Canada has fallen behind other developed nations in the number of shots administered per capita as supply disruptions derail planned vaccinations.
According to data collated by the University of Oxford-based Our World in Data, Canada now ranks 20th globally, well behind allies like the United States and the United Kingdom but also middle-income countries like Poland and Serbia.
Canada’s vaccination effort has also been outpaced so far by those in Bahrain, Denmark, Germany, Israel, Italy, Malta, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Spain and the United Arab Emirates, among others.
While a laggard compared to many other wealthy nations, Canada has administered more shots per capita than G7 partners like France and Japan.
Japan, with a population of 126 million people and just 5,400 COVID-19-related deaths, hasn’t yet started its vaccination campaign. Unlike Canada, Japan is planning to produce 90 million shots of the AstraZeneca vaccine domestically.
Some observers have blamed France’s “technocratic” system with its maze of red tape — a patient needs to consult with a doctor before they get a shot — for the slow rollout there.
While the U.S. is grappling with distribution issues of its own — the press there has said President Joe Biden is “inheriting a complete disaster,” and an “absolute mess” from the last administration — the Americans have so far vaccinated 24.5 million people with at least one dose.
Even when accounting for population size, the U.S. has vaccinated 3 times more people per capita than Canada. The CBC’s vaccine tracker estimates just over 900,000 doses have been administered in Canada to this point.
The U.S., with a population roughly nine times bigger than Canada, has fully vaccinated 3.8 million Americans with the two-dose regime of either the Pfizer or Moderna products, compared to about 150,000 people in Canada.
The U.K., a world leader so far, has administered at least one dose to 11.3 per cent of its people, nearly five times more per capita than Canada.
That country’s vaccination efforts have been helped by an early approval of the product from Swedish-British pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca. Health Canada regulators are still reviewing the company’s promising vaccine for safety and efficacy.
Canada was among one of the first countries in the world to authorize the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines for use but other nations have since caught up, as Canada contends with shortages because of a plant shutdown in Belgium.
Pfizer plant back online, Canada’s shipments still delayed
Pfizer is making upgrades to its Belgian plant so it can manufacture up to two billion doses this year to meet the insatiable demand.
In order to complete those upgrades, some production lines were idled and Pfizer didn’t have enough vials to go around in the short term to meet its previously promised delivery schedule.
WATCH | COVID-19 vaccine shortage forces provinces to rethink rollout:
Canadian provinces are being forced to rethink their vaccination rollouts due to the shortage of doses from Pfizer, with some jurisdictions now considering stretching out the time between shots, despite questions over whether that would reduce vaccine effectiveness. But the federal government maintains it will vaccinate all willing Canadians by September. 2:02
A Belgian newspaper reported Thursday those upgrades are now complete, but a spokesperson for Pfizer confirmed Canada’s deliveries won’t return to a more normal level until next month.
“We expect the supply constraints of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to last in Canada until mid-February when we will be able to increase allocations to catch up,” the spokesperson said.
“While the precise percentage allocation may fluctuate, Pfizer Canada remains on track to meet our quarterly delivery objectives to Canada by the end of the first quarter of 2021.”
Confusion over first quarter deliveries
While the delivery schedules may fluctuate, the government insists its medium-term targets are more certain.
However, a government planning document released to the provinces Wednesday caused confusion as the delivery charts indicate Canada would only receive 3.5 million Pfizer doses by the end of March, 500,000 less than anticipated.
The confusion stems from just how many doses are included in each vial shipped. Amid manufacturing delays, Pfizer is pushing the government to recognize that six doses can be extracted from each vial, but the current Health Canada standard is only five.
Dr. Howard Njoo, Canada’s deputy chief public health officer, said Health Canada is still reviewing the request to formally change the label and is examining whether that sixth dose can be extracted consistently.
Maj.-Gen. Dany Fortin, the military commander leading vaccine logistics at the Public Health Agency of Canada, insisted Thursday that, regardless of how many are in each vial, Pfizer is still contractually obligated to send 4 million doses to Canada in the first quarter of this year.
A health-care worker prepares a dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine at a COVID-19 vaccine clinic in Toronto on Jan. 7, 2021. (Nathan Denette/The Canadian Press)
He said the 3.5 million figure floated to the provinces was just for “planning purposes” in the interim, and the country will still hold Pfizer to its previous commitments.
Fortin said the pharmaceutical giant has assured Canada that it will reach 4 million doses delivered, no matter which vial standard is recognized. If Health Canada accepts that six doses can be extracted from each vial, Pfizer will send more product to cover any gaps, Fortin said.
WATCH / Saskatchewan Premier on vaccine rollout:
Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe says the confusion over the number of vaccine doses expected to arrive before the end of March is down to an inconsistent flow of information coming from the federal government. 2:26
Fortin said that Canada is expecting 79,000 Pfizer doses next week, 70,000 doses for the week of Feb. 8, 335,000 the week of Feb. 15 and 395,000 doses the week of Feb. 22. Moderna will deliver 230,400 doses next week with 249,600 doses to follow three weeks later.
