This bill was last introduced in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in September 2013.
Lisa Raitt Conservative
This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.
This is from the published bill.
This enactment provides for the resumption and continuation of postal services and imposes a final offer selection process to resolve matters remaining in dispute between the parties.
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.
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
Madam Chair, what is the definition of "relevant"? Are we going to keep going on and on and talk about everything or are we going to talk about clause 8 and the arbitrator? If they do not like themselves, let them sort that out in therapy, but we would like to know what clause 8 is.
The Chair NDP Denise Savoie
Yes, clause 8 concerns the arbitrator. I would therefore ask the hon. member to alter his presentation accordingly and address his comments to the chair.
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Madam Chair, I know it is also tiring for the member from Bourassa when we talk about workers. That is his problem. I understand that, but we have rules to follow, and I am prepared to follow them. I know he finds it tiring for us to be here, and I accept that. I accept the fact that in 1997, the Liberals also forced workers back to work with lower wages than the employer had offered. I accept that, and that is also tiring for them today.
I am asking the government to show respect for the arbitrator's authority in this clause. The arbitrator is a qualified person who will be appointed by the Minister, so let the arbitrator do his or her job.
Lisa Raitt ConservativeMinister of Labour
Very briefly, Madam Chair, this clause speaks to the ability of the minister to be able to appoint for the purposes of final offer selection. Final offer selection is indeed a legitimate means of arbitration. In fact, it is one that ensures the public that each party puts the best offer on the table. It actually encourages a rapid decision-making process, and indeed, when there are issues that are very much apart between the parties, it is the most appropriate method to use.
Joe Comartin NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Madam Chair, that statement from the Minister of Labour really shows a lack of understanding of how the system works, not just in Canada and not just at the federal level, but in every province and territory in this country.
The reality is that the final offer selection process was developed in professional sports in the United States. That is where it came from, so it is no surprise that the government is particularly interested in it. It worked there. One would have one employee, or maybe two to three, and a very narrow range of issues that had to be dealt with. Final offer selection worked quite well and still works quite well in those circumstances.
It is an absolute failure in a situation where we have a large workforce, as we do here, with 50,000-plus employees, members of the union, and then as well, because there are so many people, a large number of complex issues.
I will ask members to pretend that they are the arbitrator. One gets a list of 10 issues from the employer and a list of 10 issues from the union. One has to choose all 10 from one and reject all 10 from the other. There may be a great proposal from the employer on the pension issue, a lousy one on the wage issue and a lousy one on pay equity, but it is all or nothing. That is what the arbitrator has to do because of this clause and a number of the others, clauses 9, 10 and 11 that are forthcoming. That is why we made a series of amendments to give the arbitrator discretion.
Again, we have seen the way the government has attacked our judiciary to try to take away judicial discretion. It is doing exactly the same thing here. The bottom line on this is that the government is taking away that discretion and narrowing the ability of the arbitrator to do his or her job. The end result, and this is what all of the academic studies have shown where final offer selection is used, is that it benefits the employer to the detriment of the employee.
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Madam Chair, without having the background in labour relations that my colleague from Windsor—Tecumseh has, I know that we have voiced our concern with regard to final offer selection.
His background in regard to the process coming from the sports arena is absolutely right, but aspects of that have bled into public service contracts, where we have seen final offer selection on an issue-by-issue basis. There may be 10 issues listed, and the arbitrator can pick and choose the best offer from management or from the union people on an issue-by-issue basis. Even that would be less egregious than this particular approach to solving this problem. Certainly we have a great deal of concern with final offer arbitration.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
No.
Gordon O'Connor Conservative Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON
Madam Chair, I believe if you seek it you would find agreement to apply the results of the previous recorded vote to this motion, with the Conservatives voting no.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
