Government Operations Committee on Nov. 6th, 2018

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

It's to Treasury Board, if they're in charge of this. Treasury Board overlooks the public service.

Have we looked at how much we're spending, by department or overall; at how many overlapping...? Do we have a lot of overlapping goals?

[Nick Xenos]

In terms of the greening of government operations, I'm be happy happy to speak to that.

We have integrated it into people's roles. Because 88% of the emissions are from real property, it's the real property.... There are no special additional FTEs for greening government. It's integrated with the people managing the buildings and the fleet managers. These are targets that they have to meet within their...and integrated within their work.

Each department is organized a bit differently, but in terms of real property, fleet procurement, adaptation, etc., this is integrated into their work.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I think I'm out of time, but we'll go back to it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

You have about 30 or 40 seconds.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I'll ask a question very quickly. We'll go back to Mr. Radford.

I'm wondering whether you're satisfied with the pilot projects for the greening of the various buildings and whether you believe we're getting the proper returns, because I have some stats. We won't have time—we'll get it in the next round—but I'm not seeing from the response to our ATIP request that we're seeing an actual reduction in our releases.

[Kevin Radford]

I'll answer this way—

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

You only have a few seconds, sir.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

We'll come around the next time to address that.

[Kevin Radford]

Do I have just a couple of seconds, or no?

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Go ahead.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I'll ask you the next time around.

[Kevin Radford]

In each portfolio plan there are categories of elements that will reduce GHG in and around infrastructure. I'd be happy to share those, if we have the time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

We should have another round coming.

Mr. Blaikie, you have seven minutes, please.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

With apologies to our witnesses again, I'm going to take a moment to deal with some business for which I served notice on Thursday, November 1.

I move:

That, pursuant to Standing Orders 108(3)(c)(ix), the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates invite the Interim President and CEO of Canada Post Corporation, Jessica L. McDonald and the national president of Canadian Union of Postal Workers Mike Palecek (CUPW), to provide a briefing on the management practices of Canada Post, particularly the deplorable practice of targeting sick and vulnerable workers in response to the rotating strike taking place during the current round of collective bargaining, and that this briefing take place no later than Thursday, November 8, 2018.

This is, of course, why it's important that we deal with the motion today, in order to be able to change our schedule for Thursday.

I learned about this last Monday when I visited striking workers in Winnipeg on the picket line and began hearing stories of workers who are collecting their disability insurance because they're sick or they're injured.

When the rotating strike began, Canada Post issued a missive to their workers saying that if you're on short-term or long-term disability or if you get a maternity leave top-up under the collective agreement, Canada Post would be ceasing those benefits.

That obviously puts those workers in a very difficult position. We know from the Phoenix disaster what it looks like when people aren't getting paid: what it means for their mortgage payments; what it means for, in this case, any medications those workers have to have.

This isn't a necessary part of collective bargaining and certainly not any kind of fair collective bargaining. For any corporation—particularly a Crown corporation, in the name of Canadians—to be targeting sick and vulnerable workers as a bargaining technique I think is disgusting.

The evidence suggests that this is exactly what's going on. I've heard from many postal workers who are on disability leave, “Yes, that's my story; that's what's happening to me”, and “Thank you for trying to do something about it”.

What I think is important is that we hear the facts; that we get the president and CEO of the company here to tell us their side of the story, whatever it may be. I've been trying to imagine how you justify doing this. I can't, so I would need to hear it from her.

I'd like to hear from the president of the union to hear some of those stories and to get the union's perspective on why this is happening and on the mechanisms that even allow this to happen in the first place.

Those are the reasons I think this is really important. It's important that we do it as soon as possible, because these workers right now aren't being paid. The longer we wait to get an assessment of the situation and the longer government waits to do something about it, the more likely it is that we're going to find ourselves in a situation in which these workers are suffering material, lasting financial harm and the other kinds of harm that come from not being able to make payments.

We've heard, for instance, from the call centre that helps administer these benefits to workers. Since Canada Post made the announcement, they've been receiving more calls, and workers are reporting anxiety, depression, in some cases suicidal ideation.

