Transport Committee on June 6th, 2013

[Dennis Perrin]

That's correct.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Mr. Miller, is that a fair comment?

You can't nod. You have to say something. You can't read a nod.

[Harvey Miller]

Yes.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Mr. Sigurdson.

[Clyde Sigurdson]

Yes.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Here we have three more witnesses. I say this to you perhaps, Mr. Blakely, that having said all they're looking for when federal tax dollars are involved—and I'm not challenging the right of labour in Ontario to do what it has done within those jurisdictions, but imagine those jurisdictions that don't have these formal clauses that compel them to use only organized labour to do the jobs. As much as organized labour has the right to do the work, why wouldn't labour that is not unionized, not be able to do the work when federal dollars are involved?

[Robert Blakely]

Whether it's with federal dollars, or with provincial dollars, or with municipal dollars only, there are very few places in this country where there are union-only provisions. In some project labour agreements, yes—

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

So if that's the case, sir, then what's your concern about it?

[Robert Blakely]

My concern? I guess my concern is twofold. Every witness you've had here, with the possible exception of me, comes from the open shop and has something to gain.

The concern, I suppose, is this. If the federal government is going to tie to its support of infrastructure projects a way in which municipalities are not free to exercise the choice that an owner would make as to how they do their project, I think that's out of school. I think that if the City of Toronto—just because it happens to be a big place—decided it was going to have a fair wage policy, or a union-only tendering policy, or a non-union tendering policy, that's up to the municipality, and the voters in that municipality get to rule on that every so often.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Okay. Just following that logic, when I look at the concerns I've heard.... I don't mind that the other guests who have testified in front of us want to have some skin in this game, because they are taxpayers the same way that unionized workers are taxpayers.

I've always not made the financial argument, as those around the table thoughtfully do. I argue from the sense of moral imperative. That is to say, how do I deny, notwithstanding those jurisdictions that have it legally in place...? I'm not challenging their right to do that, but I'm suggesting to you, as I am to all of our guests, that for taxpayer dollars from people who are in open shops or non-unionized labour, why wouldn't they, with tax dollars, have that same right to be able to bid on jobs that any unionized shop would?

Because I've heard a fair amount from Mr. Blakely—and thank you for that—perhaps I could ask Mr. Perrin if he has any thoughts on that.

[Dennis Perrin]

I would submit, as I've submitted in my brief, that when it's taxpayer dollars that ultimately contribute to or pay for these projects, those same taxpayers ought to have access to work on those projects. The reality, the end result in many of these situations, is that quite frankly they don't. In some of these agreements, it's merely semantics. In the Manitoba story, if you will, the end result is that they do not.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Could I ask for comments on that—

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you, Mr. Holder, but if Mr. Miller has a comment, or Mr. Sigurdson...?

[Harvey Miller]

I would just echo what Mr. Perrin had to say. Thanks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you.

I just want to correct the record on something that Mr. Blakely said about him being the first witness to basically have a difference of opinion from some of the other witnesses. That absolutely isn't true. The first two meetings of this study.... I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, Mr. Blakely. You probably didn't read the committee Hansard for all the meetings.

I'll turn it over now to Mr. Sullivan for five minutes.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Part of what's going on here is that there's a gross misunderstanding—by the Conservative folks on the other side of the table—of how labour relations work in this country in the construction sector. What is really happening is that there has been a steady stream of contractors that haven't been successful in getting either collective agreements or work, and that are asking the federal government to give them an advantage where they don't now have an advantage. That's really what.... We don't really want to undermine the collective relations system in all of Canada as a result of a discussion here at a transportation hearing, but that's apparently where we're headed.

Is it true or false, Mr. Miller, that if an owner decides to procure a service, it's a free-market choice they make? They decide. The free market determines whether or not they choose you or someone else.

[Harvey Miller]

I believe that owners have a free-market decision. If it's a government that's tendering a project and using tax dollars, then the decision they make has to be available and equitable for everyone, and not necessarily the same thing held to private owners....

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Why is there a difference?

[Harvey Miller]

They have a charter right to decide on their own free will. They're not using tax dollars. They're not accountable to the public in the same way.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

So if they're accountable to the public, then free market doesn't rule, essentially. Okay, that's fair enough. We should get away from the free market.

Mr. Blakely, can you give us some examples of the major contractors who deal with project labour agreements and deal with construction trades—who they are and what they do and what kinds of projects they're involved in? We haven't heard from any of them, although we've put some names forward.

[Robert Blakely]

PCL, for example, provides unionized commercial institutional work across the country. I think it's the seventh-biggest contractor in the country. It does all its work with the building trades in Ontario and does its industrial work with the building trades in the west, with the exception of its spinoff, Monad, which I think is with the Christian Labour Association. There are EllisDon, Aecon, Bechtel, Fluor, Black & McDonald, Comstock, Kiewit. The list goes on and on.

There are literally 500 significant contractors that are at the top of the pyramid. Then there are another thousand contractors, slightly smaller than that, who do it regionally. Then there are another couple thousand contractors who do it locally.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

We haven't heard from those folks. I'm not sure why.

[Robert Blakely]

No. If you were to look at where to get the answer from those folks, consider Ron Martin from CLR in Ontario and Pat Dillon from the Ontario Building Trades.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Miller, your organization is essentially the competition of the building trades unions. You're like a business competitor for work. You have a vested interest in getting work for your organization, so you are the competition and your vested interest is ensuring that the money flows to you. Is it not?

[Harvey Miller]

The Manitoba Merit Contractors Association supports good business practice. We're involved in benefit plans, pension plans, and training. We're there to support open-shop contracting.