Bill C-6 (Historical)

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act

An Act to provide for the resumption and continuation of postal services

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.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this affects everybody. It is really important that we work together. We were all elected by Canadians. We are all here for a reason. We have to work for them. Let us just do it. Let us stop the lockout, move these negotiations along and let us get everybody back to work.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member on her speech, particularly in light of the history of the right to bargain collectively. That is a very important right.

This system is not ideal. When there is a lockout, as there is now, or a strike, the employer and the employees both suffer economically. Since what is proposed in the bill is unfair, does the member believe that there is a possible alternative, for example, arbitration, to find a fair resolution?

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

When I think about this, I try to put myself in the shoes of the workers. Then I think about it from all perspectives. I can see that not being able to get one's mail is hard.

However, being a Canada Post worker, being locked out of work and having one's rights violated like this is brutal. That is not right. We really have to stand here and fight for their rights. We have to stop the lockout. Let us get back to work.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I compliment my colleague on her speech. I am very proud of our caucus, particularly our new members and those who are under 30, who are behaving and acting with such poise, intelligence and composure. I thank them for that. It is refreshing.

The member reflected on what a lot of people are concerned about, which is people have been forgotten in this. The people who have been locked out have been forgotten.

I have been on the picket line before. I know what it is like. It means we cannot bring home a paycheque. It means we have to sacrifice.

We have to establish the fact that this affects every day people and the people who work to deliver our mail, as well as small businesses. I would like to hear her comment on that.

However, she said something very important. She said we must end the lockout. How can the government end the stalemate and get people back to work?

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, thousands and thousands of people work for Canada Post. It is a unionized business. If the government can do this to a unionized business, if it has the control and is able to lockout workers, which has such a big impact, what will it do to everybody else?

It is important that we work together. We could do this. We were elected by Canadians and we work for them. Let us all work together, stop this lockout and get back to work.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to take a moment to wish all Quebeckers, and especially those from my Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier riding, a happy Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day.

This holiday is a special opportunity to spend time with our families, our loved ones, and to celebrate our pride in being a part of the Quebec nation, which has a rich heritage and culture. I especially want to thank the municipalities of Sainte-Brigitte-de-Laval and Saint-Casimir for inviting me to attend their holiday celebrations.

I would have really liked to take part in the activities organized throughout my riding over the last few days, but I absolutely had to be here, in the House of Commons, to support the Canada Post workers with my NDP colleagues who are working very hard. We are working very hard for those people today.

Despite everything that is happening in Quebec, it is very important for me to be here in Ottawa and join the Canada Post workers in defending and retaining their basic rights. Those rights include the right to free association, the right to collective bargaining—which seems to have been forgotten in this case—and the right to safer working conditions and fair wages.

The current situation is utterly deplorable, but we have to remember that this is not a strike, as I heard some of my government colleagues say repeatedly during the night. The workers are instead facing a lockout imposed by Canada Post. This is something we must remember and always keep in mind as we debate this situation. The executives are the ones who made the conscious decision to lock the doors and deprive Canadians of their mail services, despite the fact that these are so essential.

Canada Post workers, even when they were holding rotating strikes, always made sure that Canadians received their government cheques and other important documents. The union even offered to end the strike if Canada Post agreed to let the expired collective agreement stay in effect during the negotiations. To my mind, that was a very obvious sign of good faith.

It is only since Canada Post ordered a lockout that service has been suspended; prior to that, it was not. It is because of this lockout that Canadian individuals and small businesses are not receiving their mail anymore.

Now the Conservative government wants to impose an agreement on Canada Post employees. The Conservative government's special legislation is unacceptable. It is an irresponsible bill that runs counter to the fundamental and inalienable right of workers to negotiate a collective agreement in good faith.

These actions of the Conservative government are depriving both parties of any opportunity to negotiate their own agreement, an agreement they are going to have to live with and work under during the next few years.

In addition, the Conservatives' offer adds insult to injury, as it is worse than what Canada Post had offered workers before the government's useless and unnecessary intrusion. Lower salaries, job insecurity, an attack on their pensions; this is what the Conservatives are offering Canada Post workers. It is a complete disgrace.