This is a real thing that is happening right now to people who work for a Crown corporation. It doesn't have to be happening. I think it's important that we get to the bottom of it as the committee that's responsible for Canada Post.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much.

I have two people on my speakers list, Mr. McCauley and Mr. Peterson.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Thank you for that, Mr. Blaikie.

Generally, I would support this.

Most importantly I'd love to hear from the temporary president of Canada Post but also from the head of the union whether this is purely a negotiating ploy instead of.... Canada Post has tools to counter the rotating strikes. Are they doing this instead of a lockout, or are there other issues? I'd certainly like to hear.

I would perhaps suggest that we also invite Minister Qualtrough to appear and explain the government's role with Canada Post. There are several reasons for doing so. One is that she, when we had the interim president of Canada Post here nine months ago, made it very clear that we were very close to landing a new president for Canada Post. It's clear that the government has no intention of finding a permanent president right now for Canada Post. I think the reason for that is so that they can pin this strike and any bad feelings from the strike on an outgoing president, not a new president. I think that has to be addressed.

We haven't yet seen the long-term plan from the government or from Canada Post that was promised to this committee when we had the president here, addressing such issues as the $8 to $9 billion pension deficit, the long-term plan to counter FedEx, UPS, and all the others, and the way they're going to maintain a business model.

I think it's very important that we hear from the temporary president, but perhaps also from the union side, and perhaps also from the government. I've heard very clearly from Canada Post that they have not received their marching orders yet from this government on how to address the pension issues, long-term viability, and the other things.

I fully support this motion, with or without Minister Qualtrough, though I believe she should be here to discuss the broader issues at hand.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you.

Mr. Peterson.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

I don't know whether Mr. McCauley was proposing an amendment and Mr. Blaikie deemed it friendly, or where we are procedurally.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

I don't believe there was an amendment.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Okay. I just wanted to be clear on that. I won't address that point then, because it's not formally part of the motion.

We certainly sympathize and empathize with the plight of the workers in these cases.

Mr. Blaikie, I think you asked a question of the minister today during question period in the House, which was the proper forum to do so. The two parties right now are at the bargaining table. We strongly encourage them to remain at the bargaining table. We'd hate to have our committee interfere with what is, I think hopefully, going to be a fruitful process.

I'm wondering whether there might be a reluctance on the part of these two parties to appear before a committee, given that they're clearly in the bargaining process right now trying to come to a mediated resolution to the labour situation.

For those reasons, although we empathize and sympathize with the workers, I think bringing these parties before the committee would be inappropriate. It may actually defeat the purpose of the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Mr. Blaikie, I have you on the list as well.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you very much. I'll make a brief response to those points.

First of all, I think it's important to say that this practice of targeting workers who are on sick or maternity leave doesn't have to do with bargaining demands. While I agree that outside interference in the bargaining process itself, in terms of what's being discussed at the table, is one thing, this is a management practice. It is a practice that the management of Canada Post has adopted in the name of Canadians to try to get leverage over the union at the table. It's not something that's happening at the table and it's not about the demands at the table. It's about using what's happening outside of that process to affect negotiations.

I thus do think this would be within our purview. I do not believe it would be inappropriate for the committee to look at it.

I would just add one thing to keep in mind when we're evaluating this kind of management strategy. I don't think it would be okay in any circumstance to make sick and vulnerable workers a pawn in negotiations. This is a rotating strike. Canada Post is making its money. Mail and packages are being delivered; the revenue is coming in. These workers aren't seeing a dime. The response is completely disproportionate to what is being done involving the rotating strike. I think that's another reason—certainly not the only reason—that Canada Post needs to stop this.

I would appreciate committee members' support in helping us get to the bottom. If there are other facts, I'm open to hearing them. That's why I'm asking that the CEO of Canada Post come here as well. I haven't heard any credible countervailing facts. In the absence of those, I think it's imperative that the government take responsibility for this and put a stop to it.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you.

I have no others on my speaking list, which means we will go to a vote on the motion immediately.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I'd like a recorded vote.

(Motion negatived: nays 5; yeas 3)

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Mr. Blaikie, we're back to you for a full seven minutes.