Evidence of meeting #11 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was process.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
I think it is. You can rule on it, though. For the benefit of the committee, and to address the question posed by my colleague Mr. Adler, there is a very extensive and comprehensive report that was tabled by the Public Service Commission that underlines Ms. Benson's responses—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
No. As a very experienced parliamentarian who is celebrating his anniversary tomorrow, I think you know that's a point of information. Points of order deal with process matters. Thank you.
NDP
Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all of our witnesses. I'd like to ask the questions I'm going to raise to Mr. Yussuff of the Canadian Labour Congress, Ms. Benson, and Mr. Stroud. I'd invite each of you—I only have five minutes—to comment on a couple of things.
The first one is a comment made by Mr. Thomas of the Taxpayers Federation, who referenced an individual employee and referred to what he characterized as a “toxic environment” within the public service. My questions to the three of you, if you wish to reply, are: do you accept that characterization that the public service is a toxic environment, and will the changes to the PSLRA make a difference, positive or negative, in that regard?
Secretary-Treasurer, Canadian Labour Congress
I think on the point Mr. Thomas made, this is one example in a very large public sector. With all the employees, it begs the question as to why that would be the point made here.
Listen, we live in a society where none of us is perfect. The reality is there's a process within the government to deal with individuals who are not performing their responsibility. I think his exposé speaks to that reality. I don't think it's a toxic environment.
In regard to the changes, I think you have a fairly good, balanced system right now in terms of the public service staff relations legislation. The way the government has gone around altering and amending it will make it unbalanced and unequal for the parties to seek remedies and solutions to solve their problems. You need to get some confidence into the system to ensure that both sides can feel that the system is fair and balanced. I think this completely alters that relationship.
National President, Public Service Alliance of Canada
What I'd like to say is I think the President of the Treasury Board, quite frankly, enhances the toxic work environment. He is out in the press talking about his employees, my members, abusing sick leave, surfing the net. He has utter disregard for them, and I think, quite frankly, he is disrespectful.
I say that here in all honesty because I've said that to him. I've had a meeting with Mr. Clement and I asked him to cease and desist, because that makes your work environment that much worse. Do you want to go to work for an individual who is on CBC talking about how you're not doing your job, when in fact many of our members have unpaid overtime, and the list goes on?
What will happen with Bill C-4, because there has been no consultation—and I'm hoping you remove those two sections from the bill—is that once again it shows an utter disrespect for the membership. They know when we've had consultation. We actually go out and talk with our membership in terms of preparing our consultation and our briefs—for example, under the Public Service Modernization Act.
Quite frankly, our members are going to work to serve Canadians, and if there are issues within the workplace, it's because of comments made by the President of the Treasury Board.
President, Local 2182, Unifor
Yes. I would just like to reiterate what Ms. Benson said. It's not so much that it's a toxic environment, but right now it's one of those environments where a lot of our members are very unsure. They are unsure if they're even going to have a job by the end of 2015. You take a look at the last contracts we've had; the amount of money we got didn't even cover the inflation rate at the time.
To say that it's toxic, no. As Robyn said, it's hard when Tony Clement is on TV all the time, putting us down and making us all feel fat and lazy. Quite frankly, all we do is work our butts off for this government.
Thank you.
NDP
Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you.
I have one minute. You can see the dilemma I have in trying to review this legislation in one minute.
Mr. Steven Barrett, who is going to appear before us, I believe is counsel to the CLC, and is certainly one of Canada's most famous labour lawyers. In his presentation, in writing, he says this about essential services, and again I'd invite your comments:
Bill C-4 revises the treatment of “essential services”. Most importantly, it gives the Government the exclusive right to determine whether “any service, facility or activity of the Government of Canada is essential because it is or will be necessary for the safety or security of the public or a segment of the public”....
And he says that it eliminates “any recourse for unions to the PSLRB in the event of a dispute”.
NDP
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Okay, we're out of time, but maybe we can get a brief response.
National President, Public Service Alliance of Canada
In the past, the employer would say they want these individuals designated. We would say no, there would be a discussion, we would go, and the decision would be made. Now the government will have the unfettered right to determine who is deemed to be essential and who is not, with no recourse.
Conservative
November 26th, 2013 / 12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Dave Van Kesteren Conservative Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON
Thank you all for being here. It's a very interesting conversation. I think you've brought some very interesting points out, Ms. Benson.
The fact remains—and this is the thing that I struggle with—Mr. Thomas has given us some comparisons of the private and the public sector, and the gap is really widening. I come from private industry. I have a business where we pay professional people and we can't afford to pay them the public sector rate.
I'm reminded of the old song by Joni Mitchell: “Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone”. Mr. Stroud, when I look in the Chatham area and your union, which the CAW joined, I see we have a legacy of plants related to the auto industry that just packed up and left. That's what happens in private industry when you can't pay your employees what the demands are. I think of your legacy funds. I think of those areas that cause concerns and the demise of some of these auto industries.
At what point, Ms. Benson, do you talk to your members and tell them they need to line themselves up with the private sector? When you say that the government is beating up on the union, remember that we represent all citizens, those people who pay taxes, those people who are frustrated with these types of wage earnings when they can't even get close to that. At what point is it your responsibility to talk to your union members and say we need to line up with the private sector?
National President, Public Service Alliance of Canada
Over the last several rounds of negotiations, I think we have been fiscally responsible with our membership and with the government. I think we need to step away from this notion about the private sector versus the public sector. I can tell you, I have members who make less because they work for the federal government than they could make in the private sector, and we have studies to prove that. You take a heavy-duty mechanic from Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, who works at the base out there, works for the federal government—he makes less than the heavy-duty mechanic down the road.
I'm sorry, sir, but when you take a look—