Do my Conservative colleagues realize that Canada Post workers deserve better? Improved occupational health and safety, decent salaries and a pension; is that really so much to ask? Apparently so, according to our fine government.

But should the Conservatives' attitude in this matter really surprise us? This is far from the first time that the government has shown such utter contempt toward workers, in particular when it comes to pensions.

In my riding, I do not have to look very hard for a tangible example of the Conservatives' dismissive attitude in recent years. We need only look at what happened to the workers at the AbitibiBowater plant in Donnacona in the spring. Unfortunately, it was announced last spring that the plant would be torn down. As the hon. members are all probably aware, 9,000 pensioners are literally watching their pension benefits disappear before their very eyes because of AbitibiBowater's financial difficulties. Even though their pensions are nothing more than deferred wages, wages that the employer formally agreed to pay them when they retired, in accordance with the terms set out at the time of their hiring, the big bosses at AbitibiBowater have no qualms about dipping into the pension fund whenever it suits their needs.

What have the Conservatives done to help these pensioners? Absolutely nothing. There were calls for help, but nothing was done. To this day, those pensioners are still experiencing problems.

Back then, the hon. member for Thunder Bay—Rainy River introduced Bill C-501, which sought protection for workers' severance and termination pay in the event of a restructuring or corporate bankruptcy, as in AbitibiBowater's case.

In short, Bill C-501 would have given pension funds, as well as severance pay and termination pay benefits, secured creditor status, making them a priority in the event of a bankruptcy. Employers would have lost the ability to choose to reimburse all subcontractors before paying their own employees their deferred wages, as companies should have always done from the outset.

Despite lingering in the House for some time, being debated and seemingly receiving approval, the bill was ultimately defeated by the Conservatives, of course. Shame!

The Conservatives are clearly turning their backs on Canadian workers. Last spring, it was the Donnacona retirees who suffered because of the Conservatives' indifference and contempt. Today, it is the Canada Post workers who are suffering. Who will be next? Which group of workers will the Conservative government try to impose similar working conditions on next? Who will the government try to control once this special legislation has been passed? Everyone is in trouble. Make no mistake. It could happen to anyone, to any group of workers. We need to be very wary.

Personally, I am disturbed by the Conservatives' current attitude. I think that many of my colleagues and fellow citizens from across the country share that sentiment. I am worried about the future of workers' rights when faced with pressure from an employer.

The government's reckless actions are a direct attack on Canada's labour organizations and only serve to reinforce my belief that we need unions that are dedicated to defending the rights of citizens who, like us, work tirelessly to improve their communities. I do not feel that members on the other side of the House are ready to stand up to defend workers' rights as all of my colleagues did throughout the night last night, and as we will continue to do throughout the coming days.

As you know, unions have fought for many years to ensure that our children can go to school instead of having to work in factories, that the salaries workers receive are fair and just, and that workers have safe working conditions.

Very important rights were won through many fierce battles, and these rights include the right to negotiate as equals and in good faith with their employers in order to establish a collective agreement that works for everyone.

It is high time that the government stop eroding the rights of Canada Post workers by interfering so brutally in the collective bargaining process. The government must stop continually siding with management, and it must take concrete action to ensure that the conflict is resolved quickly and satisfactorily. The government has the authority to demand that the lockout cease and that the two parties return to the negotiating table.

Canada Post workers are ready to return to work. They know that they provide an essential service to Canadians and they are aware of their responsibilities and importance in their communities.

All they are asking for is to return to work with dignity and that their request be heard and respected. It is a very small request in the current circumstances. It is high time to end the lockout. We must respect the right of workers to collective bargaining by ending the lockout that prevents the workers from exercising their rights.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly want to set the record straight. The Conservative Party values the hard work of Canada Post workers. We value anyone who is willing to work hard to put food on the table.

Today I was on the phone with a constituent of mine. She runs a small business and has been running it for 11 years. She was on the phone with me three times today. Cash flow has become critical. She runs a mail house. Her revenue evaporated earlier this week, she is looking for some stopgap financing and on Monday she needs to decide whether she is laying off 16 people.

