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.
Alain Giguère NDP Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Mr. Speaker, she is not in contact with the union representatives because she is in contact only with management. She is not doing her job. It is clear that the postal workers have been ambushed.
If anyone here thinks that the Prime Minister of Canada was not informed that there was going to be a lockout, they are about as broad-minded as a skinhead and they are not too bright either.
Mylène Freeman NDP Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Mr. Speaker, if I may, I would first like to take this opportunity to greet the people of my riding of Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel. Many of them are celebrating Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day today. I will not be with them and I would like to express my great disappointment that the Prime Minister refused the leader of the official opposition's proposal to suspend the sitting of the House for today. We therefore cannot celebrate with our constituents.
That being said, I rise today in this House to do my duty and carry out the mandate that was given to me when I was elected. My constituents gave me the mandate of defending workers. It is a question of principle. Workers and the public should not be punished for Canada Post's bad faith.
Forgive me, but I am starting to feel a little bit tired since I have been here since yesterday morning. I listened carefully to what was said during the debate last night. I am concerned about the fact that the hon. members are not listening to each other.
I would like to speak a little bit about the effect that these events will have on our communities.
The union we are discussing this morning is a responsible union, one which took moderate job action so as to accelerate the negotiations without stopping mail delivery. It is the employer, Canada Post, a crown corporation under the government's responsibility, that decided to reduce and then stop mail delivery entirely by locking out all of its employees. We have debated this a great deal and I think that that is clear as can be.
It is unreasonable for the government to impose wages that are lower than those in the previous proposals, to make workers pay for the employer's bad faith and to try to turn the Canadian people against postal workers.
Even though the people of my riding, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, want to get their mail, they understand the difference between a lockout and a strike. The people in my riding understand very well that the postal workers want to distribute the mail as quickly as possible. However, they cannot agree to sacrifice their pensions, their health, their job security and the working conditions of the newer workers.
Small businesses in Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel know that in order to be able to depend on quality service from Canada Post, its workers have to feel they are valued.
All of the workers in my riding support this, because they know that small communities cannot be sustained when members of the community cannot support themselves.
We are talking here—tonight, this morning, and over the weekend if necessary—about giving people the means to defend themselves. This is a matter of respect for workers and the dignity of workers.
I would point out that it is thanks to the workers who were in the vanguard that parental leave, paid for by employers, was won. I think this is something extremely important, since it represents equality. It was the trade union movement that gave us this. These women and men, these workers, simply want to be able to preserve their standing in our society and not become second-class workers.
The work done by postal employees is extremely important to all Canadians and Quebeckers, but it is obviously not valued by this government.
I hope that Canada Post will return to the bargaining table to negotiate a fair and equitable agreement.
I will be here day and night, if need be, to stand up for the right of all Canadians to collectively bargain the right of everyone to a job that enables them to support their family and their community, so that all Canadians are able to retire with security and dignity.
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member for getting up and making that speech. It is good for her to stand and talk in the House of Commons. It is a right and privilege that we all have.
When I was first a member I had to remember who put me here. I had to remember that it was the constituents who were my priority. I wonder if the member would tell her union bosses that they are fired. She no longer represents her union bosses. Now she represents her constituents. My constituents, just like her constituents, would be telling them to get back to work.
When will she tell her union bosses that they are fired and that she works for her constituents?
Mylène Freeman NDP Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Mr. Speaker, as I said, I think the point my colleagues and I have been trying to make tonight is that we have to value our workers. Our communities need every member of the community to be able to live in dignity. It is upsetting to me that the members on the other side have not quite realized that this is not about specific groups of Canadians but about our communities as a whole.
Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for her thoughtful comments.
Like many others, I have not been part of a union. In fact, in my previous life I negotiated many collective agreements on behalf of management. While we always approached those negotiations with an attitude of a win-win for both sides, we realized that after negotiations, we still had to maintain good relations. We had to have faith in one another. We had to build morale on both sides, for the employer and the employee.
Last night I received a letter from a CUPW member, George, who asked me to see if there was any possible way he could get back to work right away, have the doors unlocked and resume the mail for all people, for businesses and residents who deserved to receive it.