Thus, Canada is expected to receive 1,359,000 doses in the month of February, enough to vaccinate 679,500 people.
The opposition Conservatives have been pressing the government on why Canada has been bested by small countries like the Seychelles on vaccinations so far. “That is not normal for a country that claims to have the best vaccine portfolio in the world,” Conservative MP Pierre Paul-Hus said in the Commons.
The government has said it still expects hundreds of thousands of doses to flow in the months ahead. “This is a completely temporary situation, as we are working hard to ensure that every Canadian who wants a vaccine gets one,” Public Services and Procurement Minister Anita Anand said.
The opposition Conservatives have been criticizing the Liberal government on the pace of Canada’s vaccination program. (File photo from Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
Under questioning from the opposition, Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland said “there is no more urgent issue for this government than getting Canadians vaccinated.”
She reminded MPs that Canada has vaccinated more people than our Five Eyes partners of Australia and New Zealand. Those two countries haven’t yet begun their vaccination programs but COVID-19 is almost non-existent there.
Job seekers owe it to themselves to understand and accept; fundamentally, hiring is a process of elimination. Regardless of how many applications an employer receives, the ratio revolves around several applicants versus one job opening, necessitating elimination.
Essentially, job gatekeepers—recruiters, HR and hiring managers—are paid to find reasons and faults to reject candidates (read: not move forward) to find the candidate most suitable for the job and the company.
Nowadays, employers are inundated with applications, which forces them to double down on reasons to eliminate. It’s no surprise that many job seekers believe that “isms” contribute to their failure to get interviews, let alone get hired. Employers have a large pool of highly qualified candidates to select from. Job seekers attempt to absolve themselves of the consequences of actions and inactions by blaming employers, the government or the economy rather than trying to increase their chances of getting hired by not giving employers reasons to eliminate them because of:
Typos, grammatical errors, poor writing skills.
“Communication, the human connection, is the key to personal and career success.” ― Paul J. Meyer.
The most vital skill you can offer an employer is above-average communication skills. Your resume, LinkedIn profile, cover letters, and social media posts should be well-written and error-free.
Failure to communicate the results you achieved for your previous employers.
If you can’t quantify (e.g. $2.5 million in sales, $300,000 in savings, lowered average delivery time by 6 hours, answered 45-75 calls daily with an average handle time of 3 and a half minutes), then it’s your opinion. Employers care more about your results than your opinion.
An incomplete LinkedIn profile.
Before scheduling an interview, the employer will review your LinkedIn profile to determine if you’re interview-worthy. I eliminate any candidate who doesn’t have a complete LinkedIn profile, including a profile picture, banner, start and end dates, or just a surname initial; anything that suggests the candidate is hiding something.
Having a digital footprint that’s a turnoff.
If an employer is considering your candidacy, you’ll be Google. If you’re not getting interviews before you assert the unfounded, overused excuse, “The hiring system is broken!” look at your digital footprint. Employers are reading your comments, viewing your pictures, etc. Ask yourself, is your digital behaviour acceptable to employers, or can it be a distraction from their brand image and reputation? On the other hand, not having a robust digital footprint is also a red flag, particularly among Gen Y and Gen Z hiring managers. Not participating on LinkedIn, social media platforms, or having a blog or website can hurt your job search.
Not appearing confident when interviewing.
Confidence = fewer annoying questions and a can-do attitude.
It’s important for employers to feel that their new hire is confident in their abilities. Managing an employee who lacks initiative, is unwilling to try new things, or needs constant reassurance is frustrating.
Job searching is a competition; you’re always up against someone younger, hungrier and more skilled than you.
Besides being a process of elimination, hiring is also about mitigating risk. Therefore, being seen as “a risk” is the most common reason candidates are eliminated, with the list of “too risky” being lengthy, from age (will be hard to manage, won’t be around long) to lengthy employment gaps (raises concerns about your abilities and ambition) to inappropriate social media postings (lack of judgement).
Envision you’re a hiring manager hiring for an inside sales manager role. In the absence of “all things being equal,” who’s the least risky candidate, the one who:
offers empirical evidence of their sales results for previous employers, or the candidate who “talks a good talk”?
is energetic, or the candidate who’s subdued?
asks pointed questions indicating they’re concerned about what they can offer the employer or the candidate who seems only concerned about what the employer can offer them.
posts on social media platforms, political opinions, or the candidate who doesn’t share their political views?
on LinkedIn and other platforms in criticizes how employers hire or the candidate who offers constructive suggestions?
has lengthy employment gaps, short job tenure, or a steadily employed candidate?
lives 10 minutes from the office or 45 minutes away?
has a resume/LinkedIn profile that shows a relevant linear career or the candidate with a non-linear career?
dressed professionally for the interview, or the candidate who dressed “casually”?
