright Board as another alternative to its amalgamation with the CIRB. This key informant saw advantages to both possibilities. The Copyright Board is accustomed to dealing with artists, while the CIRB deals with terms and conditions of collective agreements.
One key informant reported that the CIRB was approached prior to the implementation of the legislation to assess its willingness to administer Part II of the Act. The CIRB was opposed in principle to the concept of self-employed persons being subject to the type of labour relations regime to which employees are subject.
Note that legal representation is also not required for parties appearing before the CIRB.
In particular, representatives from some artists' associations believe that the Tribunal erred in certifying editors as "joint authors" under the legislation. These associations believe that editors should be certified as editors, rather than as joint authors. However, this is not possible under the current Regulations.
In 1998, the Attorney-General of Canada filed an application with the Federal Court of Appeal to set aside CAPPRT's decision to grant certification to The Writers' Union of Canada with regard to pre-existing work. The applicant's challenge to the Tribunal's decision was "based on the allegation that the Tribunal acted beyond its jurisdiction by declaring a sector suitable for bargaining in a manner which empowers the Association to bargain in respect of pre-existing works." The Federal Court dismissed the application, noting that "nothing in the certification order indicates the scope of actual bargaining or whether pre-existing works may be included or excluded," and that the Tribunal's "powers extend only to the certification of a sector, and not to limiting or expanding matters for subsequent negotiations." Note that we will treat the issue of potential conflict between the Status of the Artist Act and the Copyright Act in greater detail in the final report.

Appendix D -- Report on surveys

Introduction and methodology

Methodology

Findings from the survey of artists

Profile of respondents
Relevance of the legislation
Impact of the legislation
Summary

Findings from the producer survey

Profile of respondents
Relevance of the legislation
Implementation of the legislation
Impact of the legislation
Summary

Annex A -- Survey of artists

Annex B -- Survey of Producers

Introduction and methodology

The Status of the Artist Act, brought into force in May 1995, recognizes the importance of artists in Canadian society and establishes a framework to govern professional relations between artists and producers in federal jurisdiction. The Department of Canadian Heritage engaged Prairie Research Associates (PRA) to evaluate the provisions and operations of the Status of the Artist Act as a first step in a review of the legislation.

PRA conducted a survey of artists and a survey of producers as part of this evaluation. This report summarizes the findings from the surveys.

Methodology

1. Survey of artists

PRA followed up on the introductory letter with telephone calls to each association. As a result of these calls, 31 of the associations agreed to participate in the survey. Of these, 11 were willing to provide us with their membership lists, while the remaining 20 agreed to distribute the survey to a sample of their members on our behalf.

Based on the size of each association's membership, their certification status, and a total sample size of 1,000, we determined the number of surveys to be allocated to each association using the following formula:

Non-certified associations received 15 surveys each.
Certified associations with fewer than 1,000 members received 25 surveys each.
Certified associations with between 1,000 and 10,000 members received 50 surveys each.
Certified associations with more than 10,000 members received just over 90 surveys each.

In addition, we invited all associations to inform their members that if they did not receive a copy of the survey in the mail but still wished to participate, they could access the PRA web site to request a copy.

All survey recipients received the survey in both English and French; a copy of the English version is in Annex A. Individuals who accessed the PRA web site could request the survey in the language of their choice.

It should be noted that although one non-certified association was sent 15 surveys for distribution to its members, these were returned to PRA due to an incorrect mailing address. PRA telephoned this association and left a message requesting that the association contact us should it wish to be included in the survey. However, we received no response to this call.

Some 985 surveys (rather than 1,000) were initially distributed to artists, either directly by PRA or by an artists' association. In addition, we received six requests for a survey through our web site. Overall, a total of 991 surveys were therefore distributed to artists, of which we received 296 in return, resulting in a response rate of 29.9%. We suspect that some individuals may have felt that they were not knowledgeable enough about the legislation to respond to the survey.

Table 1 shows the associations that participated in the survey, the size of their membership, the number of surveys allocated to each, the number of surveys received from each, and the response rate for each.

Table 1: Survey of artists: sample distribution and response rates
Association	Effectif total	Questionnaires distribués	Questionnaires remplis	Taux de réponse
Associations accréditées
Association of Canadian Television and Radio Artists	18 000	93	17	18,3 %
American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada	16 000	92	22	23,9 %
Union des artistes¹	6 000	51	16	31,4 %
Canadian Actors' Equity Association	5 000	50	19	38,0 %
Guilde des musiciens du Québec	3 500	50	0	0%
Canadian Artists' Representation/Le Front des artistes canadiens	4 000	50	17	34,0 %
Writers' Guild of Canada	1 600	50	20	40,0 %
Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels du Québec	1 600	50	24	48,0 %
The Writers' Union of Canada	1 400	50	31	62,0 %
Union des écrivaines et des écrivains québécois	1 200	50	19	38,0 %
Société des auteurs de radio, télévision et cinéma	850	25	6	24,0 %
Conseil des métiers d'art du Québec	700	25	1	4,0 %
The Canadian Association of Photographers and Illustrators in Communications/L'Association canadienne de photographes et illustrateurs en communication	500	25	5	20,0 %
Periodical Writers' Association of Canada	500	25	8	32,0 %
Association des réalisateurs et réalisatrices du Québec	400	25	10	40,0 %
Playwrights' Union of Canada	400	25	8	32,0 %
Associated Designers of Canada²/Association des désigners canadiens	165	30	9	30,0 %
Association des professionnels des arts de la scène du Québec	160;	25	12	48,0 %
Association québécoise des auteurs dramatiques	150	25	14	56,0 %
Société professionnelle des auteurs et des compositeurs québécois	147	25	8	32,0 %
Associations non accréditées
Fight Directors Canada	1 000	15	4	26,7 %
Association des professionnelles de la vidéo du Québec	900	15	0	0 %
Writers' Guild of Alberta	720	15	5	33,3 %
Association of Canadian Film Craftspeople (BC)/Association des artisans du film canadien (C.-B.)	600	15	1	6,7 %
League of Canadian Poets	300	15	6	40,0 %
Centre des auteurs dramatiques	200	15	7	46,7 %
Writers' Federation of New Brunswick	174	15	4	26,7 %
Association des journalistes indépendants du Québec	150	15	0	0 %
Literary Translators' Association of Canada	100	15	1	6,7 %
Canadian Alliance of Dance Artists (Ont.)	50	15	2	13,3 %
Total	66 466	991	296	29,9 %
1 One survey was requested through the web site. However, it was not returned. 2 Five surveys were requested through the web site; two were returned.

Survey of producers

PRA conducted a survey of federal producers subject to the legislation using the instrument in Annex B. The Department of Canadian Heritage identified 27 federal producers to participate in the survey. PRA mailed surveys to these 27 federal producers and asked respondents to return their completed surveys to PRA in a stamped, self-addressed return envelope or by toll-free fax. We asked survey recipients who felt that another individual from their organization was more qualified to respond, to return the blank survey, along with that individual's name, to PRA. We then invited the identified individual to participate in the survey.

