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

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour]

Madam Speaker, I do take issue with what the member had to say and I want to be very clear. The Minister of Labour and this government are acting in the public's interest on the Canadian economy and for Canadians to get mail delivery restored.

There were a couple of questions that have been raised with respect to Bill C-6. This member raised them and some others throughout the morning have raised them.

With respect to pensions, I encourage the member opposite to take a look at subsection 11(2)(a):

(a) that the solvency ratio of the pension plan must not decline as a direct result of the new collective agreement;

The fact is that this legislation includes guiding principles to provide direction to the arbitrator that the desire of the government is to see that no increase in the unfunded portion of Canada Post's pension plan moves forward. Our government's desire is to ensure that Canadian taxpayers are not left with the bill for Canada Post's pension plan.

The second issue I raise, and I ask the members to take a look at, is the wage issue as it has been noted with respect to two-tier wages. Again, I would like the member opposite to explain to me exactly where those two-tier wages are. I do not actually recognize them in this legislation.

[Bruce Hyer, NDP, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to respond by saying that I am somewhat an expert in management, but I am not an expert in negotiation, union contracts, or collective bargaining. Therefore, I will decline to comment on the specifics of what should be a collective bargaining process.

However, I do not think that this is the level of detail we should be getting into in the House at all, going back and forth by either side. We should be empowering both parties to go back to the table and do that collective bargaining. Let the workers go back to work. Let the mail be delivered. Let us empower and encourage them to solve the situation themselves.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Madam Speaker, the government, during the course of the debate, has accused the New Democratic Party of filibustering this particular debate. However, I would like to point out that the closure motion, which was tabled by the government, has interesting implications.

The government did not set any limit whatsoever on the time allocation of each stage of the bill. It used standing orders to set times for each individual speech by each individual member, but each stage of the bill was left without any special consideration. This is not how the government treated the HST bill in the previous Parliament, or the Budget Implementation Act in this Parliament.

In the previous parliaments and in this Parliament, the government had set, through government business specifically under Motion No. 3, a specific limitation on the time allocation for each individual stage of the bill. Actually, in the HST debate, the entire debate lasted six hours according to the government's own motion of closure.

If the government is so incensed about filibustering, why did it invite the New Democratic Party to do so and enable it by establishing rules for a filibuster?

[Bruce Hyer, NDP, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte for his incisive question. I have wondered this myself.

A cynic might say that this is a wonderful opportunity to hold the Canadian public, postal workers, the system and House process itself hostage, if you will. It is to give only the appearance of caring about the delivery of service from the postal department to Canadians.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise and speak in the debate on Bill C-6. We are now in almost the 39th hour of debate on the bill. There are about 46 hours left before mail service could resume on Monday morning. The government does not have to pass this bill to have that service resume. In fact, Canada Post workers have volunteered to go back today. They could go back within the hour if Canada Post, with the support of the government, would take the locks off postal stations and post offices around the country. We could have our mail resumed and postal workers could go back to work if the locks were taken off. We still have lots of time to encourage the government and Canada Post to do what is right and resume our postal service.

I represent the urban riding of Parkdale—High Park. It is a riding with a lot of small businesses and a lot of seniors. Our community cares a great deal about our postal service. It supports it and understands the importance of it.

There is a postal substation in my riding on Keele Street near where I live. I make a practice of going in there periodically and thanking the people who sort our mail and the people who deliver our mail. I know I speak for our community when I say we appreciate their hard work and their efficient service. We get our mail on time every working day, and they do an excellent job.

We have had some demands in our community. There was the threatened loss of a postal outlet in the junction in my riding. After huge community opposition to the closure of that postal outlet, we were successful in keeping it.

There are some new condo developments in my community. The placement of post boxes seems to be lagging behind the condo development, so people in the condo have to organize and push to get a post box.

People support their postal service. They care about it and they are concerned about it.

Our postal service is a success story. Our postal service has pumped profits and taxes into government coffers for more than 15 years. We have one of the best postal systems in the world. It is good value for money. We pay 59¢ for a letter, which is among the best prices in the industrialized world. Our postal service is fast and efficient.

Canada Post does have a top heavy management structure with 20 VPs, as my colleague from Vancouver has pointed out, who I am sure are generously paid. It also has the best paid CEO among any Canadian crown corporations, who receives huge bonuses.

