Finance Committee on May 31st, 2024

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Ms. Sawyers, it's great to have you here. It's great to have all the witnesses here, but I'll direct most of my questions to you.

I was very happy to be with you in east Scarborough when the Prime Minister made the announcement of the national school food program. I know how much work you've done as one of the members of the Coalition for Healthy School Food.

Could you speak a bit about your advocacy and the members of that coalition's advocacy, about how long it has been going on for and about how much effort that group has made? I think there are about 300 members across Canada, if I'm not mistaken, who have been advocating for a national school food program for quite some time. Could you give us a bit of detail on that?

[Utcha Sawyers]

Most definitely.

The coalition has been around for I believe over 25 years in some form, and it looks at food systems, specifically as they relate to school food programs. The model and the movement have, as you said, 300 members. It's nationwide. We work in synergy with each other to share models and different strategies to ensure that we are able to impact, to at least some degree on the local level, our student nutrition programs in our various community spaces. That would be schools, community centres, clubhouses like ours and other spaces, programs and national movements that are focused on healthy access for children and youth to nutrient-dense food.

It's about working with a broad spectrum, from those who are leading food programs in schools as volunteers to those of us in non-profit executive roles to those of us in academic institutions doing research. It's about galvanizing all of that content, research and information together to create synergies and strategies that work at the local level.

One thing we've been able to lead through the coalition is the reality that there's not a cookie-cutter solution in every community. Each community has the right to self-determine what their food system looks like in terms of access for children and youth. We've pioneered programs that are culturally appropriate and that consider cultural custom, and we spread that content across Canada. I think a coalition like this helps us to quickly move the most current and most successful models of student nutrition programs across Canada in a strategic and harmonious way.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thank you for that.

I note that one of the most prominent voices in Canada, Food Secure Canada, is the organization that houses the Coalition for Healthy School Food. Food security comes up quite often in our conversations in Parliament these days. In fact, Conservative politicians are regularly citing the increased number of people in food bank lineups. I think we can all agree that seeing more Canadians turning to food banks is a troubling sign.

Let me ask you this, since you're someone who does this work on the ground in the community through an organization that I know does great work: Is this program addressing food insecurity at the household level, from your perspective?

[Utcha Sawyers]

Well, we've learned first-hand about the impact of children and youth's access. We're focusing on food access because it permeates the home. When we started shifting away from serving any food to being very intentional with our food charter, focusing on nutrient-dense food and understanding food literacy, we saw that parents were coming back. They were being impacted and wanted to learn more about what we were offering and how they could offer that at home. In that regard, yes, it has a significant impact.

We still have a ways to go in looking at the economic impact and how we can shift it. Again, the investment can grow. Any investment we can layer on what we're doing now is definitely a step in the right direction.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

That's great. Some politicians have said really absurd things like, “There's no food in school food programs.” I've heard them say that.

Just to be clear, you're actually feeding children real food.

[Utcha Sawyers]

Yes, we definitely are. We have a culinary team on site that goes through a holistic food guide and looks at how we can make sure food is not just filling the hunger spaces but also uplifting and nourishing a child for an optimal future. When the premier was at our site, he was cutting up fresh vegetables and fruits, and we had all of these great snacks, which, again, have an impact. We know that when a child is well fed, they're ready to learn and be a part of civic society.

It's important for us to make sure we are providing healthy food, not just ordering something, taking whatever is donated and so on. We're even making sure we set a standard in how we clean food from the community to make sure children are eating.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, PS Turnbull.

We'll go to MP Ste-Marie.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to begin by thanking you, Ms. Sawyers. You and your entire team are doing extraordinary work given the few resources you have. Congratulations. The work you're doing is truly important.

My questions are for Mr. Weber.

Thank you for coming and for your testimony. You've raised several problems.

How would you describe relations between the government and the Public Service Alliance of Canada? When the government makes decisions that affect your members, does it consult the Public Service Alliance of Canada enough?

[Mark Weber]

There's generally very little consultation taking place. I know that for many employers—the CBSA specifically—consultation quite often means telling us what they're going to do the day before. For major decisions like ArriveCAN, there was no consultation or participation whatsoever. It's very concerning.

If you want to run an operation properly, you ask the people who actually work in it, in my opinion.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

That's also my opinion. It's rather surprising that it wasn't done.

You've partly answered my next question, but I'm going to ask you for a few more details and examples of how more consultation of the Public Service Alliance of Canada would enable the government to be more effective and show more respect for the members you represent.

[Mark Weber]

It would make a tremendous difference. I can tell you that right now, having been without a contract for two years and being at the negotiating table sitting across from our employer, the answer to absolutely everything has simply been no. It has been so abysmal that we have not even been given a wage offer, to give you an idea of the level of disrespect.

