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.

Canada Labour Code

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am talking about Bill C-58, but in talking about that bill, we need to put it in a historical context of why the Conservatives have been so anti-worker and so anti-union and have been repeatedly unafraid to use a legislative sledgehammer against workers and their unions in federally regulated sectors. That is what Bill C-58 is designed to protect, and Canadians need to understand they have a long history of being anti-worker and anti-union. This is a chance for them to try to redeem themselves from that shameful history.

Before the Liberals think they are going to get off the hook in my speech, let us turn to the Liberals and back-to-work legislation because both of these parties are equally guilty when it comes to that.

In 2018, the Liberals brought in Bill C-89, which ended the postal strikes and forced the Canadian Union of Postal Workers back to work.

In 2021, there was Bill C-29, which ended the strike of CUPE local 375 and its fight against the Port of Montreal.

Before my Conservative colleagues get a little too high on their horse, I would like to point out for both of those bills the Conservatives supported the Liberals, showing that when it comes to controlling workers and fighting against their interests, these parties more often than not have been voting in lockstep.

This is important, because if we look at the different lines of work that are covered by the Canada Labour Code we are talking about federally regulated workers in air transportation, banks, grain elevators, feed and seed mills, most federal Crown corporations, ports, marine shipping and ferries, canals, bridges and pipelines, postal and courier service, radio and television broadcasting, railways and many more. This legislation would impact thousands of workers, and it is important we show a united front and demonstrate that as members of Parliament we have their backs and are putting in legislative safeguards.

The history of Canada is one of labour fighting for its rights against corporations. There has been too much corporate deference over the last number of decades, and I am proud to see how that pendulum is starting to swing back into workers' favour these days. They are becoming more militant, more assured of their rights and more ready to use their collective bargaining to achieve those more powerful working conditions and better paycheques for themselves. I am proud to be able to stand in this place and offer them support.

Seeing as I am in the closing minute of my speech, I want to take this final opportunity I have in the House to wish all of my colleagues from all political parties a very merry Christmas and a very happy new year. We have had strong and principled debates and arguments in this place, but I hope everyone in this place has the opportunity over Christmas to spend some much needed time with their families and their friends and to reconnect with their constituents. I look forward to seeing everyone back here in 2024 as we continue the hard work of governing this country.

Port of Montreal Operations Act, 2021

[Scott Duvall, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Madam Speaker, as I listen to this debate, I continue to become more upset. Not only is the government stripping these workers of their charter right to strike, it issued notice of its intent, through this expedited legislation, to force workers at the Port of Montreal back to their jobs before they even began their strike. What is worse is that the government continues to fearmonger about COVID-19-related supplies with claims that continue to go unsubstantiated. I would like to address this with a quote from an article by FreightWaves published on August 20, 2020. It states:

The union representing longshore workers at the Port of Montreal agreed on Thursday to move some containers holding goods needed in the fight against COVID-19.

“The Maritime Employers Association and the longshoremen’s union have agreed to move containers that contain controlled substances and COVID-19-related merchandise and to unload a ship containing sugar,” the MEA announced early Thursday afternoon.

I hope this puts an end to the reprehensible nonsense. If there is any issue with important pandemic-related supplies not getting to where they need to go, that is certainly not on the union or the workers. Look to the government or the Canada Industrial Relations Board.

The legislation itself would do the following. It would force the employer and the union to extend their expired collective agreement, prevent the employer from locking out workers and prevent the union from striking.

I would like to provide some context to this bill before I give further remarks. In 2019-20, the Canada Industrial Relations Board heard the employer's application for a determination on essential services. The employer's counsel used every trick in the book to stall things at the CIRB, including a motion for the board chair to recuse herself, and forwarded judicial review applications. After the decision was issued, CUPE Local 375 went on strike for 12 days in August 2020. Workers went back to work after a truce agreement was signed, giving the parties seven months to conclude a deal. The union worked with the federal mediation service all this time. On April 16, the union reviewed its strike mandate with a 99.3% vote.

