Bill C-89 (Historical)

Postal Services Resumption and Continuation 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 mediation process to resolve matters remaining in dispute between the parties. It also empowers the mediator-arbitrator to impose an arbitration process to resolve matters that cannot be resolved through mediation.

Postal Services Resumption and Continuation Act

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, it is not the arbitrator's place to design the corporate model or the services the corporation will deliver. It is the arbitrator's place, though, to consider the financial sustainability of the employer. The corporation really is the appropriate place to have those conversations. From my perspective, the corporation has to be financially prudent. It has a large operation, and it has financial constraints.

Having said that, we also know that they have to take very seriously the other principles we have laid out for the arbitrator, including things like the health and safety of workers and the fair treatment of temporary and part-time employees. It is really the corporation's responsibility to chart its path in terms of the suite of services it offers and how it offers those services to Canadians.

[Erin Weir, Independent, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Chair, something the government promised during the past election campaign was to restore door-to-door mail delivery. Of course, keeping that promise would make a huge, positive difference for Canada Post and its employees. I would like to give the minister a chance to inform the House when the government is going to restore door-to-door mail delivery.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, our government committed to placing a moratorium on ending door-to-door delivery, and that is, in fact, what we did. Having said that, we are here to discuss the back-to-work legislation, the action we are taking to restore postal service to Canadians during this very difficult time.

From my perspective, it was referenced in my previous answer. It is at the discretion of the corporation at this point how it delivers its services and what its particular model of service is. Of course, we have given guidelines. The member knows that we have done a lot to actually transform Canada Post. We have given it quite a bit of latitude. Having said that, we believe that these principles are very balanced. We know that the arbitrator will use these principles and consider them carefully to make sure that we get to an agreement, should that be necessary should the parties not be able to come to that agreement on their own, in a balanced, fair way that considers the concerns of the union but also the constraints of the corporation.

[Erin Weir, Independent, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Chair, so far in this portion of the committee of the whole, I have asked the minister whether, in viewing back-to-work legislation as a last resort, she made an effort to negotiate an essential service protocol with the employees of Canada Post to ensure the delivery of cheques and other services that she does not want to see disrupted. We really have not heard a clear answer to that question, and I think we need one to be able to evaluate whether this actually is the last resort.

I also asked the minister, in terms of financial sustainability, how the Canada Post pension plan is going to be evaluated. That is a critically important question in terms of whether we believe management's storyline that there is a crisis and a need for concessions or whether we recognize that if Canada Post employees were treated the same as other federal public servants, there really would not be such a problem, and we could negotiate with them on a much more positive basis.

I asked the minister whether there would be consideration of postal banking as a way of improving the financial sustainability of Canada Post and of providing a needed service to Canadian communities, some of the same communities the government has tried to invoke in justifying this legislation. All we have really heard is that the arbitrator cannot determine Canada Post's corporate model. Fair enough, but surely the government can, and it would be nice to have an answer to that question as well.

Finally, the last thing I asked was when the government would keep its promise to restore door-to-door mail delivery. The minister mentioned the fact that the government has put a moratorium on the further removal of door-to-door mail delivery, which is a welcome development. However, it is not enough, and it is certainly not what was talked about during the election campaign.

It seems to me that a number of questions have come before the House this evening, and we have not really received complete answers to them. I think that really underscores why we should be having a great deal more time to debate and have deliberations on this type of legislation. The government has certainly made the case that its back-to-work legislation will not violate constitutional rights to free association and collective bargaining. However, one of the best ways to make sure that the legislation complies with the Constitution and other requirements is to actually have a full, proper amount of debate in this House.

I really appreciate the opportunity to participate in such a significant way in the committee of the whole, and I am glad we are having this deliberation. However, I feel that the deliberation we have had so far has really only underscored and exposed the need for a much more fulsome debate on this proposed legislation before we have to have a vote at third reading.

I appeal to other members of this House to reconsider the rushed timeline that has been adopted and to consider the possibility of having a few days, at least, of debate on something that might impinge on the fundamental workplace rights of tens of thousands of Canadians and that might do serious damage to a movement that is so important to the development of the middle class and those working hard to join it.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a few remarks, and then I have some questions for the minister.

There have been many references to 2011, when the Conservatives ended rotating CUPW strikes. However, this Liberal motion and the legislation that follows it, believe it or not, is even more restrictive than Stephen Harper's was, because the motion that preceded this bill limits debate to the shortest possible timeframe. We are expected to wrap up this farce before the end of this sitting day tonight. It is an outright affront to democracy, and the Prime Minister and his caucus do not even have the decency to be ashamed.

It is just another broken promise thrown on a heap of abandoned election promises from 2015. We heard about electoral reform, treating veterans and their families with dignity and fairness, promises to never take veterans back to court, balanced budgets and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and effectively addressing climate change—

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order. I realize that committee of the whole is a less formal proceeding. However, there is a little too much chaos in the chamber, with people standing and having side conversations. I would ask hon. members to keep conversations at a low level. We know it works not too badly to a point. If you really want to engage in that kind of conversation, perhaps do it in your respective lobbies.

We will go back to the hon. member for London—Fanshawe.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, there have been all kinds of promises to effectively address climate change, but sadly, the fact is that our greenhouse gas emissions increased significantly in 2015. Let us not forget the promise to restore home mail delivery. All this brings us back to Canada Post and its refusal to bargain a fair and equitable collective agreement with its CUPW members.

Let us examine the facts. There are many facts to look at in this conflict. Workplace injuries at Canada Post have increased by 43% over the last two years, largely as a result of Canada Post's transformation, which requires workers to walk longer routes carrying heavier loads. It is not just letters. It is letters and parcels. Some parcels can be quite large and quite heavy.

