Bill C-7 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Public Service Labour Relations Act, the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board Act and other Acts and to provide for certain other measures

This enactment amends the Public Service Labour Relations Act to provide for a labour relations regime for members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and reservists. It provides a process for an employee organization to acquire collective bargaining rights for members and reservists and includes provisions that regulate collective bargaining, arbitration, unfair labour practices and grievances. It also amends the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act to bar grievances related to the interpretation and application of a collective agreement or arbitral award, which are to be filed in accordance with the Public Service Labour Relations Act.
It changes the title of the Public Service Labour Relations Act and the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board Act and the name of the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board. It also amends that latter Act to increase the maximum number of full-time members of the Board and to require the Chairperson, when making recommendations for appointment, to take into account the need for two members with knowledge of police organizations.

Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act

[Scott Brison, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board]

moved that Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Public Service Labour Relations Act, the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board Act and other Acts and to provide for certain other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member of Parliament for Montarville.

I rise to speak to Bill C-7. The bill would uphold the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of RCMP members and reservists to engage in meaningful collective bargaining.

A meaningful process of collective bargaining must provide employees with enough choice and freedom to allow them to pursue their collective interests. Bill C-7 does just that. It would provide RCMP members and reservists with the freedom to choose whether they wish to be represented by a bargaining agent. It would also provide them with the ability to choose which employee organization would represent them, as well as the workplace objectives they would pursue. It would also ensure that they could make those choices independent of management.

Allow me to take a moment to explain the context in which the bill was developed. Currently RCMP members are not permitted to bargain collectively and have no recourse to arbitration or strike action. In 2006, the Mounted Police Association of Ontario and the B.C. Mounted Police Professional Association, on behalf of all members of the RCMP, challenged this restriction in the courts. Ultimately the matter was brought to the Supreme Court of Canada, and on January 16 of last year, the Supreme Court rendered its decision. The court struck down the exclusion of RCMP members from the definition of employee in the Public Service Labour Relations Act as being unconstitutional. In addition, the court held that sections of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police regulations infringed on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The current process fails to achieve the balance between employees and employers that is essential to meaningful collective bargaining. Accordingly, the court held that this violated the charter right to freedom of association. The court suspended its judgment for one year to give the Government of Canada time to consider its options. The government sought an extension and was given an additional four months to introduce legislation in the House of Commons that would provide a new labour framework for RCMP members and reservists.

The Supreme Court of Canada's decision has a significant impact on the way that RCMP labour relations are managed. A new labour relations regime for RCMP members would need to provide them with an effective collective bargaining regime, and in a manner that respects the unique role of the RCMP as Canada's national police force. The Supreme Court decision therefore required careful consideration of next steps. This included broad consultation with regular members of the RCMP, and the provinces and territories that have police service agreements with the RCMP.

The Government of Canada takes our responsibility to protect the safety and security of Canadians extremely seriously. We are committed to supporting the dedicated women and men of Canada's national police service who protect Canadians on so many fronts. They combat organized crime and defend our country against terrorists. They guard us from those who deal in illicit drugs and those who commit economic crimes. They protect us from offences that threaten the integrity of Canada's national borders. They provide contract policing services in eight provinces and three territories. Through its national police services, the RCMP offers resources to other Canadian law enforcement agencies. This is by no means an exhaustive list of what these committed individuals do to protect Canadians and to deserve our respect.

Respect is a key operating principle of our government. One of the top priorities of our government is establishing a culture of respect for and within the federal public service. That is why when it comes to respectful treatment of RCMP members and reservists, we thank the Supreme Court for its ruling. It has afforded us with this historic opportunity to enshrine the constitutional freedom of RCMP members and reservists to engage in meaningful collective bargaining.

It is important to note that the negotiation of collective agreements is a right that has been enjoyed by other police officers in Canada for a very long time. In fact, the first police union in Canada was in Saint John, New Brunswick in 1919. The Ontario Provincial Police Association, representing civilian and non-commissioned uniform members of the OPP, came into existence in 1954.