The union finally offered to end the overtime and weekend strike if the employees reverted to the working conditions applicable before April 9. On April 23, members of the union declared their mandate of an unlimited general strike as the employer did not show it wanted to negotiate in good faith. As we know, the minister then signalled before the general strike started that the government would be tabling legislation to force workers back to work, despite their charter right.

The minister should know, if she is speaking to both sides, that this strike can quickly come to an end without the need for legislation. The union has made it very clear that it would cease all forms of work disruption with one fair request to the employer to stop the pressure tactics and collective agreement violations.

I will read what a CUPE spokesperson had to say:

If the Maritime Employers Association (MEA) doesn’t want a strike, all it has to do is let up on its pressure tactics and the union will do likewise. No overtime strike. No weekend strike. It’s straightforward. We want to return to the bargaining table.... We don’t want to hurt the Montreal economy. However, we do want to exercise our fundamental right to bargain collectively.

The minister, in her speech on Government Business Motion No. 5, said the following:

Our government firmly believes that the best deals are reached at the bargaining table. However, intervention is sometimes necessary when the parties are at a significant and long-standing impasse, particularly when a work stoppage is causing significant harm to Canadians. We cannot allow the situation we saw in August 2020 to repeat itself, particularly in the midst of this pandemic. If the current stoppage continues, serious accumulated and negative impacts will continue to be felt all over Canada.

Again, the minister has not provided any concrete examples or data of the direct, significant benefit to Canadians. She continues to fearmonger without concrete facts. Instead of facts and data, all I am hearing is a bunch of quotes from lobbyists about what they speculate may happen. The only relevant fact that I have heard from the government about the actual effect of the work interruption was related to the August 2020 strike. This is relevant. What happened to those ships and the supplies they were carrying? They simply got diverted to other ports.

I have no doubt, and acknowledge, that this has made for significant changes and complications to supply chains and land transportation of goods, but this is part of what happens in a strike. Given the fact that she is the labour minister, I would expect the minister to be aware of this and instead monitor the situation. Her job is not to say that the sky is going to fall and then give notice that she will revoke the charter rights of workers to strike before their strike even begins.

Back-to-work legislation is known to have lasting, negative effects. When we take away the charter rights of hundreds of people by an act of Parliament and force them back to work like this, it really affects the morale of workers. I know. I have seen it. What it also tends to do is sour the relationship between the employer and the employees.

By way of example, let us look at the track record of back-to-work legislation and providing a swift resolution to drawn-out collective agreement talks. Bill C-89, an act to provide the resumption and continuation of postal services, was passed by this same Liberal government in the House of Commons on November 24, 2018. It received royal assent two days later and came into force at noon on the following day. Here is what representatives of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers had to say about being forced back to work to help resolve the situation a whole year after being back.

Though the legislators who passed the bill may have thought it would resolve the situation, nothing is fixed, no contract is in place, and we’re still working without a new collective agreement, without the right to strike, under the dangerous and unfair conditions that we were trying to deal with in negotiations.

They go on to speak very directly about the overarching problems being suffered due to the nature of back-to-work legislation.

Workers pay the price for back-to-work legislation. CUPW members worked two and a half years without new contracts, with the same old problems we were trying to solve through bargaining back in 2018.

After finally getting a contract, though imposed by an arbitrator some 400 days after the back-to-work legislation, significant issues are still not satisfactory. I suspect these will be part of the next round of bargaining next year. This type of legislation is a way of kicking the can down the road via a still drawn-out process all while taking away the employees' right to collective bargaining.

I think it is important for Canadians listening to know that it is not just Liberal governments that impose the harmful and unfair labour practice of back-to-work legislation. In fact, one could say that the Liberal government learned this tactic from the Harper Conservatives and is carrying on the torch of stripping workers of their charter right to strike. Let us have a look at back-to-work legislation by the Conservatives.

The Conservatives legislated the following groups back to work: the Air Canada Pilots Association and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, the Teamsters Canada Rail Conference, the Canadian Union of Postal Workers and the United Transportation Union.

