http://nationalmagazine.ca/Articles/July-2014-Web/Working-for-a-living.aspx
Working for a Living
Employment law and the practical implications of legalized prostitution.
“Should Parliament decide to do nothing…” was the opening for Gwendoline Allison’s advice to Parliament.
Allison, partner at the Allison Foy Law Group, offered the House Justice Committee a ‘what if’ scenario.
"My most recent work has centred on the implications for  employment-related laws, should Parliament decide to decriminalize the  purchase of and profiteering from sex, or should Parliament decide to do  nothing,” she told Members of Parliament. “As an employment lawyer, my  consideration is a practical one.”
Allison offered virtually the only legal opinion to Parliament  regarding possible alternatives to its controversial new prostitution  bill – one that a stream of lawyers lined up to qualify as overbroad and  arbitrary.  Allison is generally supportive of the bill.
Advocates of decriminalization argue that the Nordic Model — which  inspired the approach taken by the Conservative government — would  endanger sex workers.
And so Allison, who represented the Asian Women Coalition Ending Prostitution in their intervention of the 
Bedford case, offered some real-world caveats on how a government would hypothetically deal with legalized prostitution.
For starters, she said, a government would need to figure out whether  sex workers are independent contractors, or self-employed businesswomen  or men. Where prostitution is legal in Nevada and Europe, she pointed  out, women are contractors. They rent rooms from the brothel-owners, and  they negotiate their own rate.
From there, Parliament — or, perhaps, the provinces and cities — would  have to draw up some scheme to cover sex workers under occupational  health and safety laws.
“Employees also owe duties to employers and are engaged by employers to  enforce these duties: to be loyal and faithful; to act in good faith  and not to the detriment of the employer,” she told the committee. “To  obey the reasonable and lawful directions of the employer; to act with  all due skill, care, and competence; and, not to neglect their duties.  Some of those duties do not translate well into the realm of  prostitution where the primary obligation of the employee in this  consideration would be to provide sex to a third party directed by the  employer.”
To that end, she says, there is a conflict: if consent, under the 
Criminal Code, cannot be given by a third party, how can an employer require their employee to have sex?
“The 
Criminal Code provisions raise a question regarding the  legality of employment contracts with a fundamental and core duty of the  employees to provide sex to the clients, to the employer,” she said.
“I would say that the current schemes, and in particular the  occupational health and safety schemes, are not adequate, and human  rights laws are not adequate to protect women in prostitution.”
But Canada is not without any regulation whatsoever. Several  municipalities do treat sex workers as independent contractors and offer  some basic oversight for their work.
Alberta is likely the most notable. The province has left the matter  entirely up to their cities — Calgary and Edmonton regulate massage  parlours and escort agencies, licensing and taxing those in the trade as  they would any other contractor. That means police checks, training  seminars, and registration numbers.
But the gap still remains. “Research shows that licensing hasn't been  a help because the criminal law still stands in the way,” says 
Maria Powell,  a Master's student at the Schulich School of Law, at Dalhousie  University. She is studying the matter for her thesis. “The potential  for benefits from licensing are huge - increased legitimacy, better  safety and security, and it helps cities and police enforce laws on  trafficking and exploitation because of improved relationships between  workers and enforcement officials. Criminalization currently hinders  these benefits from coming to fruition.”
In this hypothetical world, where sex workers had the power of the law  behind them to fill that gap, Harris & Company partner 
Matthew Cooperwilliams says a whole slew of labour law options open up.
For one, it could mean that workers, if they were considered employees, could file 
Human Rights Code  claims based on discrimination. Age, gender and racial discrimination  can be pretty commonplace in the sex trade, of course, and could open up  the floodgates of claims.
And that’s to say nothing of what the workers could do if they unionized.
“They could leverage the 
Employment Standards Act if they were  employees — rather than independent contractors — by insisting on  minimum wage rates, overtime pay, minimum call-out benefits …vacation  pay, vacation leave and other leaves like parental leave,” he says.
The occupational health and safety requirements, too, would likely be  quite game-changing for sex workers and — if Europe and New Zealand are  any example — could come along with aggressive anti-STI and anti-HIV  measures.
Allison, when questioned by MPs, noted that the clear way to afford sex  workers the luxuries of being a state-sanctioned sector would really  come along with being employees, not contractors.
“The women in prostitution are, in almost every location that I've  considered so far, independent contractors, not employees, so they're  not getting benefits, they're not getting EI, or CPP, or pension  benefits. Not only that, but they're responsible for paying their taxes,  and they're responsible for paying the contributions to any workers  compensation scheme. So their protection under occupational health and  safety regulations and worker's compensation depends on their  participation and their payment into that too,” Allison said. “So when  you consider that in the context of the most vulnerable employees, the  ones who are on the street, or the ones who are operating from their  homes, their protection will depend on their payment in.”
And so, she says, workers would likely take brothels to court. How the  justice system, and the government, would react to that is entirely  unclear.
But, it’s not all bad. As Allison notes, most exotic dancers are  independent contractors — they rent the stage, and they dance for tips.  That model might be workable for the sex work industry.
While Ottawa is evidently not following the decriminalization path with  Bill C-36, the questions raised by how the sex trade meshes with labour  law is hardly moot. Indeed, when the bill comes into effect, the act of  selling sex will essentially be legal. While enterprises like brothels  will not be permitted to operate, workers who stay in the industry will  be permitted to be self-employed, even if all their clients are  committing a crime.
What’s more, the controversial amendments have opened the door to  another constitutional challenge. And so the debate surrounding the  legal framework governing the selling of sex will quite possibly keep  lawmakers busy in the coming years.
If sex workers eventually manage to work the labour system to their  advantage, it may be worldwide precedent. Even in New Zealand, Allison  notes, where sex work is legal, Parliament opted not to afford sex  workers full employment rights.
If Canadian courts decide that sex workers are workers like anyone  else, it could be the start of a very interesting friendship.
Justin Ling is a regular contributor based in Ottawa.