Today, the bill before us would provide RCMP members and reservists with their independence and freedom of choice in labour relations matters while recognizing the unique operational reality of policing.

Independence and freedom of choice were two key elements of the Supreme Court's decision.

I would like to take a moment to talk about the consultations that were crucial to the development of the legislation before us today.

During the summer of 2015, an independent expert consulted RCMP regular members on potential elements of a new labour relations regime. The consultation consisted of a survey and town hall sessions and reached out to all 17,000 active members, as well as more than 1,000 members on leave. More than 9,000 members completed the survey. As well, more than 650 people participated in 13 town hall sessions held right across the country.

The legislation before us, therefore, respects regular members' preferences in determining a new labour relations regime for the RCMP. It also takes into account the concerns and interests of those jurisdictions that contract RCMP services, including most of the provinces and territories as well as many municipalities across Canada.

Most regular members who participated in the online consultation said they support the idea of a unionized RCMP. Recognizing the particular operational reality of the RCMP, members showed a strong preference for a labour relations regime that would use binding arbitration without the right to strike as the mechanism for resolving bargaining impasses. This approach is consistent with other police forces across the country.

Members also showed clear support for the option of representation by a single national employee organization whose primary mandate would be the representation of RCMP members. Such an organization and the use of binding arbitration are two key features of the proposed legislation.

Consistent with existing provisions in the Public Service Labour Relations Act that exclude public service executives in managerial or confidential positions from representation, all RCMP officers appointed to the ranks of inspector and above would be excluded from collective bargaining.

Under this bill, the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board would be the administrative tribunal for matters related to the RCMP bargaining unit, as well as grievances related to a collective agreement. This would include grievances on terms and conditions of employment of a collective agreement, such as hours of work, overtime, and leave provisions.

The proposed legislation would preserve the commissioner's authority under the RCMP Act to manage police operations in an effective manner that is accountable to Canadians. Therefore, RCMP conduct matters would remain outside the jurisdiction of the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board and instead would continue to be managed through processes established under the RCMP Act.

The bill before us today offers RCMP members and reservists the respect they are due. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees that everyone be entitled to freedom of association. The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that this charter freedom protects the right to bargain collectively.

I am honoured to rise in support of this legislation, which would permit RCMP members and reservists to exercise their freedom of association by engaging in a process of meaningful collective bargaining. I encourage all members to show their respect for the women and men of the RCMP and to vote in support of this bill.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, there are a number of exclusions from collective bargaining within this bill. I was wondering if the parliamentary secretary could shed some light on what exactly is excluded from bargaining under this bill and what the reasons are for excluding them.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for the question and for his deep interest in this new phase of freedom of choice for collective bargaining for the RCMP.

What the bill includes is those matters that are subject to collective bargaining. The operational realities of the RCMP mean that some of the working conditions are actually part of the commissioner's responsibility to manage, and those will not be included in this bill. Therefore, what is included is consistent with what will be on the bargaining table between the RCMP members and reservists and the employee representatives who are representing them.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Madam Speaker, we appreciate most of Bill C-7, and certainly we want to support our RCMP members and all the work they do, but I find it interesting that the bill does not include the opportunity for RCMP members to have a secret ballot when they wish to unionize. I would like to ask why.

It seems again that, when we are talking about bills on unions and democracy, secret ballots are something the government does not seem to support. I would like to ask why the opportunity for a secret ballot is not included in this legislation.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Madam Speaker, as the member may know, there is other legislation before the House that impacts the actual mechanisms of certification.

The bill reflects the wishes and the direction that the consultations with 17,000 regular members of the RCMP showed was their priority, so they will have the opportunity to have representation. Should they choose it, they will have an opportunity to have their representative bargain on their behalf.