Twelve of 27 surveys were returned to PRA. Three of the returned surveys were blank, and one indicated that the questionnaire did not apply.(46) These four surveys were excluded from the analysis. Thus, the total sample size was eight; of these, seven were in English and one was in French.

The response rate for the survey was 29.6%, which was somewhat lower than expected. We were told that some of the producers identified by the Department of Canadian Heritage chose not to return their surveys because they were members of a producers' association that had already participated in the research through the interview process.(47) The association representative whom we interviewed informally canvassed the views of the association's membership prior to completing the interview and spoke on behalf of the entire organization. Fifteen of the producers in our sample were members of this producer association. Table 2 below lists the 27 recipients of the producer survey. Due to the small sample size, caution must be used when interpreting results from the producer survey.

Federal producers that received the producer survey

Legal Services, Human Resources Development Canada
Public Works and Government Services Canada
Material and Contracts, Department of Canadian Heritage
Contracting Services Division, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
Legal Services and ATIP, Communication Canada
National Capital Commission
National Gallery of Canada
Ontario Association of Art Galleries
Professional Art Dealers' Association of Canada Inc.
Alberta Recording Industries Associations
Canadian Independent Record Production Association
Music Industry Association of Nova Scotia
Canadian Learning Television
CHUM Television
CJOH TV
Country Music Television
CTV Television Network
Group TVA Inc.
HistoryTelevision/Showcase Television
Life Network/HGTV Canada
MusiquePlus
Odyssey Television Network Inc.
The Comedy Network/Outdoor Life/Talk TV
The Discovery Channel
TQS
Société Radio-Canada
Specialty and Premium Television Association

Findings from the survey of artists

Findings from the survey of artists have been organized according to the issues and questions in the evaluation framework. Note that in reporting the survey results, we have calculated all percentage responses out of the total number of survey respondents.

Profile of respondents

Table 3 shows the occupations of responding self-employed professional artists. For the purposes of this survey, a self-employed professional artist is one who pursues his or her work independently (i.e., is not employed by an organization or a producer) or who performs artistic work as part of a contract for services.

Some 40% of respondents are self-employed writers.
About 1 in 7 respondents are:
- actors (15%)
- painters/sculptors/other visual artists (14%)
- producers/directors/choreographers (13%).
Fewer than 3% of respondents are self-employed literary artists, theatre artists, performers, photographers, artisan/crafts persons, or dancers.

Table 3: Respondents' occupation
Occupation)	% (n=296
Writer	42%
Actor	15%
Painter/sculptor/other visual artist	14%
Producer/director/choreographer	13%
Musician/singer	10%
Design	6%
Conductor/composer/arranger	4%
Other	15%
Note: Respondents could choose more than one answer. Totals may sum to more than 100%.

Table 4 shows the certified artists' associations of which respondents indicated being a member; note that respondents could indicate being a member of more than one association.

Table 4: Certified artists' associations membership
Association d'artistes	% (n = 296)
Association of Canadian Television and Radio Artists	17 %
The Writers' Union of Canada	13 %
Canadian Actors' Equity Association	12 %
Union des artistes	11 %
Writers' Guild of Canada	10 %
Union des écrivaines et des écrivains québécois	9 %
Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels du Québec	8 %
American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada	8 %
Société des auteurs de radio, télévision et cinéma	8 %
Association québecoise des auteurs dramatiques	6 %
Canadian Artists' Representation	6 %
Association des professionnels des arts de la scène du Québec	4 %
Société professionnelle des auteurs	4 %
Association des réalisateurs et réalisatrices du Québec	4 %
Playwrights Union of Canada	3 %
Guilde des musiciens du Québec	3 %
Periodical Writers' Association of Canada	3 %
Associated Designers of Canada	3 %
The Canadian Association of Photographers and Illustrators	2 %
Editors' Association of Canada	1 %
Conseil des métiers d'art du Québec	1 %
Ne sait pas/Pas de réponse	6 %
Note: Respondents could choose more than one answer. Totals may sum to more than 100%.

Some respondents are members of non-certified artists' associations in addition to being members of certified associations, or are members of non-certified associations only. Among the more frequently mentioned non-certified associations were the Society of Composers, Authors, and Music Publishers of Canada; the League of Canadian Poets; Centre des auteurs dramatique; Children's Authors Illustrators, Performers; Poets, Essayists, and Novelists; and the Writers' Guild of Alberta.

We asked respondents to indicate the three main issues that concern them as self-employed professional artists.

Many (31%) are concerned about their level of compensation, income, and wages.
About 1 respondent in 6 (17%) is concerned about taxation and access to other benefits such as disability, workers' compensation, and employment insurance, and 15% are concerned about work security.
Just over 10% of respondents are concerned about public and government perception of arts and artists, and about arts funding and grants. Other concerns include financial and contract rights, and distribution and promotion of the arts in general. See Table 5.

Table 5: Issues that are of concern to self-employed professional artists
Issue	% (n=296)
Compensation/income/wages	31%
Taxation (income averaging, tax exemptions, tax status)	17%
Access to benefits (e.g., employment insurance, disability, workers' compensation)	17%
Work security (securing regular work)	15%
Arts funding and grants	11%
Public and government perception of the arts and artists	11%
Financial and contract rights	4%
Distribution and promotion of the arts	4%
Other	24%
Don't know/No response	22%
Note: Respondents could choose more than one answer. Totals may sum to more than 100%.

Before asking respondents to respond to specific questions about the Status of the Artist Act, we asked them to indicate how familiar they were with the legislation. Although 45% of respondents had heard of the Act before receiving the survey, just as many had not. Of those who had heard of the Act before, most (81%) were at least somewhat knowledgeable about its purpose, while slightly fewer (74%) were at least somewhat knowledgeable about its provisions. See Table 6.

Table 6: Knowledge of the Act
	%
Heard of the Act before this survey (n=296)
Yes	45%
No	44%
Unsure/Don't know/No response	11%
Knowledge of the purpose of the Act (n=133)
Very knowledgeable	13%
Somewhat knowledgeable	68%
Not at all knowledgeable	19%
Knowledge of the provisions of the Act (n=108)
Very knowledgeable	9%
Somewhat knowledgeable	65%
Not at all knowledgeable	26%

Relevance of the legislation

This section reports on respondents' level of agreement(48) with several statements about the ongoing relevance of the Status of the Artist Act. The first questions we asked respondents concerned the economic circumstances of artists.

A slight majority of respondents (52%) disagree that the working conditions and economic circumstances of self-employed artists are better now than they were in 1995. Just over 10% agree with this statement, and 19% are neutral. Almost one-fifth of respondents do not know or did not respond.
Virtually all respondents (92%) disagree that most self-employed artists in Canada today can earn a living through their art, including 54% who strongly disagree. Only 1% of respondents agree with this statement.
Not surprisingly, the vast majority of respondents (93%) agree that most self-employed artists in Canada today can earn a living only if they supplement their art with non-artistic work. This includes 39% who strongly agree. Only 2% of respondents disagree with this statement.

See Table 7 below.

