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

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this deal is worse than what they would even get at the table from Canada Post. The government is offering wage rates lower than what Canada Post offered.

It tramples on collective bargaining rights in our country.

As well, it supports a tax on the postal workers' defined pension benefits plan.

Also, it promotes a two-tier wage and benefits system.

This legislation is an attack not just on postal workers but also on wages, benefits and pensions of all Canadian workers. That is why we are making a stand. That is why I will continue to be in the House every day, as long as it takes, to get a fair negotiated settlement not only for our postal workers but for all our Canadian workers.

[José Nunez-Melo, NDP, Laval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by apologizing to my constituents in the riding of Laval for missing the various Saint-Jean-Baptiste festivities taking place throughout the community. I am here today to stand up for workers' rights.

On June 3, postal workers began rotating strikes. They are fighting for safer working conditions and decent wages. They offered to stop the rotating strikes if Canada Post would agree to abide by the old contract while negotiations were ongoing. Canada Post refused to do so. The employer instead decided to lock the workers out and to shut down postal service. That is why Canadians and small businesses are no longer receiving their mail.

It is important to keep in mind that this is not a workers' strike but a lockout imposed by the employer, Canada Post. Workers have the right to negotiate with their employer in good faith. But that is not the case here. The government wants to impose a labour contract on employees. What the government is doing does not give both sides an opportunity to reach an agreement. Furthermore, the government is proposing an agreement with even lower wages than Canada Post's offer.

What type of message are they sending? This debate is not only about mail, it is above all about the workers' right to negotiate a collective agreement. Who will be the next group of workers to see their rights trampled underfoot in this way?

Which leads me to ask the Conservative caucus and more precisely the Minister of Labour if the ultimate objective, the government's true objective, is not simply to create a precedent, a very dangerous one in fact, in order to destroy and annihilate the union movement in Canada.

Canada Post workers want a very simple thing: they want to deliver the mail, to work, quite simply. For the moment, they cannot provide the services they were hired to provide. This raises the following question: why can they not go to work? The answer is very simple: there is a lock on their employer's door. There are locks on all the mailboxes throughout the country.

Canada Post has a mandate to fulfill for the entire population, including people in large cities like Laval and Montreal. Laval residents are already dealing with big problems, because it is difficult these days to get around on the island of Montreal where many Laval residents work. Since the government is not investing enough in infrastructure in the greater Montreal area, the residents of both the south and north shores are suffering.

It would be possible to prevent further problems for the people of Laval, Montreal and the south shore. The government could encourage negotiations and work with the opposition to make the bill acceptable to all sides in this labour dispute.

Canada Post has decided that the Canadian population would no longer receive its mail. In addition to Canada Post preventing the letter carriers from working, the Government of Canada has decided to add insult to injury by setting lower salary levels. These workers did not need that. These workers make the economy go round. These workers are the engine of the economy. They are consumers and taxpayers. They contribute to society, as opposed to the big corporations that are always getting bigger and better gifts from the government.

The time has come to show some flexibility and withdraw the unfair provision regarding workers' salaries.

We understand that the government is in no hurry to remove the locks from the doors, because it likes locks. It locked up Parliament several times because it did not like the way things were going.

The solution to this deadlock is simple. We are asking the government to work with us to encourage negotiation in good faith between the parties in this conflict. We are asking the government to withdraw the clause that sets the salaries for postal workers, and to put an immediate end to the lockout so that mail carriers can resume delivering the mail and providing service to the population. That is what they were hired to do. We are also asking the government to allow the negotiations to continue until a new collective agreement has been signed.

Canada Post is not bankrupt. No urgent restructuring is required. Canada Post is a profitable undertaking with a responsibility to negotiate with its workers. The time has come to put an end to the lockout.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I note there have been a few people reading emails from constituents into the record. I have a few from people who are very upset. I will read one. It states, “We are very upset with the Canada Post work stoppage. This is affecting communication with our senior parents. My mother does everything by mail. She cannot use a computer. My father will not receive a gift for Father's Day. My child will not get graduation photos to family and friends, let alone gifts for graduation.We, the little people, affected by this strike are very upset. We appreciate the efforts of the Government of Canada in this matter. We will support you and the Government of Canada in this matter. I was a federal and provincial employee, but I understand, enough is enough. It costs and hurts us”.

I have another one here that reads, ”I hope you are taking the message to Ottawa that Canada Post has to get workers back on the job. As small business owners with an online retail business, we rely very heavily on the delivery services of our products to customers via Canada Post”.

They are asking that we work to get Canada Post back to work. I have also received a number of tweets. I want to share a couple of those as well. One is from a constituent in Carstairs who says, “Keep up the good work. My family has very important mail that we cannot get right now. Very disappointing for our son”.

I have another one that I want to share. It reads, “Thank you for your work. I might not use Canada Post much, but my clients do and, therefore, that means the cheques are in the mail”.

I just want to point out that that would be a hashtag NDP fail. What do the NDP say to these individuals who need to have postal service so they can get their businesses working and get their families' mail?