An experienced hiring manager (read: has made hiring mistakes) will lean towards candidates they feel pose the least risk. Hence, presenting yourself as a low-risk candidate is crucial to job search success. Worth noting, the employer determines their level of risk tolerance, not the job seeker, who doesn’t own the business—no skin in the game—and has no insight into the challenges they’ve experienced due to bad hires and are trying to avoid similar mistakes.
“Taking a chance” on a candidate isn’t in an employer’s best interest. What’s in an employer’s best interest is to hire candidates who can hit the ground running, fit in culturally, and are easy to manage. You can reduce the odds (no guarantee) of being eliminated by demonstrating you’re such a candidate.
Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. You can send Nick your questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.
Human Resources Officers must be very busy these days what with the general turnover of employees in our retail and business sectors. It is hard enough to find skilled people let alone potential employees willing to be trained. Then after the training, a few weeks go by then they come to you and ask for a raise. You refuse as there simply is no excess money in the budget and away they fly to wherever they come from, trained but not willing to put in the time to achieve that wanted raise.
I have had potentials come in and we give them a test to see if they do indeed know how to weld, polish or work with wood. 2-10 we hire, and one of those is gone in a week or two. Ask that they want overtime, and their laughter leaving the building is loud and unsettling. Housing starts are doing well but way behind because those trades needed to finish a project simply don’t come to the site, with delay after delay. Some people’s attitudes are just too funny. A recent graduate from a Ivy League university came in for an interview. The position was mid-management potential, but when we told them a three month period was needed and then they would make the big bucks they disappeared as fast as they arrived.
Government agencies are really no help, sending us people unsuited or unwilling to carry out the jobs we offer. Handing money over to staffing firms whose referrals are weak and ineffectual. Perhaps with the Fall and Winter upon us, these folks will have to find work and stop playing on the golf course or cottaging away. Tried to hire new arrivals in Canada but it is truly difficult to find someone who has a real identity card and is approved to live and work here. Who do we hire? Several years ago my father’s firm was rocking and rolling with all sorts of work. It was a summer day when the immigration officers arrived and 30+ employees hit the bricks almost immediately. The investigation that followed had threats of fines thrown at us by the officials. Good thing we kept excellent records, photos and digital copies. We had to prove the illegal documents given to us were as good as the real McCoy.
Restauranteurs, builders, manufacturers, finishers, trades-based firms, and warehousing are all suspect in hiring illegals, yet that becomes secondary as Toronto increases its minimum wage again bringing our payroll up another $120,000. Survival in Canada’s financial and business sectors is questionable for many. Good luck Chuck!. at least your carbon tax refund check should be arriving soon.
NORMAN WELLS, N.W.T. – Imperial Oil says it will temporarily reduce its fuel prices in a Northwest Territories community that has seen costs skyrocket due to low water on the Mackenzie River forcing the cancellation of the summer barge resupply season.
Imperial says in a Facebook post it will cut the air transportation portion that’s included in its wholesale price in Norman Wells for diesel fuel, or heating oil, from $3.38 per litre to $1.69 per litre, starting Tuesday.
The air transportation increase, it further states, will be implemented over a longer period.
It says Imperial is closely monitoring how much fuel needs to be airlifted to the Norman Wells area to prevent runouts until the winter road season begins and supplies can be replenished.
Gasoline and heating fuel prices approached $5 a litre at the start of this month.
Norman Wells’ town council declared a local emergency on humanitarian grounds last week as some of its 700 residents said they were facing monthly fuel bills coming to more than $5,000.
“The wholesale price increase that Imperial has applied is strictly to cover the air transportation costs. There is no Imperial profit margin included on the wholesale price. Imperial does not set prices at the retail level,” Imperial’s statement on Monday said.
The statement further said Imperial is working closely with the Northwest Territories government on ways to help residents in the near term.
“Imperial Oil’s decision to lower the price of home heating fuel offers immediate relief to residents facing financial pressures. This step reflects a swift response by Imperial Oil to discussions with the GNWT and will help ease short-term financial burdens on residents,” Caroline Wawzonek, Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance and Infrastructure, said in a news release Monday.
Wawzonek also noted the Territories government has supported the community with implementation of a fund supporting businesses and communities impacted by barge cancellations. She said there have also been increases to the Senior Home Heating Subsidy in Norman Wells, and continued support for heating costs for eligible Income Assistance recipients.
Additionally, she said the government has donated $150,000 to the Norman Wells food bank.
In its declaration of a state of emergency, the town said the mayor and council recognized the recent hike in fuel prices has strained household budgets, raised transportation costs, and affected local businesses.
It added that for the next three months, water and sewer service fees will be waived for all residents and businesses.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 21, 2024.