Tableau 7 : Situation économique des artistes
Statement	Strongly agree/Agree	Neutral	Strongly disagree/Disagree	Don't know/No response
Overall in Canada, the working conditions and economic circumstances of self-employed artists are better now than in 1995.	11 %	19 %	52 %	18 %
Most self-employed artists in Canada today can earn a living through their art.	1 %	3 %	92 %	3 %
Most self-employed artists in Canada today can earn a living only if they supplement their art with non-artistic work.	93 %	3 %	2 %	2 %

We also asked respondents several questions related to the need for measures to improve the working conditions and economic circumstances of artists.

Most respondents (93%) agree that measures to improve the economic circumstances of self-employed artists are necessary in Canada, including 66% who strongly agree.
A majority (74%) also agree that measures to improve labour relations between artists' associations and producers are necessary in Canada; 41% strongly agree with this statement.
While the vast majority of respondents agree that measures are needed to improve the economic circumstances of self-employed artists, few (10%) agree that the existing Status of the Artist Act is sufficient to achieve this. Furthermore, about 30% of respondents disagree with this statement. However, almost half (44%) of respondents do not know or did not respond.
Almost three-quarters of respondents agree that other measures, in addition to the Status of the Artist Act, are necessary in order to improve the economic circumstances of self-employed artists. Some 46% of those who agree with this statement strongly agree.
One-third of respondents agree that other measures, instead of the Status of the Artist Act, would be more effective at improving the economic circumstances of self-employed artists. About 24% of respondents are neutral, and 39% do not know or did not respond.

See Table 8 below for the details.

Table 8: Ongoing relevance of the Status of the Artist Act
Statement	Strongly agree/Agree	Neutral	Strongly disagree/Disagree	Don't know/No
Measures to improve the economic circumstances of self-employed artists are necessary in Canada.	93 %	4 %	6 %	2 %
Measures to improve labour relations between artists' associations and producers are necessary in Canada.	74 %	17 %	2 %	7 %
The existing Status of the Artist Act is sufficient to improve the economic conditions of self-employed artists in Canada.	10 %	17 %	29 %	44 %
Other measures, in addition to the Status of the Artist Act, are necessary in order to improve the economic circumstances of self-employed artists.	73 %	6 %	1 %	20 %
Other measures, rather than the Status of the Artist Act, would be more effective at improving the economic circumstances of self-employed artists.	33 %	24 %	4 %	39 %

We also asked respondents to tell us how important they feel various measures that currently exist to improve the economic situation of self-employed artists are, in terms of their contribution to their own economic circumstances.

More than 90% of respondents believe that deductions for business expenses under the Income Tax Act and copyright are important.
Almost as many (87%) believe that creation, production, and touring grants from arts councils and government departments are important.
About 80% of respondents believe that the public lending right and exhibition rights are important (79% and 76% respectively).
Of the various measures that currently exist to improve the economic circumstances of artists, the legal right to collective bargaining, one of the rights granted through the Status of the Artist Act, is seen as the least important. About 70% of respondents believe that the legal right to collective bargaining is important, while about 15% of respondents believe that this right is of little or no importance.

See Table 9 below.

Table 9: Other measures to improve economic circumstances of artists
Measure -- Very important/Important	% (n=296)
Deductions for business expenses under the Income Tax Act	95%
Protection of the economic rights of creators (copyright)	92%
Creation, production, and touring grants from arts councils and government departments	87%
Program of payments to Canadian authors for their eligible books catalogued in Canadian libraries (Public Lending Right)	79%
Compensation for public display of art works (exhibition rights)	76%
Legal right to collective bargaining	69%

We also asked respondents to rate the importance of various measures that have been proposed as means of improving the economic situation of self-employed artists. Respondents were to base this rating on their perception of the potential contribution of these measures to improving their own economic circumstances.

Almost 90% of respondents believe income averaging for taxation purposes to be important, while about 80% believe that tax exemptions on copyright income are important.
Almost as many regard protection from producer bankruptcy (78%) and access to employment insurance and other social programs (77%) to be important.

See Table 10.

Table 10: Proposed measures to improve economic circumstances of artists
Measure -- Very important/Important	% (n=296)
Income averaging for taxation purposes	88%
Tax exemption on copyright income	81%
Protection from producer bankruptcy	78%
Access to employment insurance and other social programs	77%

2.3 Impact of the legislation

A large proportion of survey respondents were unable to respond to questions related to the impact of the Status of the Artist Act, or indicated having no opinion. This may be because they were unaware of the legislation or because their knowledge of the Act is limited. For example, when we asked respondents whether the legislation adequately permitted recognition of professional artists, artists' associations, and artistic sectors, more than 60% did not know or did not respond to each of these questions. Similar proportions did not know or did not respond when we asked respondents whether the legislation adequately permits artists' associations to enter into negotiations with producers and to negotiate scale agreements with producers. See Table 11 for detailed information.

Tableau 11 : Est-ce que les mesures législatives permettent de manière adéquate...
	Yes	No	Don't know/No response
Recognition of professional artists	20 %	18 %	62 %
Recognition of professional artists' associations	33 %	8 %	60 %
Recognition of artistic sectors	20 %	11 %	69 %
Artists' associations to enter into negotiations with producers	21 %	11 %	68 %
Artists' associations to negotiate scale agreements with producers	20 %	13 %	68 %

We next asked respondents to rate their level of agreement with a series of statements about the impact of the Status of the Artist Act.

Almost half of respondents (47%) agree that the Status of the Artist Act has made no difference to their own economic circumstances. Of these, some 18% strongly agree. About 14% disagree, and 13% are neutral. Just over one-quarter (26%) do not know or did not respond.
About 1 in 6 respondents agrees that the Status of the Artist Act has improved the economic circumstances of professional artists in Canada (17% of all survey respondents), and has, in general, improved labour relations between artists' associations and federal producers (15%). For both of these statements, about half of respondents do not know or did not respond.
Just over 10% of all survey respondents agree that the Status of the Artist Act has improved labour relations between the association(s) of which he or she is a member and federal producers. However, more than half of respondents do not know or did not respond.

See Table 12.

Table 12: Level of agreement
Statement	Strongly agree/Agree	Neutral	Strongly disagree/Disagree	Don't know/No response
The Status of the Artist Act has made no difference to my own economic circumstances.	47 %	13 %	14 %	26 %
The Status of the Artist Act has improved the economic circumstances of professional artists in Canada.	17 %	22 %	15 %	46 %
In general, the Status of the Artist Act has improved labour relations between artists' associations and federal producers.	15 %	22 %	6 %	57 %
The Status of the Artist Act has improved labour relations between the association(s) that I am a member of and federal producers.	12 %	25 %	7 %	56 %

Respondents were asked to indicate what they thought were the main strengths and shortcomings of the Status of the Artist Act. About 70% of respondents do not have an opinion, do not know, did not respond, or said they do not know enough about the Act to respond. Nonetheless, respondents identified the following strengths of the legislation:

It allows recognition of artists (12%).
It allows recognition of artists' associations (7%).
It provides for collective bargaining (5%).