[José Nunez-Melo, NDP, Laval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the honourable member across the way would be surprised to know how many emails I have received from all over Canada, from workers who are demanding that the government put an end to the lockout so that they can receive their mail. That is the only solution: if the government puts an end to the lockout, the negotiations can resume properly and everything will get settled.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there is a question I have been wanting to put for quite some time and I would be interested to hear the hon. member's response.

Earlier in the evening, the Associate Minister of National Defence raised a very interesting point which I am not sure really came home to everyone in the chamber. He suggested that the salaries that had been negotiated for the postal workers should be clawed back to the level proposed in the legislation because they would be more comparable to private couriers. Perhaps he showed his hand out of turn from what the PMO would have wanted. It leads me to believe that this is the first step. Maybe the Conservatives are setting the salary range for a sell-off and to privatize Canada Post.

We have been informed in this House that it is a mere $857.50 per postal worker that they are seeking. I have just learned that the government, along with the Government of Alberta, have just gifted almost $1 billion to Shell for one project to try to meet its carbon target.

The government can give $1 billion to Shell, but it cannot give $857.50 to a postal worker? Would the member like to comment on that?

[José Nunez-Melo, NDP, Laval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and honourable member from our side of the House.

You should know that I come from a union background and that I have some experience in this, as I lived through the imposition of a law by the provincial government of Quebec. Let me say this at the outset: when salaries are being negotiated, it is not advisable for one party to have the upper hand. We went back to work dragging our heels.

Their ultimate objective here is to put an end to the union movement, privatize the business and offer ridiculous salaries.

[The Acting Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

Before we continue with debate, I will give a helpful hint for some members. There are often a lot of members who would like to get up on questions and comments and, with only five minutes, it is good to keep your question at around a minute and that gives the respondent about the same time. We might be able to get three questions in on questions and comments.

Resuming debate. The hon. member for Joliette.

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Union of Postal Workers held a rotating strike so as not to prevent Canadians from receiving their mail. The union offered to end the strike if the company would agree to keep the former collective agreement in effect during the negotiation process; however, Canada Post refused. Why did it refuse?

Employees are locked out; they are not on strike. Their right to strike has been taken away, and this is unacceptable in 2011. Locking out employees does not seem like a good idea when negotiations are underway. We must not forget that Canada Post belongs to all Canadians. Why is the government imposing legislation that will give the workers lower salaries than what was offered by Canada Post? Why decrease their purchasing power when we know that the cost of living never stops increasing? You can see it at the grocery store each week.

We are asking the Conservative government to respect the rights of workers. We are hoping that what is happening at Canada Post is not a prelude or a severe warning to all Canadian workers. We must allow both parties to come to an agreement for everyone's well-being. Will the Conservative government allow this to happen?

We know that a lower salary means a lower pension. After I was elected, employees in my riding asked me to protect their jobs and to ensure that Canada Post was not privatized. They explained to me what they are experiencing and told me about their concerns. They said that they have been feeling the pressure for a long time already. My role as a member of Parliament is to listen to them and bring their message to Ottawa.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board and for Western Economic Diversification]

Mr. Speaker, who do the hon. member and the NDP think they are helping by causing this delay in getting our postal workers back to work? Because they are not helping Canadians. In fact, 70% of Canadians are against this. They also are not helping postal workers.

I have done the math, and 25% of the annual increase is lost every day that the NDP delays the postal workers getting back to work. That means that, in four days, the entire annual increase for the postal workers is gone as a result of the NDP's delay in getting our postal workers back to work.

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the mail may be late, but we must protect the rights of workers. I know that a large part of the population agrees with us and wants the workers to be able to negotiate a real contract and not have one imposed.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I know there are many people watching this debate with curiosity. We are looking for ideas. I understand there was some movement, in that the New Democratic caucus has provided some potential amendments to the government caucus. I think there seems to be an appetite to find out what kinds of ideas might be flowing. The leader of the Liberal Party talked about constitutionality, and we have talked about the wage factor and other aspects of the legislation.

Is there any way the member could share with the House ideas the New Democrats have that they would like to see in the current legislation?

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this is the first time that I have participated in a debate in the House. It is quite interesting. In light of what we are going through and what our employees are currently going through—because they are our employees—I believe that we absolutely must support their actions. They want a contract that is signed in good faith. We have to support them in this.

[Manon Perreault, NDP, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is simple.

All members agree that workers have the right to draw a pension and to live comfortably and safely. They are entitled to that because they have worked for their retirement pension. My question is as follows. What will be the impact of such legislation on workers' pensions?

[Francine Raynault, NDP, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, reducing their wages will mean that their pensions will be smaller, and thus they will have less money when they reach retirement age. This week, we spoke several times throughout almost an entire day about the poverty of seniors. Therefore, I do not believe that we should decrease workers' salaries because they will then retire in poverty.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if my hon. colleague realizes that we are not even debating Bill C-6; we are debating the hoist amendment.

I also wonder if all the speeches we have heard for the last two days will be repeated again when we actually debate Bill C-6.