I am here today to implore the opposition to please allow this woman to get back to work and allow Canada Post workers to get back to work. She questions what really is being achieved by continuing these debates for some 17 or 18 hours. The point has been made. She really sees this as theatrics.

I am here to put the question to the hon. member who just gave her speech to please help me make sure that this woman's employees can continue working for us and to put food on the table for their families.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my honourable colleague for his question.

We want to help this person. We have a solution that will help this person make decisions and resolve the situation, and that is to end the lockout and allow the workers to return to their jobs.

[Jasbir Sandhu, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this morning I received a number of calls from constituents from my area. One of the things they are telling me is they want to get their mail on time. They asked me to tell the government to unlock the doors so they can get back to work. Has my colleague been getting any calls like that?

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have heard from a number of Canadians, people who work at Canada Post and others who support the Canada Post employees who are fighting for their rights. These people want to see the satisfactory resolution of this situation, but it must not be at the expense of workers' rights. People worked for generations before us to obtain these rights and to ensure that everyone has better living and working conditions. We will not arrive at a solution by violating their rights. The solution is clear—end the lockout.

[Joe Preston, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her great speech, but if we thought great speeches would have solved this about 24 hours ago we would have been done.

There are some terms we use around here that the public does not quite understand, whether it is filibuster, legislation or debate, and how we do it. Even some of us in here do not understand some of the terms we use, whether it is lockout, rotating strike or back-to-work legislation.

What the public knows is they are not getting their mail but want to get their mail, and we have put forward legislation that can make that happen. Let us vote on that legislation and get out of here.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his comment.

I do not believe I heard an actual question. However, if the hon. member is asking for clarification of the terms we are currently using, I can provide that information quickly. It is very clear what a lockout means. The employer locks the door and prevents employees from doing their jobs. What we are doing right now in this House, which the public understands, is very simple. We are defending the rights of workers and we are speaking on their behalf. We are their voice in the House. What we are doing right now is explaining the exact reasons why we have to put an end to this lockout.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, does the hon. member think that it was disrespectful of the Prime Minister to make a truly partisan choice by celebrating both Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day and asbestos in Thetford Mines rather than remaining in Ottawa, as our leader did, and defending his own bill?

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for this very pertinent question.

I think that Canadians can make up their own minds from what they are seeing in the House. They see which party is standing up for the rights of workers and people like them and which party is not prepared to do so and puts partisanship above the discussion we are having here.

Progress can still be made. Changes can be made to this bill even though I am not yet getting that sense here.

As for the question of lack of respect, I will let the hon. member answer that himself.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, I want to extend best wishes for Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day, a very important day of celebration. Many francophones from coast to coast celebrate it, and it is an important day on which to stand up and recognize the day and commend all of those who are involved in the organization of the day so that many Canadians, from coast to coast, are able to participate in the many different celebrations across Canada, in particular, in the province of Quebec.

I come from a very unique city when we talk about labour. Many will recall the Winnipeg General Strike of 1919 and the impact that strike had on the whole labour movement here in Canada. When I consider the type of legislation that we have before us today, it is hard not to reflect on so many different labour leaders.

When I talk about labour leaders, I am not just talking about those who hold formal positions within the labour movement. I am talking about those who have been involved in the grassroots of our union movement, not only in the last decade but over a number of years.

I believe that Winnipeg, in the province of Manitoba, in many ways has been very progressive with regard to coming up with areas of labour policy that have in fact been of great benefit both for workers and for businesses, I must add.

I want to comment very briefly with regard to postal workers. l recognized yesterday when I had the opportunity to speak, and I wanted to reinforce, what I believe is a very important point, something that is being lost. This should not be about a filibuster or anything of this nature. What this should be about is the employees who are working for Canada Post and Canada Post as a corporation itself. We would have loved the opportunity to allow those two entities to sit down in a collective bargaining fashion that is free in which an agreement would have been achieved.

We believe that the government would have known, and I suspect possibly even supported, Canada Post's decision to lock out its employees. That is really where the problem began. At that point I believe a lot of people lost faith in what was taking place. Ultimately, at the end of the day, the government did have a choice. The crisis we are in today is a crisis that has been created by the government of the day. I believe that to be the case. I do not believe for a moment that the government would not have known that Canada Post was going to lock out its employees. At the very least, Canada Post would have informed the minister responsible. If not, many might even suggest that the minister responsible might even have had some discussions with Canada Post prior to Canada Post making that particular decision. There is a great deal of concern with regard to what actually has taken place there.

