Government Operations Committee on Dec. 6th, 2018

[Les Linklater]

As the minister said, the money was given to the department so that it could help its own workforce stabilize the system.

In addition, there is the Treasury Board Secretariat claims office, which provides money to people who have experienced pay issues because of the Phoenix system, to help them pay for certain expenses.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

In your remarks, Madam Minister, you also mentioned that, since January 2018, the queue has been reduced by 21%. I know that we must proceed cautiously towards achieving the objectives.

Is a similar decrease expected in the next quarter, for example? Will this 21% decrease happen every month? Has there been a greater decrease per quarter or is it the same? Has there been a greater increase this summer or fall?

I'm asking you several questions.

[Carla Qualtrough]

Things are going well with the pay pods.

As we bring more departments and agencies into the pod system, we get better results for those departments and agencies. As I've said, in the departments and agencies that have been in pods longer, such as those in pod zero from last November, we have a more significant decline in the backlog than in those that are not being serviced in that model.

We anticipate stabilization to follow that same trend. If I had to, I would predict that the departments and agencies that are in pod zero will achieve stabilization—i.e., get rid of the backlog for their departments—in a corresponding flow of the pod rollout, if that makes sense.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

You mentioned that, since the pay pods were implemented, there has been a 23% reduction in backlogs.

[Carla Qualtrough]

Yes.

I would say that—and I don't mean it to sound as cheeky as it might come across—a year ago, my constant nagging was that we had to find a way to keep the numbers from going up. Right now, my constant nagging is about how to get the numbers to go down more quickly. That's a much better place to be than where we were a year ago.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I know I don't have much time left. I'm going to ask one last question.

We know that the Treasury Board has already taken new steps to plan a new pay system, because the other one will become obsolete at some point. Is there co-operation between Public Services and Procurement Canada and the Treasury Board to work on this matter?

[Carla Qualtrough]

Absolutely. We work together.

[Les Linklater]

Absolutely. We have a lot of experience in pay administration, so we are in regular contact with our Treasury Board counterparts to learn from our experiences.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Our final intervention will be from Mr. Blaikie, for three minutes.

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

Thank you.

I'm certainly going to take Monsieur Drouin's word that if Mr. McCauley moves his motion again, he won't have any reason to vote against it.

Minister, section 6 of the back-to-work legislation extends the provisions of the collective agreement, but it excludes the period for which there was a strike. It doesn't make any distinction between a rotating strike and a full-blown strike. Do you think that it made a material difference to the operations of Canada Post that the strike was a rotating strike, as opposed to a full strike?

[Carla Qualtrough]

I would suggest that the uncertainty and the economic impact of the rotating strike were quite significant.

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

You don't think there was a difference between what would have happened to the mail under a full strike, as opposed to a rotating strike. Is that what I'm hearing you say?

[Carla Qualtrough]

No.

I would assume, although not having lived it—

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

Why do you think it didn't make a difference for people on short-term disability? Their pay was completely suspended for the five weeks, even though Canada Post delivery was not completely suspended for five weeks—in fact, not even close.

[Carla Qualtrough]

I don't think I can answer that question to your satisfaction, sir.

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

Could you commit to reimbursing those folks on short-term disability who didn't get paid at all for five weeks, despite the fact that the operations at Canada Post continued and the mail got delivered?

[Carla Qualtrough]

I can't make that commitment at this time.

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

I think that's unfortunate to hear, because that's exactly the kind of commitment I think those people are owed. The delivery of the mail and the profits of Canada Post were not suspended for five weeks. It makes no sense to me why your government would choose, in the back-to-work legislation, not only to agree with the decision in the first place, but then to protect the company, within your government's legislation, from having the union be able to take any action retroactively. That's what section 6 of your agreement does.

Why was that provision included in the back-to-work legislation?

[Carla Qualtrough]

Unfortunately, I don't know why it was or wasn't. We'll have to confer with the Department of Labour—

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

You are the minister responsible for Canada Post—

[Carla Qualtrough]

I am, and I—

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

—and you don't know why clauses were included or not included in the back-to-work legislation for Canada Post.

[Carla Qualtrough]

The back-to-work legislation was within the responsibility of the Minister of Labour—

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

Am I to understand that you, as the minister for Canada Post and as a member of cabinet, weren't consulted on the back-to-work legislation? Was there not a cabinet discussion about the back-to-work legislation, where you reviewed the various clauses of the legislation?