Thank you very much, Ms. Davies.
The bill was adopted in 1993 in British Columbia. During the following year, there were 50% fewer labour disputes than in the previous year. That shows that the legislation did have an effect.
I have not taken a close look at the situation in other countries. One thing is clear, and that is that anti-scab legislation does lead to respect between employers and employees in a labour dispute. There has been anti-scab legislation in Quebec for almost 29 years now. You might remember some labour unrest, for example, the strike at Robin Hood Mills in Montreal, where shots were fired. The strikers were not happy. So they brought in a gun and tried to settle the problem like they used to do in the Wild West. People are injured and sometimes killed because the employer has no respect for the bargaining process.
And there is another matter to consider. In Quebec, about 40% of workers are unionized, while in the United States, the figure is only 13%. Unionization is a preference here. Unionized workers even told me that some employers, for example the IGA supermarket chain, encourage their employees to form a union to ensure good labour relations and fair bargaining practices. Under those conditions, when a strike occurs, both parties already respect one another. That was not the case before 1978, when unionization was frowned upon.
Some European countries could not even fathom the possibility of adopting anti-scab legislation because they could never imagine having to resort to the use of replacement workers. I am referring to the entire continent, as I have never really taken a close look at the situation there.
Mr. Regan also alluded to another important fact when he mentioned the report that was published following the review of Part I of the Canada Labour Code. In the minority report that was drafted by none other than Rodrigue Blouin—a world renowned specialist in labour relations who himself arbitrates labour disputes in Quebec and elsewhere—clearly demonstrates the importance of not using replacement workers. The use of outside workers undermines the situation and leads to problems in the bargaining process.
In Quebec, employees who are protected by the Canada Labour Code—and they represent about 8% of workers—are employed in communications, postal services, correctional services, transportation, pulp and paper, ports and airports. When we look at labour disputes that have occurred in these sectors, we see that they were longer and sometimes—and this can be shown—very violent. In cases such as those, it is clear that anti-scab legislation is essential.
Some solutions have been brought forward. For example, when a dispute occurs, some services are considered to be essential. That means that these services must be maintained for the protection of the public, depending on what professional group is involved.
To protect the employer's property, we recognize that there may be workers on site during the strike. But they are there to maintain equipment and not to ensure production. This is allowed when necessary and proof of that is required.
So steps are taken to protect equipment. The aim is not to destroy the owner or the company or the employer; it is to ensure that both parties can negotiate under the best conditions.
The aim of this approach, which is found in new subsections 94(2.1) and the following provisions of the bill is to cover all the angles. In some cases, the employer may even refuse to have an employee come back, if there is evidence that this employee engaged in wrong doing, and ensure that this individual does not return to work.
Both sides need to be respected. When we consider these aspects—I have provided you with a copy of the bill—it is always with regard to ensuring that both partners involved in the negotiations are respected.