All I know is I have had the opportunity to meet with and have discussions with Canada Post workers over the last number of months, and I made reference to some of those discussions yesterday. I should say “today” because we are still on Thursday inside the House. When we talk about the issues that were important, I listened to what Canada Post Corporation had to say when it came to Parliament and made its presentation, but I also intentionally took the initiative to go out and talk to some of the letter carriers and others concerning what they thought Canada Post's new, next generation of services is going to be like.

They raised concerns, and there were two different sides. The one that came to mind, which I made reference to yesterday, came from not just one letter carrier but a few letter carriers who raised the identical issue concerning how they are going to have to carry the mail door to door. It was a one-pack system. Now it is going to a two-pack system, which is very difficult to carry in their arms because of the way they flip through the mail to put it into mailboxes.

Suffice it to say there are many different issues that we in the chamber are not necessarily aware of. It is important that those issues be brought to a table wherein there is a sense that the bargaining process is going to be fair. Say what one will, I suspect that at the end of the day the employees of Canada Post believe that the government has not been fair and has directly intervened.

It is not to say that there is no place for back-to-work legislation. It has proved to be an effective tool in the history of our country, whether it is in the House of Commons or other provinces. In fact, we will find that there are political parties of all stripes, Conservatives, Progressive Conservatives, New Democrats and Liberals, who have all used back-to-work legislation. Every political party inside this chamber when in government has in fact used back-to-work legislation.

What makes this back-to-work legislation so unique is that it has been taken from the perspective of the arbitrator. Limitations have been put in that will prevent legitimate negotiations. As a result many would argue, and I would argue, and I believe the leader of the Liberal Party argued, that it could even be unconstitutional. By the time it hits the court everything will likely be resolved, but I suspect that given the way in which this legislation is worded it could be unconstitutional. There is a need for us to amend and change this legislation.

I still cannot get over the fact that the government locked out the employees of Canada Post. That is a hard pill to digest. I do not think the postal workers will ever digest that particular pill because it was premature at best, not warranted.

Having said that, I believe that the legislation and the way in which it is worded if taken to the Supreme Court I believe would be unconstitutional. The government cannot put the workers in this position. It shows its bias toward management. That is why it was interesting to listen to what the New Democrats had to say during the debate as they addressed the amendment that is being proposed, the six months' hoist.

We have been asking questions, and in terms of the responses they are interesting because we are looking for ideas. We want to see how the workers can benefit by ideas and discussions within this chamber in terms of how we could resolve this thing. We could tell Canada Post to take the locks off and end it. Then the union and Canada Post could get back together and try to resolve this through mediation. I think that is a viable option. The leader of the official opposition has talked about bringing amendments. There was even one member who stood up and said that there were amendments submitted to the government. I think there needs to be a little bit more transparency in terms of what we are talking about.

If we continue to have this debate for the next number of days, I am game for that. I was in the Manitoba legislature in 1988 when we had the final offer selection debate go for hours and hours and days and days. It was interesting to do the comparisons where they had the six months' hoist. It was a Conservative government and an NDP opposition. I have been there and I can say that there was a great deal of frustration because there was not the transparent debate that is necessary to provide comfort to not only the employees but also to the corporation.

I think we have to start to be a little fairer in our comments and start saying how we can resolve this as opposed to trying to add to the division by saying we are either for the union or the corporation. I believe at the end of the day we need to be more sympathetic in terms of what it is that our letter carriers have to go through in order to be able to communicate their messages, in order to be able to continue doing the fabulous job that they currently do. How many smiles do they put on people's faces when they walk up to their doors to deliver the mail? They are ambassadors to our communities in very many ways. They do not get the recognition that they should be getting. In essence, through the lockout, the government is trying to demonize it when its members talk about it being a strike when it is not a strike.

I see my time has expired, Mr. Speaker. I am thankful for having had the opportunity to speak.