Shortcomings of the legislation identified by respondents include:

Its economic impact is small or nonexistent (8%).
It has not been properly publicized (7%).
It does not reform tax laws (3%).
It only covers federal producers (3%).

See Table 13.

Table 13: Strengths and shortcomings of the Status of the Artist Act
	% (n=296)
Strengths
Recognition of artists	12%
Recognition of artists' associations	7%
Collective bargaining	5%
Other strengths	10%
Criticisms	4%
No opinion/Don't know/No response/Don't know enough about it	70%
Shortcomings
No economic effect	8%
Lacks publicity	7%
Doesn't reform tax laws	3%
Only covers federal producers	3%
More enforcement necessary	2%
Definitional problems	2%
Other shortcomings	11%
No opinion/Don't know/No response/Don't know enough about it	70%
Note: Respondents could choose more than one answer. Totals may sum to more than 100%.

Respondents were asked what changes, if any, they would make to the Act. A large proportion of respondents (81%) do not have an opinion, do not know, did not respond, or do not know enough about the Act to respond. However, among those who gave suggestions for changes, the most frequently mentioned possibilities were tax reform, extending the legislation to cover more workers, and access to income assistance programs. Note that except for extended coverage, these suggestions are outside the scope of the legislation as it is currently formulated. See Table 14.

Table 14: Suggested changes to the Status of the Artist Act
Suggested change	% (n=296)
Tax reforms	5%
Extended coverage	3%
Access to income assistance programs	3%
More/broader copyright protection	2%
More or different grants	2%
More publicity for the Act	2%
Other changes	6%
No changes	1%
No opinion/Don't know/No response/Don't know enough about the Act	81%
Note: Respondents could choose more than one answer. Totals may sum to more than 100%.

We also asked respondents if they had any other suggestions for how to improve the economic conditions of self-employed artists in Canada. Almost half of respondents do not have a opinion, do not know, or did not respond. However, some of the suggestions to improve these conditions include increased arts funding and grants (15%); tax breaks, tax reform, or redefinitions (13%); income assistance (9%); and more promotion of the arts, of creativity, and of the importance of artists (7%). See Table 15.

Table 15: Suggestions to improve the economic conditions of self-employed artists
Suggestion	% (n=296)
Increased arts funding or grants	15%
Tax breaks, reforms, redefinitions	13%
Income assistance	9%
Promotion of arts, creativity, importance of artists	7%
Copyright improvements	5%
Restrict foreign competition	4%
Raise awareness of law	3%
Other suggestions	18%
No opinion/Don't know/No response	45%
Note: Respondents could choose more than one answer. Totals may sum to more than 100%.

Summary

Respondents to the survey are self-employed artists representing a variety of artistic sectors. Respondents indicated that self-employed professional artists are concerned about a range of issues including, for example, their level of compensation, income and wages, taxation, and work security.

Fewer than half of respondents had heard of the Status of the Artist Act before receiving this survey. Of those who had heard of the Act, most were at least somewhat knowledgeable about its purpose and provisions.

The majority of respondents disagree that the working conditions and economic circumstances of self-employed artists have improved since 1995, and almost all respondents believe that most self-employed artists cannot earn a living through their art and that non-artistic work is needed to supplement their income. Furthermore, many respondents agree that measures to improve the economic circumstances of self-employed artists and to improve labour relations between artists' associations and producers are necessary in Canada. However, few feel that the current Status of the Artist Act is sufficient to do this, and some believe that other measures, in addition to or instead of the Status of the Artist Act, are necessary to improve artists' economic circumstances.

Most respondents believe that measures that currently exist to improve the economic situation of self-employed artists are important. Among those that are most important to respondents are provisions for deduction of business expenses under the Income Tax Act and copyright. Fewer respondents find that rights granted under the Status of the Artist Act are important. In fact, respondents to the survey rated the legal right to collective bargaining as the least important of ten existing and potential measures. Of the four potential measures that respondents were asked to rate (income averaging, tax exemptions on copyright income, protection from producer bankruptcy, and access to employment insurance and other social programs), all four are seen as more important than the legal right to collective bargaining.

Many respondents were unable to answer questions about the impact of the Status of the Artist Act. This may be because they were unaware of the legislation or their knowledge about the Act is limited. However, between one-fifth and one-third of respondents agree that the legislation is meeting its objectives. That is, it adequately permits recognition of professional artists, professional artists' associations, and artistic sectors, and adequately permits artists' associations to enter into negotiations with producers and to negotiate scale agreements with producers.

Almost half of respondents agree that the Status of the Artist Act has made no difference to their own economic circumstances. Fewer than one-fifth of respondents agree that the Act has improved the economic circumstances of professional artists and labour relations between artists' associations and federal producers. Nonetheless, respondents believe that the main strengths of the legislation are that it recognizes artists and artists' associations and that it allows for collective bargaining. Among its main perceived shortcomings are its limited economic impact, a lack of publicity, the fact that it does not reform tax laws, and its restriction to federal producers.

Very few respondents suggested changes to the Act, but about half gave suggestions for other ways to improve the economic conditions of self-employed artists in Canada. Increased arts funding and grants and tax reform were the most frequently mentioned possibilities.

Findings from the producer survey

Findings from the producer survey have been organized according to the issues and questions in the research framework.

Profile of respondents

Three respondents are part of a federal department or ministry, and two represent a federal government agency or Crown corporation. One respondent is a federally regulated broadcaster. The remaining two respondents are not representatives of one of these categories. It is possible that these respondents represent producer associations.

Half of respondents work in the area of publishing. Three are involved in visual arts. Other areas of artistic production include broadcasting; performing arts such as dance, opera, theatre, and music; and film/video production. One respondent indicated being involved in "contracting" but did not elaborate, and one did not respond.

Producers appear to employ artists who are members of certified artists' associations. However, the number of artists' associations employed by a producer varies greatly, from only one artists' association to 13 artists' associations. Five producers employ four artists' associations or fewer. One federal department/ministry employs 13 artists' associations. Two producers representing a federal department/ministry did not respond to this question.

Awareness of the Act

Most producers appear to be aware of the Status of the Artist Act. Six respondents had heard of the Status of the Artist Act before receiving the survey, while the two remaining respondents had not. It should be noted that these are the two respondents who did not fit into one of the producer groups listed in the survey.

Producers who are aware of the Act seem to be knowledgeable of its purpose and provisions. In fact, each of the producers who had heard of the Act said that they are at least somewhat aware of its purpose and provisions. Two respondents said that they are very knowledgeable about the purpose of the Act.

Relevance of the legislation

We asked respondents to rate(49) their level of agreement with several statements about the relevance of the Status of the Artist Act. Their opinions are reported in this section.

Working conditions and economic circumstances

Three respondents agree that the working conditions and economic circumstances of self-employed artists are better now than they were in 1995. Two respondents disagree, and three do not know.

Five respondents agree that measures to improve the economic circumstances of self-employed artists are necessary in Canada. One respondent disagrees with this statement, another is neutral, and one does not know. Of those who agree with this statement, two respondents also agree that the working conditions and economic circumstances of self-employed artists are better now than they were in 1995. Two disagree, and one does not know.