I wonder if the member could speak about the merit of letting everybody go back to work, resuming their former positions, and going through a normal mediation and arbitration process rather than going through the terms imposed by this legislation.
Mylène Freeman NDP Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Mr. Speaker, I think the workers just want to go back to work with a fair negotiated agreement.
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech in the House of Commons this morning. I think it is important we recognize, as she has, that what is happening right now is connected to the issue of community. There is no doubt that Canadian postal workers are very much a part of the community, as is the case, for example, in Windsor West, in Sandwich Towne.
I hear some heckling in the background, but I will ignore that for the moment, just as that member has often been ignored in the House of Commons.
However, I think it is important we recognize that community is very much a part of the postal services.
In my riding there was a threat with regards to closing the postal outlet in Sandwich Towne. We stopped that closing, the first one to be stopped across Canada, because it affected the businesses, residents, seniors, students and so forth.
I would ask the member to expand upon that connection to community. It is very important, because it is not just about the individual workers here but about the best service at the end of the day. This is a very important postal service that is recognized and renowned worldwide.
Mylène Freeman NDP Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Mr. Speaker, I agree that communities are interconnected networks of people, and a standard for everybody should be maintained such that the community can function well.
At this point, I think we will probably be elaborating more over the weekend, but I am a bit too tired to keep going right now.
Matthew Dubé NDP Chambly—Borduas, QC
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time I have risen in this House, but it is the first time I have made a speech. First, I would like to thank the voters of Chambly—Borduas for electing me to this position. Speaking of them, I also want to point out that like all my colleagues from Quebec, I will unfortunately not be able to take part in activities marking our national holiday in Quebec with my constituents. I do wish them a wonderful holiday, however. I want them to know that I am very disappointed not to be there.
What is happening is worthwhile, though, because it has given me an opportunity, on this national holiday, to put things in perspective. I would like to take a step back for a moment. I assure you that what I have to say is relevant and relates to the bill we have before us.
One of the activities I was going to take part in today was a performance put on by students at Osias-Leduc secondary school, entitled Je me souviens. All Quebeckers—and many Canadians—know that the motto Je me souviens appears on our licence plates in Quebec. But those words mean much more.
For one, they remind us to think about important historic events, such as the asbestos strike in 1949, which I think is relevant to this situation. I am not bringing this up to upset the member for Winnipeg Centre. The town is called Asbestos. We will not talk about the asbestos issue. One all-nighter is enough. Perhaps another time.
In all seriousness, I want to talk about the asbestos strike because, at that time, there was a serious issue in the labour dispute. It had to do with the language of work. People had no say. At that time, they literally had no say because management and workers did not speak the same language. Now, 60 years later, we find ourselves in the same situation: the workers have no say.
Responsibility for the lockout does not lie with Canada Post. It lies with the government, which wants to force a return to work and impose previously determined conditions that have been set out in the bill we are debating. I find it very problematic and very disappointing that, after 60 years, we are still in a similar situation, even though the circumstances have changed.
I would also like to tell a story about a woman in my riding who is a teacher. Last night, the Minister of Labour spoke about the 45,000 Canada Post workers, who, it seems, are less important than the rest of the Canadian public. However, we must not forget the big picture. My constituent was right to bring this up. She and her colleagues are constantly fighting for their fair share. Yes, I know what the members on the other side are thinking. They are going to give me a lesson. They are going to tell me that education is under provincial jurisdiction. I know that.
I am bringing up this example because the government needs to lead by example and show people that they can have a say, that they have a role to play in society. Be it through a union or some other means, they all have a right to their fair share in society.
This teacher, when she spoke to me about this, told me that she was worried that this bill would pass. Why? Because from that point forward she would be living in a society in which she did not even know whether she would be able to fight for her rights. She did not even know whether she could defend her right to have an acceptable collective agreement, get her pension, and so on.
This is all very relevant for me as a young person. With all due respect to our seniors, it is not only them we are thinking about and whom we have to think about when it comes to pensions. We must also think about young people. As young people, we do not even know if we will have pensions. Without unions or organizations that allow us to have a forum in which to speak, we cannot guarantee the security of these things, the security of pension plans.