Before I end, I do want to raise that the government has still not addressed my concern about a recent development. It is my understanding that there was a proposal put forward last evening to avoid the need for Bill C-29. While I am not privy to all the details of this proposal, I do know the employer, the union and the government were all made aware of the said proposal. This proposal would have involved a return to work, as well as the resumption of the flow of goods.

I am being told it was only the employer that objected to this proposal as a way forward. I think it would be a further injustice and shameful for the government to continue its pursuit of this motion and legislation, given the employer's unwillingness to play ball.

I call on the government to allow the workers to pursue their right to strike.

Canada Post

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Rural Economic Development]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Elmwood—Transcona for bringing up this important issue.

I am happy to rise today to speak about our government's introduction of back-to-work legislation to ensure the resumption and continuation of services at Canada Post.

Our government has always recognized that unions play an important role in protecting workers' rights and in growing the middle class.

I would remind the House that under the previous government, many of the fundamental labour rights that unions fought to secure were rolled back. It was more difficult for workers to organize freely, bargain collectively in good faith and work in a safe environment.

When we came to power, we restored fair and balanced labour laws that recognize the important role that unions play in Canada. We abolished Bill C-377 and Bill C-525, which weakened Canada's union movement.

We recognize that unions are important in helping the middle class grow and prosper. We also believe in a fair and balanced approach to labour relations.

This is why the government did everything it could to support Canada Post and the Canadian Union of Postal Workers and encourage them to sign new collective agreements.

However, despite our efforts, the parties were unable to reach an agreement. We brought in back-to-work legislation, Bill C-89-, on November 22. The rotating strikes ended and postal services resumed.

On December 10, the Minister of Labour appointed Elizabeth MacPherson, a former chair of the Canada Industrial Relations Board, to help the parties reach new collective agreements.

The most recent collective agreements have been extended until new agreements can be reached. The work stoppage at Canada Post has had significant negative impacts on Canadians, charities, businesses of all sizes, international commerce and Canada Post, its workers and their families.

Canadians and businesses rely on Canada Post and its workers, especially during the busy retail season. We had to take action. Let me be clear that back-to-work legislation was a last resort, but a necessary one after having exhausted all other options. It was necessary to avoid future harm to the economy.

We took these steps, and we continue to ensure that there are fair negotiations between Canada Post and its union to reach a negotiated settlement.

Canada Post Corporation

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague and I can certainly agree on the fact that in the best-case scenario both sides are able to sit down at the bargaining table and come out with an agreement that is of benefit to all. Unfortunately, there are instances that arise where such is not the case and an agreement is elusive. That is when governments have to take action.

As we have previously said, back-to-work legislation is a last resort solution. It is something that this government certainly did not take lightly. We did everything we could to support and encourage Canada Post and the Canadian Union of Postal Workers to reach that negotiated collective agreement. Throughout the process, which was going on for well over a year, the parties were assisted by federal conciliation officers, mediators and a special mediator. Alas, despite these efforts, the parties were unable to reach a new agreement.

As a last resort, the government tabled Bill C-89 in November 22 of last year. This set out the process by which the parties were required to work with an independent mediator-arbitrator and the employees would return to work. On November 26, Bill C-89 received royal assent, the rotating strikes ended and all postal services resumed on November 27.

Since Canada Post and CUPW were unable to agree on a mediator-arbitrator as per the process outlined in the legislation, our government appointed a former chairperson of the Canadian Industrial Relations Board to serve as the mediator-arbitrator to assist the parties in reaching a new collective agreement.

It seems to me that it is worth noting that the member across has conveniently forgotten about the many changes our government has brought forward for workers because this is about workers. We have passed legislation to modernize federal labour standards in this country, which have not been updated since the 1960s. These changes stem from extensive consultations with stakeholders who have told us the same thing, time and time again: The way Canadians work has changed, but federal labour standards have not.

The modern set of labour standards we have introduced will better protect Canadian workers, especially those who are most vulnerable, such as workers who are in part-time, temporary or low-wage jobs and it will help set the stage for good-quality jobs. This modern set of standards will also help ensure employees in precarious work are paid, treated fairly and have access to labour standards by introducing equal treatment protections.

