This bill was last introduced in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session, which ended in March 2011.
This bill was previously introduced in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session.
France Bonsant Bloc
Introduced as a private member’s bill. (These don’t often become law.)
Second reading (House), as of Dec. 10, 2009
(This bill did not become law.)
This is from the published bill.
This enactment amends the Canada Labour Code to allow employees to take unpaid leave from work for the following family-related reasons:
(a) the inability of their minor child to carry on regular activities because the child suffers a serious physical injury during the commission or as the direct result of a criminal offence;
(b) the disappearance of their minor child;
(c) the suicide of their spouse, common-law partner or child; or
(d) the death of their spouse, common-law partner or child during the commission or as the direct result of a criminal offence.
It also amends the Employment Insurance Act to allow these employees to receive benefits while on leave.
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.
Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, it is proving impossible to reach a negotiated agreement with the Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation. The employees of the Canadian Museum of Civilization and the Canadian War Museum have been on strike since September 21, 2009. At the end of August, the 420 workers voted 92% in favour of the strike.
From the beginning, the union has clearly indicated to the employer, to a mediator, to members of Parliament and to the general public that the employees of the Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation are simply asking for employment conditions similar to those offered in other museums and cultural institutions in the region.
Specifically, these conditions include layoff protection, protection against subcontracting, a commitment to promote stable, permanent employment, and salaries that are in line with those paid at other museums in the region. The Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation's position falls short in all those areas.
Regarding layoff protection, the Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation insists on maintaining its capacity to lay off employees as it sees fit. When layoffs do occur, the corporation refuses to recognize the employees' years of service to the organization.
Regarding protection against subcontracting, the employer wants to maintain its authority to contract out certain jobs.
Regarding fairer treatment for term employees, the employer wants it to be more difficult for certain employees to get indeterminate positions. Again, 38% of the staff is temporary.
Regarding salaries and other monetary items, the employer's position is such that employees lag far behind those of other museums in the region. However, the Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation has recognized from the outset that recruitment and retention are serious problems.
In terms of the overall situation, the striking workers from the Canadian Museum of Civilization and the Canadian War Museum have massively rejected the final offered presented by the Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation. The workers came together at a meeting and 96% rejected the offer.
After the vote, the Public Service Alliance of Canada informed the Minister of Labour that it would be impossible to reach a negotiated agreement with the Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation and therefore asked for her direct intervention to settle this dispute without further delay.
The statements made by the Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation after the vote only confirm to what extent the parties are divided on the issues. Given the length and intensity of the strike, binding arbitration is a reasonable solution to end the dispute.
We are therefore asking the Minister of Labour to provide a reasonable solution by imposing binding arbitration.
Ed Komarnicki ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have this opportunity to provide further information in response to the question raised by the hon. member for Gatineau, who obviously has an interest in seeing a positive outcome to this matter, as we all do.
The strike at the Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation has been going on since September 21, when 420 members of the Public Service Alliance of Canada walked off the job.
All members of the House hope that the parties can resolve this dispute soon, and all members, I am sure, would urge the parties to give it their best efforts.
The hon. member for Gatineau would like the minister to intervene further by imposing arbitration. I would remind the House that the Canada Labour Code provides the foundation of labour relations in our country, and part I in particular, outlines the steps that parties, including labour, management and the minister can take in these situations.
Just as important, I would remind the House that this code is a finely balanced piece of legislation that has been refined over the course of several decades by Parliament, with the input and advice of experts who, over the years, have guided various amendments since the original Conciliation Act was passed in the 1900s.
The code is built upon the long tradition of labour legislation and policy to promote common well-being through free collective bargaining and the constructive settlement of disputes. It supports freedom of association and free collective bargaining as the basis of effective industrial relations.
That code balances the interests of both labour and management and, as a result, Canadian labour relations have recently enjoyed a degree of relative stability.
The hon. member for Gatineau would like to have the minister and the government intervene in a way that is not appropriate in this case. The best solution is always for the parties to reach a settlement themselves, assisted as needed by conciliators and mediators.
Under the code the minister has various options. For example, in this case, when given notice that parties failed to renew or revise their collective agreement, she appointed a conciliation officer on July 3.
On August 27 the parties were released from the conciliation process. On that date, the union members voted 92% in favour of strike action.
Once the conciliation process has concluded, the code provides the minister with the authority to appoint a mediator. This was done on August 31.
On September 17 the union gave notice to the employer that it would take strike action on September 21 if a settlement could not be reached.
The settlement was not reached, and the union members of the War Museum and the Canadian Museum of Civilization did indeed begin their legal strike on September 21.
On November 20 the parties agreed to resume bargaining talks with the mediator. However, unfortunately, no settlement was reached.