Two respondents with an opinion agree that measures to improve labour relations between artists' associations and producers are necessary. Another two respondents disagree with this statement. Three respondents are neutral, and one did not respond. Of those who agree with this statement, one respondent also agrees that the working conditions and economic circumstances of self-employed artists are better now than they were in 1995. The other disagrees.

Ability of the Act to achieve its objectives

Three respondents strongly disagree that the existing Status of the Artist Act is sufficient to achieve its objectives. Two respondents agree with this statement, and two are neutral. One respondent does not know.

Three respondents agree that other measures, in addition to the Status of the Artist Act, are necessary in order to achieve its objectives. Of the remaining respondents, two are neutral, two disagree, and one does not know.

A variety of reasons for agreeing that other measures are necessary were given. The responses include:

Act affects associations but not necessarily artists themselves.
Labour relations provisions may apply to one form of artistic production but not another.

Half of respondents agree that other measures, rather than the Status of the Artist Act, would be more effective at achieving its objectives. Three respondents are neutral, and one disagrees.

Those who agree give the following reasons:

Have not been successful so far in implementing SAA so there is evidently a problem.
Further support to individual artists could be made through stimulation of the market through tax incentives, improved funding to federal producers, enhanced support to arts councils and grassroots arts organizations.

Two of the respondents who strongly disagree that the existing Status of the Artist Act is sufficient to achieve its objectives agree that other measures, in addition to the Status of the Artist Act, are necessary in order to achieve its objectives. All the respondents who strongly disagree that the existing Act is sufficient agree that other measures than the Status of the Artist Act would be more effective at achieving its objectives.

Implementation of the legislation

In this section, we report on respondents' perspectives regarding the implementation of the Status of the Artist Act.

Respondent involvement with the Act

The level of respondent involvement with the Status of the Artist Act varies.

Nonetheless, the majority of respondents (5 of 8) have been served with notices to bargain. Of these, three respondents have been served one notice to bargain, and two have been served three notices to bargain. For four respondents, these notices to bargain resulted in one case of entering into negotiations. One respondent entered into

negotiations in three cases. In one instance, these negotiations resulted in the conclusion of a scale agreement.

Implementation

Three respondents agree that the Status of the Artist Act adequately permits professional artists' associations to be recognized for collective bargaining purposes. Half of respondents have a neutral opinion, and one did not respond.

Half of respondents disagree that the existing Status of the Artist Act adequately takes into account the concerns of producers. One respondent agrees with this statement because "there is a need to properly define the producer and engaging of artists." Of the remaining respondents, three respondents are neutral, and one agrees. The reason for agreeing with this statement is that "freedom of association and expression are recognized under the Act."

Half of respondents agree that there are numerous impediments to successful negotiation of scale agreements with artists' associations. Reasons for agreeing with this statement include:

The negotiation of collective agreements is inappropriate for contracting departments.
The law is not clear and is inconsistent with common contracting practices.
Producers are not represented or adequately consulted.
Associations are certified to negotiate for activities that fall outside the scope of the Status of the Artist Act, e.g., for copyright, which is a "good," not a service.

Two respondents disagree with this statement, one is neutral, and one has no opinion/does not know.

Half of respondents strongly agree that the Status of the Artist Act has been inconsistently interpreted. Reasons for strongly agreeing with this statement include:

No one seems to have a good handle on what is required, and the Tribunal is not willing to assist.
Different associations interpret the Act the way it suits them and usually to the benefit of the union or association rather than artists.
Producers have not been consulted, and the Act, while granting artists' unions the right to set fees, does not seem to have encouraged government funders at any level to have improved program support to institutions.
The Tribunal has exceeded the scope of its legislated authority. In our current negotiation with an artists' association, the artists' association is requesting to negotiate beyond the scope of their certification.

Three respondents have a neutral opinion, and one has no opinion/does not know. Half of respondents strongly agree that some provisions of the Status of the Artist Act require clarification. Reasons for strongly agreeing with this statement include:

Federal producers should be significant users rather than every department and agency [i.e., they should employ large numbers of self-employed artists in order to fall under the scope of the legislation].
The role and authority of the Tribunal must be re-evaluated to ensure that their decisions, particularly in regard to certifications, balance the interests of stakeholders and reflect the intent of the legislation.

Two respondents have a neutral opinion, one disagrees, and one has no opinion/does not know. Each respondent who strongly agrees that the Act has been inconsistently interpreted also strongly agrees that it requires clarification.

Impact of the legislation

In this section, we report on respondents' perspectives on the impact of the Status of the Artist Act legislation.

Half of respondents have no opinion/do not know whether the Status of the Artist Act has improved the economic circumstances of professional artists in Canada. There is no consensus among those who could rate their opinion; two are neutral, one agrees, and one disagrees.

Half of respondents disagree that the Status of the Artist Act has improved labour relations between their organization and artists' associations. Three of these respondents strongly disagree. One respondent agrees, two are neutral, and one has no opinion/does not know.

Half of respondents disagree that, in general, the Status of the Artist Act has improved labour relations between artists' associations and federal producers. Of the remaining respondents, two are neutral, and two have no opinion/do not know.

Three of the respondents who disagree that the Act has improved labour relations between their organization and artists' associations also disagree that the Act has improved labour relations between artists' associations and federal producers.

Strengths and weaknesses

Respondents identified the following strengths of the legislation:

Unions are more able to impose themselves because of the added powers the legislation grants them. However, this may be counterproductive because federal producers want to work with them but for benefit of artists, not associations.
The Act provides a good framework for negotiations and is clear on most of the obligations of federal producers.

Two respondents indicated that they did not have experience with the Act. However, one reported that his/her organization recognized the Act's potential to enhance the conditions of employment for artists who are delivering a service to a federal producer.

The main shortcomings identified by respondents include:

The Act doesn't seem applicable to visual artists because of the nature of the visual artist/dealer relationship.
With respect to visual arts institutions, only one or two copyright collectives have been privileged to set fees.
Does not work for contracting/competitive solicitations where bidders include individuals and firms.
Causes federal departments tremendous complexity for business volumes that are insignificant.
Not consistent with provincial laws affecting this industry.
The Act is not clear on outlining the way federal producers work vis-à-vis the arts community.
Some organizations are finding themselves brought into collective bargaining under the Act for activities beyond commissioned or distributed works.

Summary

Given the small sample size, it is difficult to make generalizations based on results from the producer survey. Further, some producers were unable to rate their opinions about the Status of the Artist Act. This may be because two of the producers were not aware of the legislation before this survey was distributed or because most producers who were aware of the Act were only somewhat knowledgeable about its purpose and provisions. Additionally, in many instances where producers were able to rate their opinions, a general consensus was not reached.

While producers may have limited experience with the Status of the Artist Act, they agree that measures to improve the economic circumstances of self-employed artists in Canada are necessary. However, it also appears that the current legislation may not be adequate. Several producers agree that other measures, in addition to or rather than the Status of the Artist Act, are necessary in order to achieve its objectives. This may be because producers do not feel that the current legislation takes into account their concerns or because the Act has been inconsistently interpreted and therefore requires clarification.