These are just some of the measures that we have taken to show respect in our approach to labour as a government and in developing the labour laws that are needed for today's workforce, but also respecting collective bargaining, making sure that Canadian workers are shown respect and that the Government of Canada is there not to put its thumb on the scale.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement and Accessibility]

Madam Speaker, during the last election campaign, there was a lot of talk about Canada Post and its future. We promised to destroy Mr. Harper's plan and adopt a new plan. We consulted at length with people across the country, including postal workers. We concluded these consultations with a good plan, a plan for the future that respects Canada Post employees.

I would like to clarify some of the facts about the benefits employees are entitled to in the event of a strike. It is an unfortunate fact that during a strike, some of the benefits that Canada Post employees receive could be affected because the collective agreement has expired. However, this would not be true for all benefits. For example, during a strike, employees could continue to have prescription drugs covered.

Moreover, during the strike action that took place in November 2018, Canada Post put in place a mechanism to make it possible for employees to request an exemption from any denial of benefits on compassionate grounds. I would like to also add that employees continued to keep their EI benefits, such as maternity and parental benefits, during the strike.

Although the employees are now back to work, negotiations on a final agreement are under way. I believe that we will reach a good collective agreement.

Our government urged the two parties to continue with bargaining for more than a year. We believe that a respectful dialogue between the two parties is the best way forward and the best way to reach a fair agreement.

We reached a turning point last year, with the stalled negotiations and weeks of rotating strikes across the country. Jobs, the well-being of the most vulnerable Canadians and our economy were all in jeopardy.

It is our job to do what is right for Canadians. That is precisely what we did when we introduced and passed Bill C-89, which got Canada Post back to work on November 27, 2018, while setting out a process for continuing negotiations with an independent mediator-arbitrator.

I am confident that Canada Post values its relationship with the union. Certainly, that is something that we have encouraged the new management and new board to pursue. I am encouraged that they have been able to find common ground on many issues. Moreover, I know Canada Post values its relationship with Canadians, who more than ever depend on it to deliver.

Both sides of this dispute are working hard to resolve these issues. The arbitration process outlined under Bill C-89 officially began on January 16 of this year.

As the Minister of Labour said when tabling Bill C-89, this was a last resort, something that our government had done everything in its power to avoid. While we did not take the decision lightly, we acted as we always do, with the best interests of all Canadians in mind.

Canadians should expect nothing less from us as parliamentarians. Our objective has always been to restore necessary services to all Canadians in the immediate term and to encourage those involved to find common ground for the long term.

Canada Post

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

Mr. Speaker, today, the Prime Minister is attending an event on gender equality and women's economic participation, yet his unconstitutional Bill C-89 forced rural and suburban mail carriers back to work for less pay than their male counterparts, this despite an arbitrator's award for pay equity that continues to be ignored by Canada Post.

The Prime Minister talks a good game, but actions speak louder than words. Back-to-work legislation forced postal workers back into inequality. What is so feminist about that?

Canada Post Corporation

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, Canada Post Corporation and the Canadian Union of Postal Workers had been negotiating collective agreements for unionized urban and rural workers, but they were unable to reach an agreement. Our government has done everything it can to support and encourage Canada Post and CUPW to reach a new negotiated collective agreement.

Throughout the process, which had been going on for over a year, the parties were assisted by federal conciliation officers, mediators and a special mediator. Despite these efforts, the parties were unable to reach new agreements. On November 22, the Government of Canada tabled Bill C-89, which set out a process by which the parties were required to work with an independent mediator-arbitrator while the employees returned to work.

We legislated a fair and balanced process, not a deal, not a one-sided agreement. Our government took action because of the effects the rotating strikes were having on Canadians and small Canadian businesses.

Canada Post and CUPW were unable to agree on a mediator-arbitrator as per the process outlined in the legislation. On the advice of the chairperson of the Canada Industrial Relations Board, Elizabeth MacPherson, a former CIRB chair, has been appointed to serve as mediator-arbitrator to assist the parties in reaching a new collective agreement.