The Canadian Union of Postal Workers, which represents the people who work at Canada Post, has managed to negotiate, through very hard work, a decent wage for the people who work there. It is not exorbitant. It is in fact the average industrial wage for difficult work. Letter carriers are out in all seasons. We get a taste of that during elections when we go door to door, when we run up and down stairs and are out in all kinds of weather. We get a little taste of what letter carriers face day in and day out every day of the year. They do an excellent job. They make an average wage and they get benefits and pensions.

I have been contacted by many members of my community who expressed concern because Canada Post has locked out its employees and not allowed them to deliver the mail. I have also received a lot of support for the work that their elected representatives across the country are doing to try to pressure Canada Post and the government to resume the postal service.

I want to just read one letter from a constituent. She says:

I am writing to you today with a story about my family.

My aunt Diane works at the post office on Eastern Avenue in Toronto. She's locked out and on the picket line in her pink baseball cap. I called her last week and she explained to me what was happening.

“This isn't for me,” she said. “Myself, I'm looking forward to retirement, but we're sticking up for the future”. She explained the big issues in negotiations that concern her. The top three are an attack on pensions, two-tier wages,

which means lower wages for new hires

and outsourcing sick time.

I should just insert here that in fact because letter carriers are out delivering mail in all kinds of weather, their injury rate is actually quite high. It has one of the higher rates of injury in workplaces in Canada.

Canada Post wants to move from a stable deferred compensation of defined-benefit pension, to the crapshoot of defined-contribution pensions. This puts old people at the mercy of the stock market.

We have seen how reliable that has been for people.

My aunt is also out because of the corporation's efforts to create two-tier wages, with new hires making much less than their co-workers. These are co-workers doing the same jobs, on the same equipment. Says my aunt—“Young people today don't deserve good jobs? Says who? I know how hard it is for you guys to find good full-time work with benefits, and that just isn't right”.

Finally, workers at Canada Post don't want their sick time controlled by an outside insurance company.

I'm proud of my aunt. She sorted social assistance and pension cheques as a volunteer. I'm also very proud of her for sticking up for good jobs for young people. I know she doesn't want to be out on the line in the heat and the rain, but I'm behind her all the way.

So—I know the [Prime Minister's] conservative government talks about family a lot. And what do families do? We look after our elders. We look after our kids. We take care of each other when we're sick. These sound a lot like the issues postal workers are concerned with, like pensions for old people, good jobs for young people, and provisions for sick people to stay home and get better. Frankly..., going after my aunt doesn't seem very family-friendly of our government. Could you please talk to them about that?

Yours...Jody Smith.

I want to thank Ms. Smith for her excellent letter. I am so pleased and proud that she, as a constituent of mine, took the time to write.

I have to ask myself, and it is a question really to the hon. members opposite on the government side: Why would they go after hard-working Canadians like Jody's aunt Diane? Why would they go after hard-working Canadians? What is behind this? Why are they attacking the hard-working Canadians who have built Canada Post to provide such a fine service for our country? Is it because they want to privatize Canada Post? We know in other countries, for example, where the postal service has been privatized it is a very different situation. The mail is much less reliable, but also the jobs are very different. These are not the kinds of jobs I described earlier where people have an average income with benefits. They are usually part-time, independent contractors, which is kind of a way for an employer not to be responsible for any benefits or any injuries if someone gets injured or ill.

I wonder why they would want to undermine the success story that is Canada Post, because they are certainly undermining it by poisoning the labour relations climate. I appeal to the members opposite. Let us work together. We are here. We have all been sent here by our constituents. Let us work together. Let us take the locks off the doors at Canada Post. We have 46 hours that remain before Monday morning. My constituents in Parkdale--High Park, and I believe all Canadians, want to get this great mail service at Canada Post moving again. Let us work together and get it done.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice]

Madam Speaker, the member opposite and the member of the NDP who spoke before her asked several questions in their speeches, but they also have engaged in irresponsible and unfounded speculation.

We have been asked what kind of government we are. We are a government that believes in effective leadership. We believe in informed decisions. We believe in leadership and taking action, particularly when we are dealing with a fragile economic recovery that is threatened by a work stoppage for a crown corporation that provides, as we all seem to agree, an essential service and contributes $6.6 billion to the GDP.