There is another avenue that remains, and that is arbitration. The parties may agree in writing to refer outstanding issues to an arbiter for binding arbitration and determination. Both sides must, however, agree to go to arbitration. The minister does not have the legal authority to impose arbitration without the consent of both sides. It is clear that in order to refer their outstanding issues to arbitration, the two parties need to come to an agreement.
The strikers have voted to pursue arbitration. The Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation has indicated it does not wish to go to arbitration, so there is no legislative authority for the minister to get involved in this strike by appointing an arbiter to settle the dispute.
We would again urge the parties to get back to the bargaining table and to use their best efforts to bring in a resolution they can all live with.
Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, according to this morning's Le Droit,
The architect of the Canadian Museum of Civilization, Douglas Cardinal, is “appalled” to see how the museums' workers, who have been on strike for 81 days, are being treated.
“Museum workers are guardians of Canadian heritage and the keepers of our national treasures,” he said. “It's absolutely shameful that the museums' management is not in dialogue seeking a mutually harmonious resolution [to the conflict]”.
The internationally renowned architect, now 75, spoke out yesterday in support of the 420 striking employees of the Museum of Civilization and the War Museum.
I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Cardinal.
The 420 striking workers want the Minister of Labour to keep the strike from dragging on any longer. She must intervene and impose binding arbitration. That is a reasonable solution to put an end to the conflict.
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. members of the House that this is a legal strike and that the Minister of Labour has done everything she can to help resolve this dispute.
The Canada Labour Code clearly establishes the roles and responsibilities of the government and the Minister of Labour. In this case, she has exercised every option available to her to help the parties resolve their issues.
Any further involvement by the government would be detrimental to the resolution of this labour dispute. The parties have to work together to reach a settlement. If they cannot achieve such resolution, they could both agree to submit all issues to binding arbitration.
It is clear that acting within her authority, the minister has sought to facilitate a timely and equitable resolution. This is why the minister is urging the parties to go back to the bargaining table and, with the assistance of a mediator, find a solution to this dispute. Everyone in the House would like to see that and it is in the interests of everyone.
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Mr. Speaker, in preparing, responding to and recovering from the H1N1 pandemic, Parliament's focus must be to reduce the rate of hospitalizations, illness and death, as well as to reduce economic and social impacts. Therefore, our discussions must remain on the winding down of the second wave, as well as preparing for a possible third wave.
Having said this, we are here to address a question regarding communication and consistent messaging. Before I address challenges, I want to recognize the government's effort in producing a guide, information sheets, radio and television ads, et cetera, during the mid-fall. I also want to recognize Dr. David Butler-Jones, who made himself available to me several times to answer questions regarding vaccine research and safety.
However, we missed a window of opportunity in the summer to adequately prepare Canadians for a possible second wave. That is to first, let families know that for the vast majority of Canadians H1N1 would be a mild illness, but for a small percentage it would be a very severe, potentially fatal disease; and second, to inform Canadians of the best way to prevent the spread of the disease and to reduce the risk of contracting it.
Tragically, it was a bereaved family that shook the complacency of Canadians when their young hockey-player son passed away. The family wanted other families to know that H1N1 could be deadly so that no other family would have to suffer as theirs had.
Communication is vital in responding to any crisis and clear, consistent messages are required. Prior to asking tonight's question in the House, MPs' office had been inundated by health care workers and the public who wanted real answers.
Perhaps the greatest confusion surrounded vaccine for pregnant women. The WHO advisory panel on vaccines recommended on July 7 that non-adjuvanted vaccine be used for pregnant women if it were available. However, the government ordered adjuvanted vaccine on August 19, and not August 6 as earlier stated, and later ordered non-adjuvanted vaccine on September 4.
Why were pregnant women an afterthought? When the WHO made its recommendation in July, there was no safety data for the adjuvanted vaccine in pregnant women and expectant women fared poorly during past pandemics.
The government then recommended that pregnant women wait for the non-adjuvanted vaccine unless the cases of H1N1 were rising in their area. If a woman was over 20 weeks, she should take the adjuvanted vaccine.
To add to the confusion, the government then ordered 200,000 doses from Australia. This meant that expectant women in Canada had to make a choice that they should never have had to make: risk getting H1N1 or risk taking a vaccine for which there were not yet clinical trials in pregnant women.
The position was eventually clarified, but the damage was done. Research shows that the first message received on a particular subject sets the stage for a comparison of all future subjects; that is, if the public cares that the world is flat and someone comes along and says the world is round, the latter message may face some resistance because of preconceived ideas on the subject.
Preliminary data shows that the vaccine uptake among pregnant women in Manitoba is lower than other priority groups considered at high risk of falling severely ill from H1N1 influenza. Consistent messages are vital and inconsistent messages will increase anxiety and quickly torpedo credibility of experts.
Colin Carrie ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to respond in greater detail to the matter raised by the member opposite in regard to the Government of Canada's efforts to keep Canadians apprised of the developments on the H1N1 front.