Canada Post and CUPW have seven days to come to an agreement. This period can be extended to 14 days if both parties consent. If agreements are not reached in this period, Ms. MacPherson will be required to arbitrate all outstanding issues based on a number of guiding principles that are fair and balanced to the interests of both parties.

These principles include the need: to ensure the health and safety of employees; to ensure employees receive equal pay for work of equal value; to ensure the fair treatment of temporary, part-time and other employees in non-standard employment as compared to full-time and permanent employees; to ensure the long-term financial sustainability of Canada Post; to create a culture of collaborative labour-management relations; and to have Canada Post provide high-quality service at a reasonable price to Canadians.

Make no mistake that Canadian workers will be heard through this process. The government remains hopeful that the two parties will be able to negotiate new agreements. We will continue to monitor the situation very closely.

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

Mr. Speaker, despite the Prime Minister's claims of being a friend of labour, he and his government have proven, once again, that there is no difference between Liberals and Tories.

It is postal workers who are suffering the tragic fallout of the same old story. Despite the fact that the Conservatives' back-to-work legislation forcing CUPW back to the Canada Post workplace in 2011 was deemed unconstitutional by the Ontario Superior Court, the government one-upped Stephen Harper.

It put profits ahead of people, and rammed Bill C-89 through in record time, using time allocation and procedural tricks to ensure less time for debate and consideration than Stephen Harper ever did.

The Prime Minister has managed to out-Tory the Tories, all the while claiming to be on the side of labour. What a joke. Bill C-89 forced postal workers to return to work on November 27 under their previous collective agreements, after five weeks of rotating strikes, which means that between then and this Christmas, at least 315 disabling injuries will happen to postal workers. Rural and suburban mail carriers will work roughly 250,000 hours without pay. Urban postal workers will work thousands of hours of forced overtime.

In 2011, the Conservative government imposed back-to-work legislation after Canada Post locked out CUPW members for two weeks. Ontario Superior Court Justice Stephen Firestone later determined that the legislation violated the rights to freedom of association and freedom of expression under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada declared the right to strike to be fundamental and protected by the Constitution.

CUPW was fighting for its members' lives and safety. The rate of workplace injuries has skyrocketed since postal transformation. Rural and suburban mail carriers continue to be paid less than urban workers, despite an arbitrator's decision that Canada Post should pay all workers equally. Forced overtime means workers are unable to spend time with their families and unable to see their children before bedtime. It means longer hours walking longer routes with heavier loads in dark and dangerous conditions.

All the while, Canada Post Corporation is profitable. If it were to consider any of the proposals in delivering community power offered by the union and its partners, its increased profitability and sustainability would be ensured for generations to come.

The government, in its arrogance, has ignored workers' charter rights to organize and to withdraw services when the employer refuses to bargain a collective agreement in good faith. Every person in this country who earns a living from employment should be aware of, and hopefully furious with, the government's abuse of their human and constitutional rights.

New Democrats stand with workers. New Democrats stand with CUPW. Make no mistake about it, CUPW is fighting for every worker in this country, for safe working conditions, for fair and equal treatment, and to be compensated fairly for ensuring profits for the corporation.

The Prime Minister's sunny words in support of labour have tarnished in the light of his actions. The joke is on Canadians, and it is a sadistic joke played on Canadians who thought they had gotten rid of Stephen Harper.

The anti-work agenda and the refusal to advocate for those who create the wealth and deliver the services is alive and thriving under the Liberal Prime Minister.

Bill C-86—Time Allocation Motion

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Madam Speaker, here we are again with an 800-plus page budget implementation act, and who is answering the questions? It is not the Minister of Finance. It is the Minister of Employment. Now she brags that there have been 15 hours of debate on a massive budget implementation bill, yet here is the Minister of Employment answering the questions. Perhaps it is because she is used to this undemocratic process. After all, this is the minister who forced Bill C-89 through the House with limited debate. In the other place, the unelected place, she allowed a massive study and allowed them to come in as witnesses. This is the same minister who took away the right to a secret ballot for unionization, yet here is the Minister of Employment answering questions, because the Minister of Finance will not.

Will she answer one simple question? When will the budget be balanced?