The members opposite like to use the language of compassion, but they seem to have no problem denying mail delivery to those most in need of that compassion. Will the member opposite urge her opposition colleagues to walk the talk and let the mail through?

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Absolutely. We will completely work with the members in this House to encourage Canada Post to remove the locks from the doors. Canada Post workers have said that they will come back to work with the same terms and conditions they have had. They are saying they will come back with the conditions they went out under. We are absolutely prepared to do that.

When we have a crown corporation like Canada Post that has had profits of $1.7 billion over the last 15 years, $281 million last year alone, and has pumped another $1.2 billion into the federal coffers in dividends and income tax, I fail to understand why the current government wants to tamper with that success. We have a winner here. We have something that is the envy of other countries. Why is the government undermining it?

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Madam Speaker, the government members have been citing the need for expediency, referencing the essential nature of the service. They are saying this needs to be passed. The New Democratic Party is obviously taking up the challenge of the filibuster, but again I will go back to how the filibuster may have been arranged to begin with.

For those who may be tweeting this, on Thursday, December 3, 2009, pursuant to Standing Order 57, the government issued a motion regarding the implementation of the HST bill. The government prescribed very specific terms and conditions as to how that debate would be allowed to proceed should the motion be adopted by the House. The motion was indeed adopted by the House.

The motion indicated specifically:

not more than one sitting day shall be allotted to the second reading stage of the bill and, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the day of the consideration of the said stage of the said bill...[be granted].

And then it said:

not more than four hours following the adoption of the second reading motion, any proceedings before the Committee to which the bill stands referred shall be interrupted, if required...and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the committee stage of the bill shall be put....

While the government professes to be angry about the NDP's filibuster, and the NDP is angry that the government is not responding to their requests, the reality here is that a trap was set and a trap was taken. That is what has happened here with this filibuster--

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

I interrupt the hon. member to give the member for Parkdale—High Park an opportunity to respond.

There is one minute left.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member has pointed out something very interesting, which is that the government, if it was so concerned about the timeliness of this debate, because it sets its own rules here in this motion, could have set a time limit on the debate.

I disagree with the member's implication that defending hard-working Canadians is somehow something not worth standing on. On this side of the House, and in this party, we support decent jobs, decent wages, and the hard work that Canadians do. We are proud to stand for that principle today and any day in this House.

[Jonathan Tremblay, NDP, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague just spoke. I just received messages on my BlackBerry because I told my constituents that I would take the floor at 10:45 a.m. They said they would wait until I rose to speak. There are currently people watching CPAC to find out what is going on. They are gaining an understanding of what the Conservatives are trying to sneak through.

Earlier, I heard the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons speak, and I thought I detected some openness there. He said that Canadians want to receive their mail. We just have to remove the locks from the doors for people to get their mail. Before the lockout, people were receiving their mail.

When will the government realize that the NDP is not preventing postal employees from working, the Conservative Party is? The Conservatives are the ones who conspired to impose the lockout. When will the government realize that it has the power to allow the postal employees to work? With the consensus in the House, we could immediately decide to let them work.

When will the government realize that it has the power to unlock the lockout? If we had a consensus, we could put an end to the lockout right now. The NDP supports reopening post offices and getting postal workers back to work. Furthermore, when will the government realize that it has the power to unlock the lockout with a simple phone call? When will the government realize that we could require the employees to go back to work by ending the lockout, while we continue to consider the rest of the special legislation before us?

When will the government realize that small businesses could receive their mail as well as send and receive packages, that seniors could receive and send letters, cheques and gifts, that both workers and the unemployed could receive their cheques, and that all Canadians could once again have access to postal service, as soon as the government agrees that it is essential to immediately end the lockout, well before voting on this bill?

When will the government realize that ending the lockout is the only way to remove the threat to the economy, a threat it created, economic losses it created? When will the government realize that preserving a healthy employer-employee relationship is the only way to ensure a company's future prosperity?

When will the government realize that creating an unhealthy climate and adding to people's workload, which already is not obvious, will hurt the economy? Has it assessed how costly an increase in the number of workplace injuries will be to our society?