The bill really shows respect for RCMP members, who will have the opportunities that most other police across the country already have.

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister (Intergovernmental Affairs)]

Madam Speaker, one issue that reoccurs in this House around labour negotiations and proposed changes to the framework in which collective bargaining agreements are reached is this notion of a secret ballot.

If the RCMP members or if the union they choose to represent them decide on a secret ballot mechanism for any vote within the collective agreement process, they are free to choose a secret ballot if they want. We do not have to mandate that. That is something that the union can choose to do, if it chooses to proceed in that specific direction.

We are not reaching into the union and mandating a secret ballot. The union has an option as an organization to operate and conduct its votes as it chooses. Is that not true?

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Madam Speaker, the principle of the bill is empowering RCMP members to have the same rights and freedoms as other police forces across the country and the right to collective bargaining.

At this time, details around the manner of certification are being debated in the House on another bill, so the exact mechanisms that move forward with Bill C-7 would depend on the outcome of that bill.

However, I can assure the member that this is about freedom and opportunities and equality for RCMP members and reservists.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in this place to speak to the second reading of Bill C-7, an act to amend the Public Service Labour Relations Act, the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board Act, and other acts, and to provide for certain other measures affecting the Royal Canadian Mounted Police labour relations regime and its operation, tabled by the hon. President of the Treasury Board.

On January 16, 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled, in the case of the Mounted Police Association of Ontario v. Canada (Attorney General), that section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees freedom of association and protects a meaningful process of collective bargaining. Such a process must provide the employees with both choice and independence sufficient to enable them to determine and advance their collective interests.

Because the current labour relations regime does not meet this requirement, the court found it to be unconstitutional. The court gave the federal government 12 months to comply with this ruling. Due to the federal elections in the intervening period, a four-month extension was granted for the government to table legislation. Indeed, this is a technical bill to comply with the government's legal obligations. It does not claim to offer additional remedies to some of the challenges confronting the RCMP as an organization, such as operational stress injuries or harassment.

Our government is committed to ensuring that we provide adequate support to members of the RCMP and other first responders affected by operational stress injuries, as well as the eradication of any and all forms of harassment within this important and iconic institution for our country.

This bill was drafted following extensive consultations with regular members of the RCMP and jurisdictions with RCMP police service agreements. Jurisdictions with RCMP police service agreements were consulted, they and provided input about their concerns in the development of a new RCMP labour relations regime. As this regime is being implemented, we will continue to keep our contracting parties informed.

In addition, in the summer of 2015, RCMP regular members were surveyed and a series of town hall meetings was carried out across the country to develop a solid understanding of their preferences. Results indicated that a strong majority of RCMP regular members supported the idea of a unionized RCMP. In addition, as I noted earlier, there was strong support for binding arbitration, with no right to strike, to resolve bargaining impasses. Finally, there was also support for a single national bargaining unit comprising RCMP members and reservists only. The proposed legislation was shaped by these consultations. Our government is grateful for all the feedback that was received.

Furthermore, we intend to work with all parliamentarians in an open and engaging manner throughout the legislative process, in order to achieve the desired objective in the very limited allotted time in which we have to comply with the Supreme Court decision.

I will take a few minutes to clarify some important parts of the bill.

First, the bill would allow for the creation of a single national employee association representing all RCMP members and reservists excluding those at the inspector rank or higher. To clarify, the RCMP has a pool of reservists who are qualified police officers able to provide short-term services when the need arises.

Second, the bill stipulates that the bargaining agent must exist to serve the police. The Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board could certify only a union whose primary mandate is the representation of RCMP members. In other words, the union could not represent other police officers, other police forces, or groups of employees who are not members of the RCMP.

Third, the bill excludes officers at the inspector rank and above from the collective bargaining process, just as public service managers are excluded from representation.

Fourth, even though RCMP members and reservists will not have the right to strike, the bill establishes a binding arbitration process for conflict resolution.