[The Speaker, Geoff Regan]

I have the honour to inform the House that a communication has been received as follows:

November 26, 2018

The Honourable

The Speaker of the House of Commons

Ottawa

Mr. Speaker,

I have the honour to inform you that Ms. Assunta Di Lorenzo, Secretary to the Governor General and Herald Chancellor, in her capacity as Deputy of the Governor General, signified royal assent by written declaration to the bills listed in the Schedule to this letter on the 26th day of November, 2018, at 8:33 p.m.

Yours sincerely,

Christine MacIntyre

Executive Director, Events, Household and Visitor Services

The bills assented to were Bill C-62, an act to amend the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act and other acts, and Bill C-89, an act to provide for the resumption and continuation of postal services.

Message from the Senate

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

Before we go to questions and comments, I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate, informing this House that the Senate has passed the following bill, Bill C-89, an act to provide for the resumption and continuation of postal services.

Canada Post

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

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-89 will force postal workers back into the toxic workplace they have been working to improve for over a year. Increased risks of workplace injury, forced overtime, stress and mental health issues, and pay inequity are the real crises people are facing that need to be addressed. Ignoring them comes at a human and financial cost to the workers.

Why are the Liberals so determined to force the workers back knowing that they will be injured on the job? How can they not be ashamed of this?

Resumption and Continuation of Postal Service Operations Legislation

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague seems pretty insistent that this is a violation of constitutional rights. Perhaps he can explain to me why this proposed legislation, Bill C-89, fails the minimal impairment test under Oakes.

Postal Services Resumption and Continuation Act

[Karine Trudel, NDP, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I must say that today is a sad day for me, and it is not an honour to take part in the debate on Motion No. 25 moved by the government.

It is also a sad day for postal workers, who are still delivering the mail, whether it be the cheques people rely on or parcels sent by businesses directly to homes in Canada and around the world.

Much like the workers' bargaining rights are being violated, we in the opposition are being muzzled by today's government motion, which will lead to a debate on Bill C-89 tomorrow evening. Here are a few excerpts from the motion to demonstrate what I mean. First of all, only two hours are being allotted for the consideration of the second reading stage following the adoption of the motion. I have seen many bills introduced in the House of Commons since I was first elected in 2015, but this is first time I have been in such a situation, where all our rights, the rules and our freedom of expression are being violated here in the House of Commons.

I was elected in 2015 to represent my constituents and debate bills. As MPs, we are the voice of our constituents, and that means we have to present opinions here in the House. Unfortunately, once again, the government is trampling on our freedom of expression and our democracy.

Part (e) of Motion No. 25 states that not more than one hour shall be allotted for the consideration of the committee of the whole stage. The motion goes on to say that not more than one half hour shall be allotted for the consideration of the third reading stage, provided that no member shall speak for more than ten minutes at a time during this stage. Worse yet, no period for questions and comments will be permitted following each member’s speech.

What is the point? We are here to debate important issues and represent our constituents. When this bill is debated tomorrow in the House of Commons, this motion will take away our right to speak, other than to ask the government questions at third reading. Is that because the government is afraid to answer our questions? This is unacceptable.

I want to say a few words about my own experience. I was a mail carrier in 2011. I delivered mail for 15 years, on foot, carrying a bag on my shoulders. For 15 wonderful years, I walked up and down the streets of Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. It was amazing, and I always loved my job. I was proud to wear the uniform. Every day, I would deliver mail and packages right to people's doors. I was proud to be a part of this organization.

However, I lived through the 2011 lockout. I lived through the imposed restrictions and negotiations. At the time, Canada Post shut down for two weeks, but this was not what the workers had wanted. We wanted to negotiate a collective agreement. The right to strike is a constitutional right. We wanted to continue to deliver the mail while we were negotiating and using pressure tactics that were, and still are, constitutional.

Even though our employer locked us out and shut down Canada Post offices, all the workers, including both mail carriers and inside workers, got together to deliver the old age pension cheques that had to go out that week in June 2011. I remember that they did this in good faith, in good spirit, and on their own time.