A unanimous agreement regarding the impact of the Act was not reached. Some producers feel that the Act improves the economic circumstances of professional artists in Canada; improves labour relations between their organization and artists' associations; and improves labour relations between artists' associations and federal producers. Others do not agree with these statements or do not have an opinion/do not know.

Producers said that the Act is a good framework for negotiations and noted that it has the potential to enhance the conditions of employment for artists who are delivering a service to a federal producer. However, they also indicated that the Act is not applicable to all areas of artistic production and that, in some instances, its implications for producers are not clear.

Annex A -- Survey of Artists

Review of the Provisions and Operations of the Status of the Artist Act

The Department of Canadian Heritage has contracted with PRA Inc., an independent research firm, to conduct a review of the provisions and operations of the Status of the Artist Act. The Act is federal legislation that recognizes the importance of artists in Canadian society and establishes a framework to govern professional relations between associations of self-employed professional artists and producers in federal jurisdiction.

This survey, which gathers information from members of artists' associations, is part of our review of the federal legislation. Your name was randomly selected from the membership list of the association of which you are a member. Your views are important to the review, so please take a few moments to complete this questionnaire. All of your responses will remain confidential to PRA and will be reported only in aggregate. The administrative number below is solely to enable us to manage the survey process and to understand our sample.

If you have any questions about the survey, please telephone Natalie Baydack of PRA toll-free at 1-888-877-6744.

Please return the survey in the envelope provided or by toll-free fax at 1-800-717-5456

Your early attention to this survey is appreciated

Please return the survey by April 19, 2002

Part A: Background information

This first section of the questionnaire gathers background information to help us understand the context for your responses.

1. Please check the single category that best describes your occupation as a self-employed professional artist.

Self-employed professional artist: A self-employed professional artist is one who pursues his or her work independently (i.e., is not employed by an organization or a producer), or who performs artistic work as part of a contract for services. Self-employed artists are not covered under the Employment Insurance Act, but are covered by, and must pay all the contributions required under, the Canada Pension Plan based on their net self-employed earnings. The questions below pertain to your activities as a self-employed artist, and not to any work you might be performing as an employee.

Writer
Actor
Producer/director/choreographer
Painter/sculptor/other visual artist
Conductor/composer/arranger
Artisan/craftsperson
Musician/singer
Dancer
Other (specify)

2a. Please check the name of the certified artists' association(s) of which you are currently a member. If you are a member of more than one association, please check all that apply.

If you are not a member of any of the associations on the list, please go to question 2b.

Certified Artists' Associations: A certified artists' association is one that has been granted the sole right, under the Status of the Artist Act, to represent an artistic sector for purposes of collective bargaining with producers in federal jurisdiction.

Société des auteurs de radio, télévision et cinéma (SARTEC)
Union des artistes (UdA)
Union des écrivaines et écrivains québecois (UNEQ)
Playwrights Union of Canada (PUC)
Canadian Actors' Equity Association (CAEA)
American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada (AFofM)
Association québecoise des auteurs dramatiques (AQAD)
La Guilde des musiciens québecois
Canadian Association of Photographers and Illustrators in Communications (CAPIC)
Le Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels du Québec (RAAV)
Société professionelle des auteurs et des compositeurs du Québec (SPACQ)
Conseil des métiers d'art du Québec (CMA)
Periodical Writers Association of Canada (PWAC)
L'Association des réalisateurs et réalisatrices du Québec (ARRQ)
Writers Guild of Canada
The Writers' Union of Canada (TWUC)
ACTRA Performers Guild
Front des artistes canadiens (CARFAC)
Association canadienne des réviseurs (EAC/ACR)
Association des designers canadiens (ADC)
Association des professionels des arts de la scène du Québec (APASQ-CSN)

2b. If you are a member of an artists' association that is not listed in question 2a, please indicate it below. If you are a member of than more than one other association, please indicate all of them.

3. Please describe the main issues that concern you as a self-employed professional artist.

4. We are interested in knowing how well the federal Status of the Artist Act has been promoted. Before receiving this survey, had you heard of the Status of the Artist Act?

1 Yes (Go to Question 5)
0 No (Go to Part B)
8 Unsure/don't know (Go to Part B)

5. How would you rate your knowledge of the purpose of the Status of the Artist Act?

3 Very knowledgeable
2 Somewhat knowledgeable
1 Not at all knowledgeable (just heard of it) (Go to Part B)

6. How would you rate your knowledge of the provisions of the Status of the Artist Act?

3 Very knowledgeable
2 Somewhat knowledgeable
1 Not at all knowledgeable

Part B: Relevance of legislation

Background: The federal Status of the Artist Act came into force in 1995. The Act was intended to improve working conditions and economic circumstances of artists vis-á-vis other workers. Part I of the Act recognizes the importance of artists in Canadian society and establishes the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist, which is responsible for supporting and promoting the professional status of artists in Canada. Part II establishes a framework to govern collective bargaining between associations of self-employed professional artists and producers within federal jurisdiction. A labour board, the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal, oversees Part II of the Act. The overall objectives of the legislation are to improve the socio-economic status of self-employed professional artists, and to improve labour relations between artists' associations and producers.

This section asks for your opinion about the ongoing relevance of the federal legislation.

7. Please read each statement below and check the response that best represents your opinion.

	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree	Don't know
a. Overall in Canada, the working conditions and economic circumstances of self-employed artists are better now than in 1995.	5	4	3	2	1	8
b. Most self-employed artists in Canada today can earn a living through their art.	5	4	3	2	1	8
c. Most self-employed artists in Canada today can earn a living only if they supplement their art with non-artistic work.	5	4	3	2	1	8
d. Measures to improve the economic circumstances of self-employed artists are necessary in Canada.	5	4	3	2	1	8
e. Measures to improve labour relations between artists' associations and producers are necessary in Canada.	5	4	3	2	1	8
f. The existing Status of the Artist Act is sufficient to improve the economic conditions of self-employed artists in Canada.	5	4	3	2	1	8
g. Other measures, in addition to the Status of the Artist Act, are necessary in order to improve the economic circumstances of self-employed artists.	5	4	3	2	1	8
h. Other measures, rather than the Status of the Artist Act, would be more effective at improving the economic circumstances of self-employed artists.	5	4	3	2	1	8

8. If you answered Strongly Agree or Agree to Question g above, please elaborate.

9. If you answered Strongly Agree or Agree to Question h above, please elaborate.

10. Various measuresto improve the economic situation of self-employed artists currently exist. Some examples are listed below. Please indicate how important you think each of these measures are, in terms of their contribution to improving your own economic circumstances.