We on this side of the House fully recognize the importance of sharing timely information and of conveying it to Canadians in a clear and consistent way. We recognize the need for using multiple communication channels to get the message out. We recognize the need to partner with others, with the provinces and territories, with health professionals and with community organizations to get these messages out.
We recognize the need to apply basic principles of risk communication, of ensuring people understand how serious the issue is, what they should expect, the steps they can take to protect themselves and their families, and where to access the latest information. More to the point, we acted on the knowledge. The scope and breadth of our activities to keep Canadians apprised of the latest news of the H1N1 vaccine has been unprecedented, and against a backdrop of constantly evolving scientific knowledge about the virus and ongoing developments on the vaccine production front, we have done an admirable job.
I know the hon. member opposite is aware of the diligence with which the Minister of Health has acted to keep all members of the House up to date on this issue. Since the beginning of the outbreak, the Minister of Health and her officials have appeared before the Standing Committee on Health some 10 times. She has participated in multiple debates in the House on this issue and has answered all questions put to her by the opposition fully, responsibly and respectfully. Mr. Speaker, you know that, the hon. member knows that, and all other members of the House know that. Rather than debate subjective issues, let us look at some of the hard facts about how extensive our efforts have been to share information with Canadians on the H1N1 virus, on public health measures, and on the benefits of getting vaccinated.
Indeed our comprehensive citizens readiness marketing campaign for the H1N1 flu virus was launched in late April, shortly after the significance of early reports of a potential flu pandemic could be assimilated. Our first step was to immediately issue travel advisories in English, French and Spanish for travellers coming to Canada from Mexico, or visiting Mexico from Canada. Since then, our efforts have remained ongoing and multifaceted. Let me give a few examples.
Since the outbreak was first reported in April, the Minister of Health and Public Health Agency of Canada officials have participated in no less than 48 separate press conferences. Our FightFlu.ca website has had six million hits. We have posted guidance documents on the site for families, health professionals, parents and businesses. We set up a toll-free 1-800 service to respond to questions from Canadians. To date, some 65,000 Canadians have called and their calls have been received and answered.
We have purchased H1N1 advertising in all mainstream media, including radio, television, and in daily and weekly newspapers. We have posted transit ads, posters and billboards. We have produced materials specifically targeted to first nations and Inuit communities in English, French and five Inuit dialects. We have also demonstrated our respect for new Canadians by purchasing advertisements in over 300 ethnic newspapers and 500 ethnic radio stations.
These are impressive efforts and they have been delivered in close partnership with our provincial and territorial counterparts. We have been working hard to coordinate core messages for H1N1 outreach activities with the provinces and the territories. Senior public health officials and senior public communications experts from all jurisdictions have been meeting on almost a daily basis to get it right and ensure our outreach is mutually reinforced.
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Mr. Speaker, the low uptake of the vaccine among pregnant women today in Manitoba is a tremendous concern. Six per cent of deaths in the U.S. have been among expectant women, who make up a tiny percentage of the population.
Confusion also led to the initial ambivalence about the vaccine. When federal officials declared that Canada was in its second wave of the H1N1 pandemic, a poll revealed that almost half of Canadians did not plan on getting the vaccine created to stop it.
Simply having the vaccine is not enough to have a successful program. As a result, the minister and Dr. Butler-Jones were then forced to make a plea to Canadians. There is a very real risk of the flu. Even in its mildest form it is miserable, and at its worst it kills. The choice is simple: a safe and effective preventive vaccine, or a very real risk of disease. This message, the real facts about immunization, needed to be given during the summer.
I call on the government to increase its efforts in order to achieve the target of greater vaccination come January.
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
Mr. Speaker, recent public opinion research underscores the success of the Government of Canada's efforts to keep Canadians informed about the H1N1 flu outbreak. For example, a significant part of our citizens' readiness efforts have focused on hand washing and the importance of coughing on one's sleeve. Not surprisingly, in all of our public opinion surveys, unprompted, Canadians named hand washing as an effective way to reduce the risk of getting and spreading H1N1. Knowledge of cough and sneeze etiquette has also been on the rise sharply.
More to the point, recent polls make it clear that the majority of Canadians are feeling well informed about H1N1 and are satisfied with the Government of Canada's response to the outbreak.
Mr. Speaker, this is likely the last debate of the decade, and I wanted to take a minute to thank you, thank my constituents of Oshawa, my colleagues and my staff for allowing me to be part of this wonderful institution. I want to wish everyone a very Merry Christmas. God bless Canada. I am looking forward to 2010.
The Acting Speaker Barry Devolin
It being 8:03 p.m., pursuant to an order made earlier today, the House stands adjourned until Monday, January 25, 2010 at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Orders 28(2) and 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 8:04 p.m.)
The second session of the 40th Parliament was prorogued by royal proclamation on December 30, 2009.