Bill C-58

An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code and the Canada Industrial Relations Board Regulations, 2012

Sponsor

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is, or will soon become, law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.

This enactment amends the Canada Labour Code to, among other things,
(a) amend the scope of the prohibition relating to replacement workers by removing the requirement of demonstrating a purpose of undermining a trade union’s representational capacity, by adding persons whose services must not be used during legal strikes and lockouts and by providing certain exceptions;
(b) prohibit employers from using, during a legal strike or lockout intended to involve the cessation of work by all employees in a bargaining unit, the services of an employee in that unit, subject to certain exceptions;
(c) make the contravention by employers of either of those prohibitions an offence punishable by a fine of up to $100,000 per day;
(d) authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations establishing an administrative monetary penalties scheme for the purpose of promoting compliance with those prohibitions; and
(e) amend the maintenance of activities process in order to, among other things, encourage employers and trade unions to reach an earlier agreement respecting activities to be maintained in the event of a legal strike or lockout, encourage faster decision making by the Canada Industrial Relations Board when parties are unable to agree and reduce the need for the Minister of Labour to make referrals to the Board.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-58s:

C-58 (2017) Law An Act to amend the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts

C-58 (2015) Support for Veterans and Their Families Act

C-58 (2013) Law Appropriation Act No. 5, 2012-13

C-58 (2010) Law Appropriation Act No. 4, 2010-11

Votes

May 27, 2024 Passed 3rd reading and adoption of Bill C-58, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code and the Canada Industrial Relations Board Regulations, 2012

Feb. 27, 2024 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-58, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code and the Canada Industrial Relations Board Regulations, 2012

Debate Summary

This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Bill C-58 aims to amend the Canada Labour Code and related regulations. The key provisions of the bill include prohibiting the use of replacement workers during strikes or lockouts in federally regulated workplaces, with certain exceptions for health and safety, and establishing a process for maintaining essential services during labour disputes. The bill also sets timelines for reaching agreements on maintained activities and allows the Canada Industrial Relations Board to intervene if agreements cannot be reached.

Liberal

Banning replacement workers: Bill C-58 will prohibit the use of replacement workers in federally regulated workplaces, with violators facing a fine of $100,000 per day. The Liberal Party argues that replacement workers undermine the collective bargaining process and prolong disputes.
Tripartite collaboration: The legislation is the result of employers, workers, and the government working together to address issues in Canadian labor relations. Consultations, though tense, allowed parties to reach agreements and improve the maintenance of activities process.
Maintenance of activities: The bill sets clear timelines for employers and unions to determine what work needs to continue during a strike or lockout, ensuring the health and safety of Canadians and preventing damage to property and the environment. If an agreement cannot be reached, the Canada Industrial Relations Board will make a determination within 90 days.
Supports collective bargaining: The Liberal speakers argued that by banning replacement workers, Bill C-58 will strengthen collective bargaining. They asserted that it will level the playing field between workers and employers, and lead to more stability and certainty for businesses, unions, and the public.

Conservative

Hypocrisy on replacement workers: Conservatives argue the bill is hypocritical because it does not apply to the federal public service and because the government is subsidizing foreign replacement workers at projects like the Stellantis battery plant while simultaneously restricting their use in federally regulated private sector industries.
Balance needed: Conservatives emphasize the need to balance workers' rights with a healthy business environment. They feel the Liberal government's policies have led to increased labor unrest and an unaffordable cost of living for workers.
Transparency concerns: Conservatives are demanding transparency regarding contracts for projects like the Stellantis and Northvolt plants, particularly concerning the use of foreign replacement workers and guarantees for Canadian jobs. They want to ensure Canadian tax dollars benefit Canadian workers.
Impact on the economy: Conservatives fear that the legislation could drive business investment away from Canada, potentially leading to fewer jobs. They also raise concerns about the potential for disruptions to critical supply chains and the overall Canadian economy.

NDP

Strong support for Bill C-58: The NDP strongly supports Bill C-58, anti-scab legislation for all workers governed by the Canada Labour Code. The party views this bill as a historic step towards upholding workers' fundamental right to strike and ensuring a fair balance of power during labor disputes.
NDP's long-time advocacy: The NDP has consistently championed anti-scab legislation, introducing multiple bills over the years, and views the current bill as a result of their efforts. They emphasize that this legislation is essential for protecting workers from exploitation and ensuring fair negotiations with employers.
Addresses power imbalance: The NDP argues that anti-scab legislation is necessary to address the power imbalance between employers and workers during labor disputes. They believe that allowing employers to hire replacement workers undermines the right to strike and prolongs disputes, leading to tension and potential violence.
Implementation timeframe concerns: While supportive of the bill, the NDP expresses concern over the proposed 18-month implementation timeframe, deeming it unnecessarily long. They plan to push for a shorter implementation period in committee to ensure the legislation's benefits are realized sooner for workers across the country.

Bloc

Strong support for bill: The Bloc Québécois strongly supports Bill C-58, an anti-scab bill. Members have been requesting this bill for a long time and want it passed quickly to restore balance in labour disputes.
Correct flaws in bill: The Bloc will vote for the bill, but it has flaws that need to be corrected in committee. Concerns include loopholes allowing employers to hire replacement workers before a strike notice, the bill not being retroactive, employers transferring workers to other sites, and the 18-month delay for implementation.
Eliminate implementation delay: The Bloc Québécois finds the 18-month delay before the bill comes into force unacceptable. They will push to shorten this timeframe so the bill can be implemented sooner and provide immediate dignity to striking workers.
Address Quebec's leadership: Quebec has had anti-scab legislation since 1977, and this bill aims to address the power imbalance in employer-union relationships and align federal regulations with Quebec's progressive stance. The Bloc has introduced numerous bills over the years to achieve this goal.