	Very important				Not at all important
a. Legal right to collective bargaining (i.e., the Status of the Artist Act)	5	4	3	2	1
b. Deductions for business expenses under the Income Tax Act	5	4	3	2	1
c. Compensation for public display of art works (Exhibition Right)	5	4	3	2	1
d. Protection of the economic rights of creators (Copyright)	5	4	3	2	1
e. Program of payments to Canadian authors for their eligible books catalogued in Canadian libraries (Public Lending Right)	5	4	3	2	1
f. Creation, production, and touring grants from arts councils and government departments	5	4	3	2	1
g. Other (specify): ________________________________	5	4	3	2	1

11. In addition to the measures that already exist, various measures have been proposed as means of improving the economic situation of self-employed artists. Some examples are listed below. Please indicate how important you think each of these measures would be, in terms of their contribution to improving your own economic circumstances.

	Very important				Not at all important
a. Income averaging for taxation purposes (i.e., the right to carry extra income forward to the next tax year to reduce taxes)	5	4	3	2	1
b. Tax exemption on copyright income	5	4	3	2	1
c. Protection from producer bankruptcy	5	4	3	2	1
d. Access to Employment Insurance and other social programs	5	4	3	2	1
e. Other (specify): __________________________	5	4	3	2	1

Part C: Impact of the legislation

This last section of the questionnaire asks for your perspective on the impact of the Status of the Artist Act.

12. Please read each question below and check the most appropriate response. If you answer yes or no, please explain your answer in the space provided.

In your opinion, does the legislation adequately permit...	Yes	Don't Know	Why or Why Not?
a. recognition of professional artists?	1	8	______________
b. recognition of professional artists' associations?	1	8	______________
c. recognition of artistic sectors?	1	8	______________
d. artists' associations to enter into negotiationswith producers?	1	8	______________
e. artists' associations to negotiate scale agreements with producers?	1	8	______________

A scale agreement is an agreement in writing between a producer and an artists' association respecting minimum terms and conditions for the provision of artists' services and other related matters.

13. Please read each statement below and check the response that best represents your opinion.

	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree	Don't know
a. The Status of the Artist Act has improved the economic circumstances of professional artists in Canada.	5	4	3	2	1	8
b. The Status of the Artist Act has made no difference to my own economic circumstances.	5	4	3	2	1	8
c. In general, the Status of the Artist Act has improved labour relations between artists' associations and federal producers.	5	4	3	2	1	8
d. The Status of the Artist Act has improved labour relations between the association(s) that I am a member of and federal producers.	5	4	3	2	1	8

14. What do you think are the main strengths of the Status of the Artist Act? Please describe with reference to your own experience or the experience of the association(s) of which you are a member.
___________________________________________________
88 No opinion/don't know

15. What do you think are the main shortcomings of the Status of the Artist Act? Please describe with reference to your own experience or the experience of the association(s) of which you are a member.
___________________________________________________
88 No opinion/don't know

16. What changes, if any, would you make to the Status of the Artist Act?
___________________________________________________
00 No changes 88 No opinion/don't know

17. Do you have any other suggestions for how to improve the economic conditions of self-employed artists in Canada?
___________________________________________________
88 No opinion/don't know

Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey.

Please return it in the enclosed self-addressed, postage-paid envelope to: Prairie Research Associates Inc. (PRA) 500 - 363 Broadway Winnipeg, Manitoba R3C 3N9

Or you can fax it back to us toll-free at: 1-800-717-5456

Annex B

SURVEY OF PRODUCERS

Survey of Federal Producers Review of the Provisions and Operations of the Status of the Artist Act

This survey, which gathers information from producers in federal jurisdiction, is part of our review of the federal legislation. Your organization was identified by the Department of Canadian Heritage to participate in the survey. Your views are important to the reviewsopleasetakeafewmomentstocompletethisquestionnaireAllofyour

responses will remain confidential to PRA and will be reported only in aggregate. The administrative number below is solely to enable us to manage the survey process and to understand our sample.

If you would prefer that another individual from your organization respond to the survey, please write that person's name and telephone number in the space provided and return the questionnaire to PRA in the enclosed self-addressed, postage-paid envelope. PRA will then invite the individual you identify to participate in the survey.

If you have any questions about the survey, please telephone Natalie Baydack of PRA toll-free at 1-888-877-6744.

Name of alternate respondent

Phone number of alternate respondent

Please return the survey in the envelope provided or by toll-free fax at 1-800-717-5456

Your early attention to this survey is appreciated

Please return the survey by March 22, 2002

Part A: Background information

This first section of the questionnaire gathers background information to help us understand the context for your responses.

INSTRUCTIONS: Please read each question carefully and check ( ) or write in the appropriate response. Return your completed questionnaire by toll-free fax (1-800-717-5456) or in the envelope provided.

1. Three categories of producers fall under the jurisdiction of the federal Status of the Artist Act. Please check the category that describes your organization.

Federal department/ministry
Federal government agency/Crown corporation
Federally-regulated broadcaster

2. In what area of artistic production does your organization work? Please check all that apply.

01 Film/video production
02 Performing arts (dance, opera, theatre, music)
03 Broadcasting
04 Visual arts
05 Publishing
06 Music recording
66 Other (specify)

3. Does your organization employ artists who are members of any of the following certified artists' associations? A certified artists' association is one that has been granted the sole right, under the Status of the Artist Act, to represent an artistic sector for purposes of collective bargaining with producers in federal jurisdiction. Please check all that apply.

Société des auteurs de radio, télévision et cinéma (SARTEC)
Union des artistes (UdA)
Union des écrivaines et écrivains québecois (UNEQ)
Playwrights Union of Canada (PUC)
Canadian Actors' Equity Association (CAEA)
American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada (AFofM)
Association québecoise des auteurs dramatiques (AQAD)
La Guilde des musiciens québecois
Canadian Association of Photographers and Illustrators in Communications (CAPIC)
Le Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels du Québec (RAAV)
Société professionelle des auteurs et des compositeurs du Québec (SPACQ)
Conseil des métiers d'art du Québec (CMA)
Periodical Writers Association of Canada (PWAC)
L'Association des réalisateurs et réalisatrices du Québec (ARRQ)
Writers Guild of Canada
The Writers' Union of Canada (TWUC)
ACTRA Performers Guild
Front des artistes canadiens (CARFAC)
Association canadienne des réviseurs (EAC/ACR)
Association des designers canadiens (ADC)
Association des professionels des arts de la scène du Québec (APASQ-CSN)

4. We are interested in knowing how well the federal Status of the Artist Act has been promoted. Before receiving this survey, had you heard of the Status of the Artist Act?

1 Yes (Go to Question 5)
0 No (Go to Part B)
8 Unsure/don't know (Go to Part B)

5. How would you rate your knowledge of the purpose of the Status of the Artist Act?

3 Very knowledgeable
2 Somewhat knowledgeable
1 Not at all knowledgeable (just heard of it) (Go to Part B)

6. How would you rate your knowledge of the provisions of the Status of the Artist Act?

3 Very knowledgeable
2 Somewhat knowledgeable
1 Not at all knowledgeable

Part B: Relevance of legislation

Background: The federal Status of the Artist Act came into force in 1995. The Act was intended to improve working conditions and economic circumstances of artists. Part I of the Act recognizes the importance of artists in Canadian society and establishes the Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist, which is responsible for supporting and promoting the professional status of artists in Canada. Part II establishes a framework to govern collective bargaining between associations of self-employed professional artists and producers within federal jurisdiction. A labour board, the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal, oversees Part II of the Act. The overall objectives of the legislation are to improve the socio-economic status of self-employed professional artists, and to improve labour relations between artists' associations and producers.

