Human Resources Committee on Feb. 8th, 2007

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

I certainly have to say hello, because I have the greatest number of potash mines in my riding. I've been trying to emphasize how important it is to my province of Saskatchewan. We are not only agriculture and potash; taking it to the bigger picture, there is the mining. I think there's a good argument that every province would be adversely affected or that it could be a very difficult situation for any province that has a lot of mining. I think that's the way our country is going; mining is leading, I'm sure, as a sector in our country.

I just wanted to thank you for your presentation. I've had many witnesses questioned many times over whether they have a unionized workforce. In the case of the banking industry, for example, that's quite irrelevant. Could you give me some material examples?

I would also ask Mr. Turnbull to give me a material example of how a shutdown of an industry like rail would impact your members and your customers. We know how corporations and employees are affected, but I think what's missing in this whole debate is the public--the customers, the consumers. I think it was in your opening remarks, or perhaps it was over here, that you started to talk about global trading and the big picture. So I would like to hear from both of you about how a shutdown like rail would impact your members and your customers.

Mr. Nieman, would you like to talk a little bit about...?

[Ted Nieman]

Sure. In most of the countries where we do business, and that's about 26 countries, we are engaged in fairly intense competition with other potash suppliers, as I mentioned before. They are particularly from countries such as Russia and Belarus, which produce a lot of potash, and also from Germany and Israel.

In most countries we have contracts with various customers, and in many of the situations many of our customers also have supply relationships, not only with us but with others. In some cases we do enjoy exclusive relationships, but those are more the exception than the rule.

In those situations in which we would not be able to meet our commitments, it's very simple: our customers, who already have a relationship with our competitors, would simply buy more from our competitors, and our sales would suffer. In some particular cases very serious damage may be done, in that it will take a long time to regain the confidence and trust of those customers to again supply to the amounts we had been supplying before the strike. It can cause a lot of difficulty.

We ran into that situation—

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

I was going to say we want empirical data. Many of the committee members are not happy there's not enough empirical data on how this could cause a real crisis in our country or globally. So any picture you can put on this of just how serious and severe this could be to your industry would help us.

[Ted Nieman]

Are you looking for amounts of lost sales, or what have you?

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Yes.

[Ted Nieman]

I'm sorry, I can't exactly say what they might be, but an extended strike could result in lost sales of probably several hundreds of thousands of tonnes of potash, if it were extended for any particular period of time, which would be many tens of millions of dollars to our shareholders and to the economy of Saskatchewan—

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

So you're looking to us—

[Ted Nieman]

—and it would not take a very long time for that to accumulate as well.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Thank you.

[David Turnbull]

First of all, I would like to point out in fact that our industry, the courier industry, has a remarkably good labour relations record. To the best of my knowledge, in the last two decades there has been one day of a strike at one company, which is quite a record. We believe in treating our workers well and in working with them.

The particular concern that I have expressed today is the domino effect of a strike in some other sector. I use the example of the auto sector. There are many small components that cross the U.S.-Canada border as many as seven times, going backwards and forwards until the final product is finished, with small components being added to something on an assembly line and shipped back across the border—and backwards and forwards they go. You would close down a tremendous amount of the Canadian auto sector if you were to block the ports, for example.

There are all kinds of examples with health care. I've shown in great detail here list after list of health and diagnostic products that are shipped by our couriers on a daily basis. Let us say that due to a strike an airport were to lose its safety operating certificate; if they did not have the right safety measures in place, the correct and natural effect would be for them to lose their safety operating certificate. That would close down the courier business. There are tremendous numbers of businesses in Canada that depend on next-day delivery of small packages; that's their inventory. Let's say we have a factory that has a broken machine part and they have to repair it. Who do they look to? They look to the courier industry to move these parts.

This is the danger, as millions of workers could potentially be affected by a strike in some other sector.

We doubt we're going to have strikes, though you can never tell. We believe that with our record of very good labour relationships, it's not going to happen in our industry. It's the bump-on effects.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

I'd like to thank you, Mr. Nieman, for being here. I just want to follow up on what Mr. Turnbull said and say that you, too, have excellent labour relations. You have not had a strike for many, many years, and I think you are negotiating now. So I think it has to be reiterated how important the relationships are and that there already appears to be a good balance. So the status quo works quite well, would you say? It's just an example showing that you don't need back-to-work legislation.

[Ted Nieman]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Yelich.

Mr. Nicholls, someone took the bait the first time around, and I'm going to ask you this: as a resource-based multinational with billions of dollars invested, if this law passes, will it affect how you invest in Canada?

[Graham Nicholls]

I think, again, we have to look at it on a case-by-case basis and whether the code applies, which it doesn't in all jurisdictions, but if this legislation passed.... As I've already indicated, we have a significant operation in the territories, and when we expand those we're investing hundreds of millions of dollars. As I've indicated, when we look at this type of legislation potentially coming forward and the type of labour relations situation we could be in as a result, it would affect our decision. I'm not saying it would be determinative, but it would certainly be a key consideration of our management in considering whether to go ahead with that kind of investment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Nicholls.

We're going to move to our next round, which will be five minutes. We have Mr. Dhaliwal and Mr. Savage.

Mr. Nieman, I believe you're going to head out now as well. Do you have to leave?

[Ted Nieman]

Yes, if there are no further questions, I'll be leaving.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you for taking the time to be with us today.

[Ted Nieman]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Okay, we're going to move to Mr. Dhaliwal and Mr. Savage for five minutes.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I think Mr. Merasty wants to make a quick comment on the record.

[Gary Merasty, Liberal, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Yes, very quickly, I want to say to Mr. Zoe that as a first nations person, and understanding that I think your presentation was good, I don't think it's fair that you've been painted as anti-union, as I've heard here.

I understand the challenges of our first nations communities sometimes in dealing with these issues. I also understand the neutrality, the jurisdictional issues, and sometimes being economically marginalized from the mainstream.

I want to say that for the record here, because I don't necessarily agree with the statements that have been made about your presentation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Merasty.

We're going to move to Mr. Dhaliwal now.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairperson, and thank you, panel, for coming out here.

When I was listening to Mr. Finn, it seemed as though it came up as very scary tactics. When I look at your part of the business—and you need very well-trained people to work in your force—with minor clarification to the way this bill is written, I think it will serve your purpose.

Making such a drastic one-day statement that this bill is a total flaw--I don't agree with that. Would you like to comment on that particular perspective?

[Sean Finn]

Experience has shown that in the railway industry—and I'll come back to this again—the impact of shutting down a railway to Canada's economy would be enormous. But more important is the previous speaker's comment, that the impact on customers would be enormous.

Imagine Alcan in northern Quebec shutting down three smelters. We wouldn't be able to move aluminum out of Shawinigan, Quebec, or out of Lac Saint-Jean to various places in Canada. Think of shutting down the Port of Vancouver and the Port of Halifax at the same time—major issues.

The issue here is that, with all due respect, the law as drafted is pretty clear that it provides for a right to use managers for simply—

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

That's what I said, Mr. Finn, with that clarification. Madam Lavallée said this is part of the understanding of the bill. I'm here replacing someone.

But if that is the case, I would like to ask, will that serve your purpose—yes or no—in that perspective?