When will the government realize that it is flouting the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and disregarding rights that were recognized and confirmed by the Supreme Court in 2007? When will the government realize that Canada Post is a profitable and efficient crown corporation?

Is the government's objective to increase the profits of its friends at the expense of workers? Is its objective to destabilize postal services in order to privatize this sector? When will the government realize that disregarding the rights of workers will do nothing to improve their physical and moral well-being, or the economic health of the country?

When will the government realize that in order to stand up for democracy in the world, it must also safeguard democracy here at home?

Since being elected to power, this government has thumbed its nose at democratic rights in Canada. I am talking about the rights of trade unions, the right to associate and everything connected with union rights, party financing, voting methods, the use of the media and public funds, to give you just a few examples.

When will the government realize that members have a duty to represent all citizens? They have a duty to work for all citizens. When will the government realize that the public will not put up with this kind of behaviour for very long?The official opposition is prepared to work with the government, but the government does not appear to be listening to us. The message goes in one ear and out the other.

We have a duty to represent all citizens and to do everything in our power to preserve our vested rights. Our duty is to defend our democracy and our democratic processes, along with our young people, their future and their rights. We must work together, not merely defend the interests of a select few.

Why is the government not worried about public opinion? Just like some government members, I, too, I have been flooded with words of encouragement to continue our opposition to this bill.

But what is the cost of the Conservatives' interventionist policy? The workers are paying the price by being oppressed. Negotiations require a consensus of both parties, we recognize that. The Canadian Union of Postal Workers knows that; the law recognizes it; and the people, whether they belong to a union or not, also know it; but not Canada Post and the Conservative Party.

Finally, with regard to a brief debate that took place earlier, I, too, would like to know why the minister misled the government by proposing this bill to deal with a strike. As everyone knows today, we are not dealing with a strike, but with a lockout. In fact, I would like her to take the time to explain this to us. Perhaps it was only the result of some confusion and not a premeditated act. She will now have the opportunity to clear this up or simply to explain things to us. But if the government was truly misled, this means it has introduced a bill for which there are no valid grounds. I simply want to ask the minister to take the time to reply, because we are debating this bill which may well have a questionable rationale.

[Alice Wong, Conservative, Minister of State (Seniors)]

Madam Speaker, I would like to comment on the presentation by the hon. member.

I have already heard from a lot of seniors in my riding who are feeling really depressed because we have not solved this and because we are still talking and talking and talking, without taking any real action, because the opposition is stalling everything.

We all understand that this work stoppage of Canada Post is already directly affecting the lives of many people, including seniors in my riding. Young people are waiting to get their student visas extended, and a lot of low-income seniors and other residents need their cheques, as well as all the other convenience of the mail.

Why is the member opposite not cooperating with the government to pass this important legislation? We need to make sure that both sides get back to the table so that the workers can resume their duties in service of the general public.

This is the time when they really should get back to work, instead of politicking.

[Jonathan Tremblay, NDP, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Madam Speaker, let us end this lockout. Let them continue to negotiate. No one will be treated with contempt, and everyone will receive their mail.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is curious that it is Thursday in the House, but of course it is really Saturday, and it gets more bizarre after that.

It is entirely correct that the government itself set the stage in the terms of the motion we are debating today, so it's all nonsense about when will we stop. The Conservatives themselves decided not to put in any time limits.

To add insult to injury, I would point out that a lot of the questions that have been asked we cannot ask directly of government members because they are not participating in the debate. They are asking a few questions and making comments, but they are not taking any turns whatsoever to be part of the debate. So all of these questions that we have had directly from all of the members we cannot ask directly.

The parliamentary secretary earlier said that they are doing this, apparently, in the public interest. I would like to ask the member, what is the public interest here? Is the public interest forcing workers back to work, or is the public interest actually upholding collective bargaining in this country and allowing the parties to do the job that they need to do and to find their own solution?

[Jonathan Tremblay, NDP, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the answer is simple. The public interest means respecting the rights of everyone in the country. In that way, we will be respecting the economy and the health of our businesses.

I note that the member said this is still Thursday, June 23, 2011. We also see that on the other side they keep repeating the same things. It would indeed be desirable for us to co-operate in the public interest. We are already proposing solutions. We are simply waiting for some phone calls to be able to put an end to this lockout.