Green

Supports bill C-58: The Green Party supports Bill C-58, which bans the use of replacement workers during strikes and lockouts. They advocate for amendments to remove loopholes and exemptions that undermine the bill's purpose.
Strengthen the bill: The Green Party is calling for amendments to remove the 18-month delay before the bill comes into force and to eliminate loopholes that allow the use of replacement workers. They believe that a stable system of collective bargaining is essential for economic security.
Correcting Conservative misinformation: The Green Party clarified that workers from South Korea at the Stellantis battery plant, brought in under trade agreements, are not replacement workers and are unrelated to Bill C-58. They emphasized the importance of accurately understanding the legislation's focus on protecting the rights of unionized workers during legal strikes or lockouts.

Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:20 p.m.

Milton Ontario

Liberal

Adam van Koeverden LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on a $66.7-million funding agreement that our government made with the City of Edmonton earlier this year to guarantee over 2,000 new and refurbished affordable housing units. That could not have been possible without the fantastic leadership of their amazing mayor, Amarjeet Sohi. Despite the fact that I have never heard the member stand up to talk about the importance of affordable, public housing in the House, we are moving forward with funding for the great City of Edmonton with their awesome mayor.

For the fifth or sixth time today, we have not heard whether or not the Conservatives are actually in favour of banning replacement workers, also known as “scab workers”. This legislation would advance labour rights and workers' rights to make sure that the best negotiations, which always happen at the table, can operate in a fair, open and transparent manner. Cut and dry, does the member agree that we should ban replacement workers in Canada?

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:25 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

Madam Speaker, if that useless parliamentary secretary bothered to listen to my speech—

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:25 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

Order. I want to remind the hon. member that this is exactly the issue we are having with keeping the House running smoothly. When parliamentarians use adjectives that are not proper to use when describing individuals, it creates havoc in the House.

I would remind members to please be respectful in the House when they are speaking of other parliamentarians.

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:25 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

Madam Speaker, I will at least acknowledge that the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of the Environment had at least some integrity when he stood up in the House and acknowledged that his government had betrayed Ukrainian farmers.

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:25 p.m.

NDP

Lisa Marie Barron NDP Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Madam Speaker, I am not hearing the answer I was hoping I would hear in the member's response to my colleague's question. Is the member saying that he feels that replacement workers are a benefit to workers?

I am not understanding what his stance is, exactly, on this bill, or if he and his Conservative colleagues will be voting in favour of this bill to ensure that protections are in place to support workers, have fair working conditions and have a fair wage.

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:25 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

Mr. Speaker, I have concerns about this bill, particularly from the standpoint that it would prolong and increase the number of strikes. Very rarely are there winners when there are extended strikes. Workers lose out on paycheques. There is lost productivity. There is disruption to supply chains, and there is a loss of profit for employers, which often negatively impacts workers' wages.

There are problems, potentially, with this bill. We want a bill that gets it right for employers and businesses and strikes the appropriate balance. I am not sure this legislation does that.

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:25 p.m.

Conservative

Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the speech my colleague from Alberta gave. I would ask him to reflect on how it seems like the NDP has highlighted a number of challenges it sees with this bill, although it plans to support it. We recently saw media reports that, if the Liberals do not get pharmacare done this year, it is willing to amend their confidence and supply coalition agreement.

I wonder if my colleague from St. Albert—Edmonton would have any reflections on whether the NDP has any integrity left in standing up for the principles that it supposedly ran on in the last election. It certainly seems to me as though NDP members are nothing more than sellouts.

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:25 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

Madam Speaker, I would concur with the conclusion drawn by my colleague from Battle River—Crowfoot.

We have this costly coalition, which is making life less affordable for everyday Canadians, including Canadian workers. We have an NDP that has voted against the interests of everyday Canadians multiple times when it supported the Liberals' carbon tax increases. The NDP continues to prop up this costly government.

The NDP will have to answer at the next election for why it is that it has sold out and propped up this corrupt Prime Minister.

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:25 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

Again, I want to remind the member to be very careful with the words he uses to describe members in the House. It does not do well for the debates we are trying to have in the House of Commons.

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:30 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, the ruling that came from the Chair was very clear on the language that can be used and should not be used in the House.

For any member to use the term “corrupt Prime Minister”, or “corrupt” in reference to anybody in here, violates the rules the Chair has put forward in the House. I would suggest that the member needs to either retract the comment or be properly censured until he does.

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:30 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

I have members who seem to be weighing in before I even recognize them.

The hon. member for London—Fanshawe is rising on the same point of order.

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:30 p.m.

NDP

Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON

Madam Speaker, I would also advocate that, concerning the language used by parliamentarians in the House, hon. members need to remember the ruling that came forward from the Chair earlier.

I know that I myself have a lot of adjectives in my head that I would like to use to describe some of the folks here, but I do not use them. I am very specific about it. I try to maintain decorum, and I would hope that they would do the same.

Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders

November 27th, 2023 / 6:30 p.m.

Conservative

Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB

Madam Speaker, on the same point of order, I know one of the issues for some of my colleagues on this, and in light of the discussion that was had after question period today, is that, when it comes to the conduct and speech of members, there needs to be an equal application of the rules across party lines.

The accusations the government House leader made during question period certainly call into question whether or not those rules are being fairly applied. Therefore, when it comes to decorum in the House, it is absolutely incumbent upon all members. Certainly for my part, I will always be happy to defend the things I say and endeavour to speak the truth.