Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to the members of the committee for the opportunity to appear before you.
My name is David Chartrand. I serve as the general vice-president for Canada for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. We represent thousands of workers in federally regulated industries, particularly air transportation and airports. Approximately 16,000 federally regulated workers work within Canada's airports.
I'd like to begin with why the right to strike matters. The federal government itself has acknowledged that approximately 95% of collective agreements are reached without a work stoppage. Strikes are rare because both sides know there are dire consequences if they cannot agree. That is what brings employers to the table and keeps them there. The Supreme Court of Canada recognized in 2015 that this right is protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Bill C-39 goes too far. Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code was written as a general power to promote industrial peace. It says nothing about ending strikes. However, in 2024 and 2025, the federal government used it to order an end to strikes and lockouts at CN and CPKC, at ports in British Columbia and Quebec, at Canada Post and at Air Canada without a single vote in Parliament.
Rather than repealing this power, as the IAM and other labour movements have called for, this bill writes it into the code. Once a strike or lockout begins, one minister could direct the Canada Industrial Relations Board to order a return to work, extend the existing collective agreement or impose binding arbitration. The federal government calls the new conditions guardrails, but the deciding test is whether the Minister of Labour forms the opinion that a stoppage would have a significant adverse national impact. The minister must consider a special mediator's report, but is not bound by it. Economic harm is one of the factors to be weighed, even though economic pressure is the very purpose of a strike. That is far too much power to place in the hands of one individual.
Mr. Chair, this is not only a question of principle, because it changes behaviour at the bargaining table. If an employer knows that a minister can end a strike and send the dispute to binding arbitration, it has far less reason to negotiate in good faith and every reason to wait for the federal government to step in. In August 2024, CN and CPKC locked out their employees. The dispute was referred to the CIRB that same day. When intervention becomes the expected outcome, the workers who keep our airports, railways and ports running are left with the weakest voice at the table, precisely because their work matters so much.
I want to be clear that there is a good deal in this bill that the IAM does welcome. Successor rights for airport and air transportation contract workers will help prevent contract flipping from erasing their collective agreements. First-contract arbitration will help newly organized workers whose employers try to drag out negotiations. Stronger enforcement against bad-faith bargaining, wage theft and misclassification is long overdue, and we want to see these measures passed. However, none of these improvements require weakening the right to strike. Our members are not prepared to give up that right in exchange for them. Good measures should stand on their own merits and not be used to carry provisions that take away the most important tool workers have.
We therefore ask the committee to amend Bill C-39 in four ways.
First, amend section 107 so that it cannot be used to end a legal strike or lockout. If a strike ever creates a national emergency causing serious, irreparable harm to the economy, an independent expert body should assess it first. Only Parliament should decide whether to end it through legislation, and this should be debated and voted on in the open.
Second, make the special mediator independent and expert so that it helps the party settle rather than serving as a step towards intervention.
Third, keep the right to apply for geographic certification with unions rather than allowing employers, the minister or the CIRB to start that process.
Fourth, keep the measures that help workers: successor rights for airport and air transportation contract workers, first-contract arbitration and stronger enforcement against bad-faith bargaining, wage theft and misclassification.
Mr. Chair, building Canada strong must also mean strong collective agreements and strong protections for the people who do the work. A stronger and more independent Canada has to be built with workers, not at the expense of rights that generations of Canadians fought to establish.
Thank you for your time. I look forward to your questions.