Binding arbitration will give members and reservists an effective way to advance their interests in the workplace. It is worth noting that RCMP members have already indicated their support for binding arbitration.

Lastly, the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board will serve as an administrative tribunal for all matters related to the collective bargaining process for RCMP members and reservists.

It is also important to note that any disciplinary action that currently falls under the authority of the commissioner of the RCMP pursuant to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act will continue to be managed through the existing process.

I would like to conclude my speech by emphasizing the government's commitment to support the proud and dedicated men and women of the RCMP. If this legislation goes through, RCMP members and reservists will have the right to make choices regarding who represents them when it comes to labour relations. This will be done in a way that reflects the working environment that is unique to law enforcement.

Our government takes its responsibility to protect Canadians' security very seriously. The RCMP plays a key role in ensuring that we can fulfill this mission. Accordingly, our efforts will always focus on doing what is in the best interests of this vital Canadian institution.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, I heard the hon. parliamentary secretary say that part of what this bill is meant to do is address, in a minimal way, what the Supreme Court has asked be done with regard to the right of RCMP officers to bargain collectively. It does not pretend to do much else about a lot of other outstanding issues with the RCMP.

That is fair enough as far as it goes, but what I would like to draw the member's attention to and hear him comment on is that collective bargaining is one possible way to deal with some of the chronic problems and issues that we have heard about in the RCMP, such as harassment, and the bill is not neutral with respect to that position. It prejudges the question as to whether collective bargaining is an appropriate way to deal with those issues.

The bill does shut the door on that, and I think it is incumbent upon the government to provide better reasons for why it is not considering collective bargaining as a way to deal with some of those outstanding issues. I am hoping we can hear one of those arguments now.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question and the important point he raised.

Indeed, it is important to point out that the purpose of this exercise is to respond exclusively to the Supreme Court's request. There was a constitutional shortcoming in the past, and we are now obliged to meet that need and resolve this very specific problem.

It is important to understand that this problem could have been resolved before the election. That was not done. We are now obliged to fix it. We were, however, given the privilege of having a four-month extension. Nonetheless, the deadline is tight. Time is limited and it is important to take that limitation into account in our debate, as we must respond to this specific problem of giving the RCMP the right to be represented.

The other issues, such as harassment and other behavioural issues, are already being examined. We have already asked the RCMP and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner for reports and investigations.

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Madam Speaker, I know that the government is moving forward because of the Supreme Court ruling and what needs to happen with respect to the subject matter, but I will ask the question yet again with respect to secret ballot voting and the opportunity for allowing democratic action to take place within the RCMP.

I recognize that the member will probably get up and say that there is other legislation in the House. The RCMP is an entity that I think we all have a huge amount of respect for. We all respect these individuals because they put themselves in harm's way every day in the line of duty. Why are we not addressing this issue directly now, making sure that these individuals are allowed to have a secret ballot vote?

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question.

I understand why she is proud of the RCMP. I was a civilian member of the RCMP for a few years, and I am proud of the time I spent there. I will always be proud to have been part of that organization. We owe them our respect, and we must give them the means to choose how they will be represented, within the rules. The purpose of today's exercise is to respond to the Supreme Court's findings.

My colleague is right. She even answered my question because there is a process under way. We are doing this within the legislative measures in place. If there is a change, we will adapt to the new reality. For now we are addressing the Supreme Court ruling only.

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister (Intergovernmental Affairs)]

Madam Speaker, again, if the membership of the RCMP choose to have a secret ballot, there is nothing that restricts them from doing so. If they choose to have an open ballot, there is nothing that forces them to have an open ballot beyond this legislation, but if they choose to have a secret ballot as part of their ratification process, they are entitled to make that choice.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question and point of clarification.

I believe that his point is correct. We will address the issue of this vote in due course. I would like to reiterate my personal concern with respect to our duty to address the issue of the right to representation, in response to the Supreme Court ruling.