This shows how much postal workers care about their work. However, our rights had been violated, and we had to live with the consequences of special legislation being imposed on us by the former Conservative government in 2011.

I spoke about my personal experience as an employee who was locked out and about the fact that my bargaining rights were violated.

Now I want to come back to the work that Canada Post workers do every day and explain why the negotiations are still happening and why demands are still being made regarding workplace safety. These days, mail gets delivered in a number of ways. I know that some people here are less familiar with how the system works than I am.

The cancellation of home delivery means that in some municipalities, the mail carrier uses a truck to deliver the mail. Other mail carriers deliver the mail on foot, for example, those working in downtown Montreal.

There are also mail carriers who work in rural areas. Most of them are women, and they cover thousands of kilometres for their routes. When I was a mail carrier, one of my colleagues told me that she would start in Saguenay and cover four municipalities. Her route was so long that she would cover nearly 250 kilometres each day. These people use their own personal vehicles. There is a double standard because these workers do not have the same working conditions as urban mail carriers. The salaries are not the same either. The majority of rural mail carriers are women, and they sometimes work in small, isolated offices. They may work alone or with one other person because they live in remote areas. Their safety is important, but so are their working conditions. We need to restore fairness. The federal government introduced a farce of a pay equity bill, and these women have yet to derive any benefit from it. There is still a huge gap, and it is creating inequity. There is a reason why we are hearing comments about that.

Over the past few weeks, I have also received many messages from mail carriers across Canada, thanking me for being their voice and for being here. They said they felt supported. Fortunately, the NDP is there for them. They feel the government has abandoned them, in spite of its promises. We talk a lot about the middle class. These people are part of the middle class. They are all members of the middle class, and they feel completely forgotten, ignored and let down.

I want to go back to the issue of safety. When the workload is not properly assessed, some sectors may be assessed differently. I will come back to my female rural mail carriers, who deliver the mail in remote areas. That is what they experience. They often end up working for free. If their contract says they will be paid for three or four hours, but it takes them longer because of stormy, icy or windy conditions or because there is an abnormally high volume of mail, they will not be paid for the overtime they put in. They work for free every day.

Some might say that people choose to volunteer. That is true. People volunteer for many community organizations because they want to do so. When people have a job and have a mortgage and car payments to make, they expect to be paid for their service. That is why this is unfair. Those people are right to want to improve their workplace safety and to want fair treatment. I do not blame them. They have been asking for these terms to be reinstated for several years now. Just like in 2011, the government is introducing legislation that infringes on bargaining rights.

People at Canada Post are not dumb. We have been hearing on the Hill for two weeks now that special legislation would be imposed. Why would they negotiate? Yes, it is true that reappointing the mediator was the right thing for the minister to do. That is good. That is fine. Anyone would do the same thing if they were about to buy an expensive new car and they knew the dealer was willing to drop the price by $5,000. People are not dumb. Anyone would wait for that. They would not accept the offer after the third time. That is exactly what is happening in this case.

I also want to talk about the false crisis that Canada Post is creating. It did the same in 2011. I know, because I lived through it. I was right there, in the trenches.

From the beginning of the strike mandate, Canada Post chose to completely stop replacing employees who were absent or to extend hours for postal clerks processing mail and packages.

Having a surplus of mail in a given month is not unheard of. Everyone is talking about Black Friday this year, but there was an increase in mail last year and there will be one again next year. Even though there have been work stoppages during the rotating strike, I say again: there is no complete work stoppage. There is no need to panic, unlike in 2011, when Canada Post itself decided to lock out its employees.

Right now, rotating strikes are going on across Canada. They last for a day or two, but never more.

Canada Post voluntarily decided to stop processing the mail on time and suspend the rules for people on disability, parental and maternity leave, for example. Canada Post itself created this crisis. The government seems to be out of touch because it is not going out there to see what is happening on the ground.

eBay sent a lovely letter about how this is catastrophic, their mail will not be delivered on time, and mail carriers will not even check ID. That is outrageous, and that is why we now have to debate Motion No. 25 to force the workers to stop negotiating. Their rights will be infringed upon, and that is unacceptable.

