Private Members' Bills C-337, C-386 - An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (Replacement Workers)
Private Members' Bill C-337 (and similar legislation C-386), introduced by New Democratic Party Member of Parliament Chris Carleton on March 11, 2009 is just the latest in a series of flawed private members' bills seeking to ban replacement workers in the event of a strike or lock-out.
The Canadian Airports Council opposes Bill C-337 and all similar legislation because it could lead to the shut-down of one or several of Canada's airports in the event of a strike or lock-out.
Important facts about Bill C-415
- Bill C-415 is not simply badly drafted or poorly written, it is bad public policy.
- Bill C-415 does not correct the fundamental flaw of the previous bill, C-257: It leaves essential economic services unprotected.
- If passed, Bill C-415 will have a direct and significant impact on businesses across the country.
- As we notified the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, Bill C-415 could lead to the shut-down of one or several of Canada’s airports in the event of a strike or lock-out.
- Bill C-415 will affect the balance in business/labour relations: a balance that has been carefully crafted over time and developed in a consensual, tri-partite, equitable manner with all stakeholders involved.
- Bill C-415 could significantly affect the delivery of necessary services – not only Canada’s aviation system, but also telecommunications, land transportation and banking.
Background
Federally regulated industries are regulated at the federal level because of their scope and importance to all Canadians. They are not like industries under provincial jurisdiction precisely because they constitute the backbone of the Canadian economy – transportation, communications, and banking. They provide services that are critical to all Canadian, such as facilitating emergency services like 911. They also provide services that are critical for Canadian business to allow goods, services and capital to flow across the country and internationally.
Federally, there already are limits on the use of replacement workers that are built into the Canada Labour Code. The Canada Industrial Relations Board has been given the power to require that an employer stop using, for the duration of a labour dispute, the services of replacement workers when an unfair labour practice has been committed.
The Canada Labour Code has an emergency services provision designed to “prevent an immediate and serious danger to the safety and health of the public.” It kicks in when there is a clear and present danger to the public. However, it does NOT cover many other essential services provided by federally regulated industries that the Canadian public view as critical to their well-being. For example, it could not be used to deal with a strike or lock-out of the following work groups who are essential to keeping an airport open and operational:
• Workers who provide snow removal services at many airports during the winter
• A contractor’s employees who providing de-icing services
• Commissionaires, or other groups who provide important security-related duties
• Non-safety/security labour groups, such as baggage handlers
By way of contrast, British Columbia’s “essential services” provision in its labour legislation refers to the "health, safety and welfare of the residents of British Columbia." The B.C. Labour Board has determined that "welfare" can include economic impact. B.C.’s essential services law protects against economic harm caused by labour disputes. Bill C-415 would not.
Unlike Quebec’s regime, the statute on which C-415 is modeled, neither the federal government, nor the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) nor the Minister of Labour would have the power to a strike or lockout if it is felt that essential services are not adequately provided.
The proponents of Bill C-415 allege that its flaws can be corrected at the committee stage. As a matter of process, you know that the ability to amend a Private Members’ Bill at committee stage is limited so as to not alter the substantive nature of the bill. We submit that the changes needed would be substantive: Bill C-415 cannot be corrected.
Let’s not break something that is working well. Today we have labour law at the federal level that is a carefully crafted balance, recognizing key concerns from all sides. And it has served workers and employers well. Since 1999, we’ve only once had to ask Parliament to return to legislate workers back to work in an area of critical federal infrastructure. Should Bill C-415 become law, parliamentarians will become frequently called upon to legislate employees back to work.
Questions MPs Need to Consider:
- As an MP, are you ready to return to an era where you are frequently required to legislate striking workers back to work? It is important to recall that Parliament was called upon to consider back-to-work legislation 25 times between 1972 and the implementation of the 1995 Sims Task Force recommendations – only once since.
- How will you help your constituents in the event that their airports close, they no longer have access to medicines, food and other products shipped in by air?
- Do you want to upset the carefully considered tripartite approach to labour law reform with hasty and flawed legislation? The 1995 Sims Task Force enacted changes to the Canada Labour Code after a lengthy task force study involving labour, business, and the federal government. It heard from hundreds of key stakeholders and produced consensual and meaningful reforms that have ensured labour peace to this day. That is the way to amend the Labour Code, not through a politicized environment around a partisan private member’s bill.
- Do you want to tell international investors that the industrial relations balance in Canada has tipped in favour of organized labour? This will have a direct impact on negotiations and settlements.
- How can Canadian firms hope to prosper in the global economy if we cannot rely on our airports, our rail and trucking systems, our communications industry, and our financial services sector?
In the interest of Canada’s small business sector, our rural and remote communities, the competitiveness of our economy and Canada’s long-term prosperity, MPs must defeat Bill C-415