This section asks for your opinion about the ongoing relevance of the federal legislation.

7. Please read each statement below and check the response that best represents your opinion.

	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree	Don't know
a. Overall in Canada, the working conditions and economic circumstances of self-employed artists are better now than in 1995.	5	4	3	2	1	8
b. Measures to improve the economic circumstances of self-employed artists are necessary in Canada.	5	4	3	2	1	8
c. Measures to improve labour relations between artists' associations and producers are necessary in Canada.	5	4	3	2	1	8
d. The existing Status of the Artist Act is sufficient to achieve its objectives.	5	4	3	2	1	8
e. Other measures, in addition to the Status of the Artist Act, are necessary in order to achieve its objectives.	5	4	3	2	1	8
f. Other measures, rather than the Status of the Artist Act, would be more effective at achieving its objectives.	5	4	3	2	1	8

8. If you answered Strongly Agree or Agree to Question e above, please elaborate.

9. If you answered Strongly Agree or Agree to Question f above, please elaborate.

Part C: Implementation of the legislation

This section of the questionnaire asks for your perspective on the way the Status of the Artist Act has been implemented.

10. Since the Status of the Artist Act was implemented in 1995, has your organization been served with any notices to bargain by a certified artists' association?

1 Yes (If yes) How many notices to bargain has your organization been served?
0 No (Go to Question 11)

Did any of these notices to bargain result in entering into negotiations?

1 Yes (If yes) In how many cases did a notice to bargain result in entering into negotiations?
0 No (Go to Question 11)

Did any of these negotiations result in conclusion of a scale agreement?

1 Yes (If yes) In how many instances did negotiations result in conclusion of a scale agreement?
0 No (Go to Question 11)

11. Please read each statement below and check the response that best represents your opinion.

	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree	Don't know
a. The Status of the Artist Act adequately permits professional artists' associations to be recognized for collective bargaining purposes.	5	4	3	2	1	8
b. The existing Status of the Artist Act adequately takes into account the concerns of producers.	5	4	3	2	1	8
c. There are numerous impediments to successful negotiation of scale agreements with artists' associations.	5	4	3	2	1	8
d. The Status of the Artist Act has been inconsistently interpreted.	5	4	3	2	1	8
e. Some provisions of the Status of the Artist Act require clarification.	5	4	3	2	1	8

12. If you answered Strongly Agree or Agree to Question b above, please explain your answer.

13. If you answered Strongly Agree or Agree to Question c above, please explain your answer.

14. If you answered Strongly Agree or Agree to Question d above, please explain your answer.

15. If you answered Strongly Agree or Agree to Question e above, please explain your answer.

Part D: Impact of the legislation

This last section of the questionnaire asks for your perspective on the impact of the Status of the Artist Act.

16. Please read each statement below and check the response that best represents your opinion.

	Strongly agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly disagree	Don't know
a. The Status of the Artist Act has improved the economic circumstances of professional artists in Canada.	5	4	3	2	1	8
b. The Status of the Artist Act has improved labour relations between my organization and artists' associations.	5	4	3	2	1	8
c. In general, the Status of the Artist Act has improved labour relations between artists' associations and federal producers.	5	4	3	2	1	8

17. What do you think are the main strengths of the Status of the Artist Act? Please describe with reference to the experience of your organization.
___________________________________________________
88 No opinion/don't know

18. What do you think are the main shortcomings of the Status of the Artist Act? Please describe with reference to the experience of this organization.
___________________________________________________
88 No opinion/don't know

19. What changes, if any, would you make to the Status of the Artist Act?
___________________________________________________
00 No changes 88 No opinion/don't know

20. Do you have any other suggestions for how to improve the economic conditions of self-employed artists in Canada?
___________________________________________________
88 No opinion/don't know

21. Do you have any other suggestions for how to improve labour relations between producers and artists' associations?
___________________________________________________
88 No opinion/don't know

Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. Please return it in the enclosed self-addressed, postage-paid envelope to Prairie Research Associates Inc. (PRA) 500 - 363 Broadway Winnipeg, Manitoba R3C 3N9 1-800-717-5456

Notes

This respondent's organization was not represented by the categories of federal producers listed in the questionnaire.
As a part of the evaluation of the Status of the Artist Act, PRA conducted in-depth interviews with 65 key informants.
This is based on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is strongly disagree and 5 is strongly agree.
This is based on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is strongly disagree and 5 is strongly agree.

Note: to read the PDF document you will need to download Adobe Reader version 7.0 (free) to your system. If the accessibility of PDF is a concern, you can learn how to configure Adobe Reader 7.0 to work with your assistive technology using the information Read PDF Content provided by Adobe.

Common menu bar links

Institutional links

CAPPRT

Transparency

Final Report

Table Of Contents:

Appendices

Executive Summary

Introduction

Methodology

Findings

Relevance

Implementation

Impacts

Recommendations

Notes

Introduction

Purpose of the evaluation

Structure of the report

Methodology

Document review

Key informant interviews

Survey of artists

Context for the legislation

Notes

Findings

Relevance

4.1.1 Limitations of the legislation

Implementation

4.2.1 Part I: General Principles

4.2.2 Canadian Council on the Status of the Artist

4.2.3 Part II: Professional Relations

4.2.4 Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal

4.2.5 Administrative provisions and procedures

Application for certification

Serving notice to bargain

Negotiations

Other procedures and provisions

4.2.6 Issues of clarity and interpretation

4.2.7 Jurisdictional issues vis-à-vis the Copyright Act

4.2.8 Role of other bodies

Impacts

Notes

Conclusions and recommendations

Recommendations

Appendix A -- Evaluation framework

Appendix B -- Document review

Introduction

Purpose of the document review

Methodology

Context for the legislation

2.1 Socio-economic context

2.2 Policy context

Summary of recommendations of the Standing Committee on Communications and Culture Respecting the Status of the Artist (February 1990)

3.0 Implementation of the Status of the Artist Act

3.1 Part I: General Principles

3.2 Part II: Professional Relations

3.2.1 Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal

3.2.2 Administrative provisions and procedures

Certification of artists' associations (s. 23, 25-28)

Associations of producers (s. 24)

Notice to bargain (s. 31)

Duty to bargain (s. 32)

Duty of fair representation (s. 35)

Content and interpretation of scale agreements (s. 36-43)

Pressure tactics (s. 46-48)

Complaints (s. 53-54)

3.2.3 Tribunal activity to date

Current issues

4.1 Jurisdiction of the legislation

4.2 Scope of the legislation

4.3 Implications of globalization and technological change

4.4 Potential merger of CAPPRT with other labour boards

4.5 Jurisdictional issues vis-à-vis the Copyright Act

4.6 Artists' associations lack resources and expertise

4.7 Other issues

5.0 Summary

Annex A -- Bibliography

Government publications and documents

Reviews, research reports, and evaluations