The government is listening only to Canada Post. Of course business is important. Small businesses do a lot of business with Canada Post, and that is a great source of pride because it proves that our public service is viable and cost-effective even though the Conservatives would have us believe the opposite. That is what they said in 2011, and I remember them wanting to privatize Canada Post. That was on the table and we kept hearing about it more and more.

I am pleased to hear the Conservatives saying that businesses use Canada Post for their exports and deliveries and that Canada Post is helping them to grow. It is wonderful to hear that. What is even more wonderful is that Canada Post is delivering packages on time. I have pictures to prove it and I even experienced it myself when I had to order something that I could not find in Ottawa. Canada Post is delivering packages on time. I even have a photo of a mail carrier with a message that says that the package he is holding was mailed on November 20 and that he was in the process of delivering it on November 21. I do not see any delays there.

Pressure tactics are part of the constitutional right to strike. All workers are entitled to exercise that right. They know that Canadians are waiting for their packages, shipments, payments or money. That is why they have not stopped working completely. They never wanted to do that.

What I am hearing in the House is that this is a catastrophe, that mail is no longer being delivered and that the workers are asking for too much. Is Canada Post trying to have it both ways?

What we are hearing from the government is that it is introducing bills, that we debated pay equity, that the middle class is important, and that it is close to unions. We also heard a lot of that in 2011. The member for Cape Breton—Canso was here then and was later re-elected. In 2011, he criticized the special legislation introduced by the Conservative government and asked questions about it. He said, and I quote:

Does the minister see the folly in her ways in that she has absolutely kicked organized labour in the teeth? With her actions in the last week, she has sucker-punched organized labour in this country. Is that what we can expect to see over the course of the next four years?

I would like to quote another question which was asked by the member for Malpeque:

The best way to get a solution that is going to work in the future is to allow arbitration to work in a fair and equitable way. If that were in the bill and it was arbitration that was fair and equitable, it would be quite easy for us on this side of the House to support it.

I ask the minister, why is she taking the side of management in terms of this issue and why is the government not coming forward with arbitration that is fair and equitable to both sides and let them negotiate?

The Liberal government is proposing a motion, which we are debating today, that will result in legislation. Bill C-89, which will be debated tomorrow in the House of Commons, will infringe on the right to collective bargaining.

I mentioned earlier that the right to strike is a constitutional right. Collective bargaining is important. If the people at Canada Post know right off the bat that there will be a special act, how can they negotiate in good faith?

I gave several examples earlier, but that is the reality. The workers are there today to deliver the mail. They will be there tomorrow and until Christmas and even afterwards. They want a safe place, measures tailored to their circumstances when they are working after dark.

It is not normal to use a headlamp to find an address when it is -35°C out when we just want to stay warm. We get out of our cars or get off the bus and rush into a building to seek shelter and stay warm.

Sometimes postal workers spend eight to 12 hours outside. I know from experience what that is like. One December 24 evening, at 8 p.m., I was sitting on my snowbank. As people were starting to celebrate the holidays, I was still delivering mail. That is the reality of all letter carriers.

Some routes are indeed different and are evaluated differently. Across Canada there are currently some serious safety concerns. This special legislation infringes on the negotiations. We are infringing on the right to negotiate and improve postal workers' safety.

To make the debate on Bill C-89 a bit more democratic, I move, seconded by my hon. colleague from Vancouver East:

That the motion be amended:

(a) by deleting paragraphs (a), (d), (e), (i), (j), and (k);

(b) by replacing the words “two hours” in paragraph (b) with the following “five days”;

(c) by replacing the words “a Committee of the Whole” in paragraph (c) with the following “the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities”;

(d) by replacing all the words after the words “not more than” in paragraph (f) with the following “five days shall be allotted for the consideration at third reading stage of the said bill”; and

(e) by replacing the words “at the expiry of the times provided for in this Order, any proceedings before the House or the Committee of the Whole” in paragraph (g) with the following “15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the last day allotted to the consideration at second reading and on the last day allotted to the consideration at third reading, any proceedings before the House”

I hope these amendments to the motion will be supported.