Today the disabling injury rate for a letter carrier is five times the rate of the rest of the federal public sector. Just imagine if our workplace were such that it jeopardized our physical and emotional well-being. When CUPW president Mike Palecek asked his members about injuries, in a couple of hours he received more than 450 responses. The stories are quite heartbreaking. I would like to give members a sense of the kinds of things CUPW members are facing.

One young woman writes that she tripped and fell on an icy sidewalk. She was seriously injured, and it took several months for her to get back to work after having received physiotherapy. When she went back, she was supposed to be on light duty. Despite that, she was harassed by her manager to do more and more heavier work. As a result, she was re-injured, and she has not been able to get back to work. She has small children who are depending on her ability to earn a living.

Another individual reported that he fell and landed on his right knee. He twisted his left knee in the process, and now he has severe arthritis in both. He was accommodated at the plant, but that accommodation has not worked out, and as a result, he cannot work. He cannot work the way he had intended, and he has many years ahead of him in terms of his working life.

This means that not only are these people injured but they cannot provide for their families in the way they had expected, and quite simply, families are suffering. I cannot begin to explain how important it is for the government to understand that this strike is about not just money but about the well-being of families and CUPW members. It is about their health and safety, and that should matter.

We hear other stories about workers being sent out on nights, not unlike tonight, to wear headlamps to find their way over dark, slippery snowbanks and snow covered sidewalks. If a worker cannot finish a route in eight hours, that worker is sent back out to finish delivering the mail. The fact is that people cannot work 10, 12 or 14 hours a day, as we heard from people in the gallery.

The government has chosen to come to the aid of Canada Post instead of the aid of CUPW workers. Before I ask my questions, I would like to quote once against from Dru Oja Jay and his observations about this strike. He said, “Every successful strike has to pass through a storm of negative media coverage and worse. It's no different for Canada Post employees. They're striking for their own health and safety. They're endlessly overworked, and they're frequently injured. They have a plan for transforming Canada Post into an engine for economic and environmental transition. They're also bargaining for equal pay for rural mail carriers, who are not paid the same rate as their urban counterparts.”

In some cases, they receive no money at all for work done, simply because it does not fit into the four or six hours that Canada Post has determined for a mail route.

I do indeed have some questions for the minister. I would like to know if the minister is aware that the injury rate for postal workers is more than five times that of other federal workers. Does the minister condone the perpetuation of this unsafe reality in the workplace at Canada Post?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, I thank the member for her obvious compassion for the workers of Canada Post. We share that compassion.

I share a profound conviction that people should be safe at work. As Minister of Labour, one of the most devastating parts of my job is that I receive notices, from across the country in federally regulated workplaces, of significant injury and death that occur in workplaces. It is a profoundly sobering part of my job to see how many injuries and deaths arise in federally regulated workplaces to this day, most of which, if not all, are preventable.

I stand with the member opposite to say that we all deserve to come home safe and sound at the end of a day. It is my commitment as the Minister of Labour to continue to work on making sure that workplaces are safe and healthy.

That is why the first guiding principle in the legislation is to ensure that the health and safety of employees are protected. We have heard from union members about their concerns regarding their health and safety in the workplace, and that is why that principle is incorporated into the principles that the arbitrator must consider when making decisions, if the parties cannot make those decisions on their own.

I will also say—

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order. We will go back to the hon. member for London—Fanshawe. Normally, in this format the length of the response is as close as possible to the time that was taken to pose the question.

The hon. member for London—Fanshawe.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, I appreciate your clarifying that for the minister.

The minister has talked a great deal about the cost of the rotating strikes to the economy. Is she aware that one of the key issues of this strike is indeed the injuries suffered by CUPW workers? Given that injuries cost the economy in Canada about $26 billion a year, is the minister at all concerned about the cost to the economy of this reality of injury at Canada Post?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, I will complete my response to the member about the very compelling story she told about a particular worker who had been injured, had returned to work and who felt harassed to do more than her return-to-work plan indicated she was capable of doing.

I will point out that Bill C-65 was passed thanks to all, very supportive, members of the House, who agreed that workplaces should be free of harassment and violence. All workers will now be protected by the new legislation this government has introduced. In fact, now when people are harassed, regardless of the workplace in which they find themselves, if they are in a federally regulated workplace, they will have measures to protect them and support them as they move through processes for which they may not have had support previously.

In terms of the—

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order.

The hon. member for London—Fanshawe.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, Canada Post was, in fact, a federally regulated workplace before this legislation, and those issues were never addressed and the harassment continues.

I would like to now ask the minister if she supports management's directive, which we have heard something about, that Canada Post CUPW workers withheld government cheques that included child tax benefits and social assistance cheques. Was she aware of it and does she condone it?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, in fact Canada Post and the union agreed prior to the strike that they would continue to deliver government cheques to Canadians. What we know is that some of those cheques may have arrived slightly late as a result of the rotating strikes, and that has created hardship.

What is even more difficult for Canadians who rely on government cheques, and in fact all kinds of cheques, is the uncertainty. I repeat that I have heard from members of my own community that even the uncertainty of not knowing if a cheque will arrive in time to pay rent can be extremely difficulty for people who are often in the most vulnerable situations.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, I thank the minister for that answer, but unfortunately it does not bear out in terms of the truth of the matter. Cheques were delivered to Canada Post outlets and there was a message that they were not to be delivered until after November 22. That came from management. That seems to me to be at the crux of it, the manipulation by Canada Post, and the minister does not seem to be able to understand it or control it.

I wonder if the minister believes that it is okay that for the past 10 years the CUPW workers' pay has remained below inflation.