That being said, this teacher certainly took notice of what the 308 members of this House wanted. Yes, we want the mail to be delivered again.
However, she said it very clearly. We can spend the whole night, as we have done, taking out our BlackBerrys and saying that we have received an email from some person or another saying that the workers should go back to work or that they should not and that we are doing the right thing. However, the fact remains that the letter carriers, Canada Post employees, were delivering the mail. It was management that decided to declare a lockout, not the workers. People, including those from Quebec, know this. It strikes at the very core of the community values we hold in Quebec.
I would therefore like to take this opportunity, with all due respect to the people in the rest of the country, to note that today is Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day. It is indeed important to remember. We need to be able to say “Je me souviens”, I remember this important event and the fact that, 60 years later, we are still fighting for the same thing. That being said, this is why we must oppose Bill C-6.
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Mr. Speaker, I have listened to this debate and others with some interest. At some point, people need to be legislated back to work. This legislation provides how that might be done and gives some guidelines to the arbiter. One of those guidelines is to ensure the short and long-term economic viability of Canada Post. What does the member have against that principle. Does Canada Post not have to be viable if it wants to protect its workers?
It also talks about maintaining the health and safety of its workers, and that is pretty important, and ensures the sustainability of its pension plan. In order for workers to benefit from a pension plan, does it not have to be sustainable?
Would the member not agree with me those guiding principles are reasonable?
At some point, people must come to a place where someone other than the parties bring the matter to a resolution. There are third parties involved, Canadians, who are suffering economically and need to have this brought to a conclusion. It is costing them a significant number of dollars, and that is right across the country.
Matthew Dubé NDP Chambly—Borduas, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would say that the problem with this way of thinking is, as I mentioned, that we can no longer hear the workers' voice in all of this. Are the workers not also Canadians who are negatively affected by certain circumstances, as the member opposite said? Yes, we understand the importance of the economy, but workers are also part of the economy.
I would like to say—as we have said throughout the night and will continue to say this weekend—that things were going well at Canada Post until management decided to lock out the employees. There is no reason to prevent workers from expressing themselves and having a voice at the bargaining table.
Jean Rousseau NDP Compton—Stanstead, QC
Mr. Speaker, I was born in Asbestos. An entire generation of workers have talked to me about the conflict that took place under a government that was in power in a period that we call the great darkness in Quebec. We will see how history will depict the government opposite.
I would like to ask my hon. colleague from Chambly—Borduas what will be the social cost of a collective agreement that is not negotiated, a bogus agreement. Once again, the gap between rich and poor is growing and is greater than ever before.
Matthew Dubé NDP Chambly—Borduas, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I am happy to have the opportunity to reply to a question from a colleague who is from the area I was referring to.
In fact, that event I referred to does for some mark the beginning of the Quiet Revolution in Quebec. To answer the question, if this bill is passed, if we silence workers in this way, we will be losing ground and going back to that era known as the great darkness.
As I mentioned in my speech, this is very important because it is going to create a precedent. The time to act is now. We have four years to go and in my opinion, this is not a very good message to send at the beginning of a mandate.
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, the member had beautiful speech in the House, especially when he says that it is his first speech. He was very thoughtful. The sense of history he brings to the debate today is very important.
He mentioned that postal workers had no voice. That is a very pertinent comment because they have been locked out. They want to do nothing more than get back to the bargaining table.
It was very surprising to us last night to hear the minister talk about the strike. She did not seem to know the difference. Could the member comment on what a lockout is and what took place?
Matthew Dubé NDP Chambly—Borduas, QC
Mr. Speaker, the answer is quite simple, but it is crucial to this debate.
The rotating strikes the workers were holding allowed them to serve Canadians anyway and to perform their duties, even in a less-than-perfect way. However, when there is a lockout, there are two things to consider. Firstly, people are deprived of service. The other factor, which is even more important, is that management makes this decision and workers pay the price, without being able to make their voices heard, voices that my colleague and I deem to be important, but that are being jeopardized by this debate.