Here we are with mediation coming up on Monday and on the verge of a strike, and our employer has refused to talk to us about anything whatsoever. Our members work incredibly difficult jobs. They are horribly understaffed. Three thousand is a fairly conservative estimate of how many more people we need. We have ports of entry where five years ago 20 people were working and they're down to five or six. They work almost unlimited overtime. We make up 3% of the federal public service at the CBSA, and we account for 20% of the overtime budget, to give you an idea of the hours they are working to keep our borders running. They do it with pride. They do not want to go on strike.

We want to be negotiating with someone who actually speaks to us and understands the issues—our issues—and demands at the bargaining table for parity with the rest of law enforcement, such as being able to retire after 25 years like all the rest of law enforcement. The CBSA wonders why they have staffing issues with recruitment and retention. The tag line seems to be “Come to the CBSA; we will pay you less and you have to work longer”. That's not a great way to attract or keep people.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Yes, it's really distressing. You've just mentioned again that it's been two years without a labour contract.

How do you account for the government's decision to let things drag on? What message is it sending about the government's stance on workers' rights?

[Mark Weber]

It's absolutely inexplicable and it really shows a severe lack of respect for the people who do the work. Our strike mandate was 96% in favour with a 70% participation rate. That's about as high and as strong as anyone has ever seen.

Our members are so disappointed. If you had a situation where everyone in this room had a benefit except one person and that one person asked for it year after year for decades and was refused, and was even refused proper consultation or discussion about it, I think we would all agree that person would be understandably furious. That is the situation we are in specifically with the “25 and out”.

Salary is an issue too, though. We're the second-largest law enforcement force in Canada. We enforce more legislation than any other police agency. We're armed and have the same use-of-force requirements, yet we're always told as to pay and benefits that we are somewhat less. It's an unacceptable situation. It has to change.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Yes, exactly.

We understand that the government shows a lack of respect for its public service, and particularly the members you represent, who are without a contract at the moment. It's upsetting to see it allow things to drag on like that.

How does all this affect the general population?

[Mark Weber]

I think the public can see it. We garnered tremendous support when we went on strike back in 2021. I think everything that has come out.... We discussed how ArriveCAN became a public issue, and with the other things we see happening at the federal public service, like with Phoenix and Canada Life, it's one thing after the next where the consultation is poor to none. There was the decision to arbitrarily send people back to work three days a week when we had a telework agreement that ensured individual consultation and that committees would look into these things. It's one thing after the next that demonstrates a lack of respect, and I think the Canadian public can really see it.

For us specifically at the CBSA, we might be on strike in a week. Obviously, that could greatly affect the public when they cross the border. It's the last thing we want. It was absolutely one hundred per cent unavoidable. Our bargaining demands are not pie in the sky. They're just about getting what everyone else has. It's really disappointing for us to be in this situation now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, Mr. Ste-Marie.

Now we will go to MP Green.

Welcome to our committee.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. It's certainly a pleasure to be back, and it's great to be here, particularly on a day when we have the opportunity to talk a bit about our incredible public service.

I want to begin, Mr. Weber, by congratulating PSAC on a successful convention. There's a new president and a new executive, yet the fight continues.

I want to pick up on the last round of questioning. In early May, PSAC sent a joint letter with 15 federal public service unions to the President of the Treasury Board, Anita Anand, to express your outrage with the federal government's decision to impose an in-office mandate. The updated policy requires all federal public service workers in the core public administration and in separate agencies to work on site a minimum of three days a week.

Can you confirm if PSAC was consulted by the federal government prior to the announcement of this in-office mandate?

[Mark Weber]

I can confirm that we were absolutely not consulted before this came out. We were actually told it was not going to happen.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I think I heard you say that this was part of a telework agreement, so this was in fact part of your collective agreement.

[Mark Weber]

That's correct. There was a letter of understanding that there would be consultation, that there would be joint consultation committees and that telework agreements would be done on a case-by-case basis per employee, which is the opposite of what happened. It was an arbitrary mandate for everyone to go back for three days a week.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

In your view, does this imposition of the mandate violate the spirit and intent of the signed letters of agreement between the federal government and PSAC from your recent rounds of collective bargaining?

[Mark Weber]

I believe it absolutely does. In the situation we're in at the CIU, we'll potentially be on strike in a week. As mediation happens next week and negotiations go on, we'll be demanding that things be enshrined in our collective agreement, because apparently a letter of understanding doesn't have much value.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

In your view, how will the imposition of this mandate impact the workforce productivity, well-being and work-life balance of your members?

[Mark Weber]

It has been devastating for work-life balance. It has done nothing for productivity.

The Government of Canada was very proud to announce how productivity had gone up during COVID when people were at home working full time. You could say that the one positive that came out of COVID was proving that they could do their work full time from home. Productivity actually increased. Now we see the announcement that offices are going to be retrofitted into affordable housing, and that, combined with telling employees arbitrarily that they have to come back to work three days a week, really doesn't make any sense for a government that says they're trying to save money.