Human Resources Committee on Dec. 5th, 2006

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

You never heard about that before?

[Garth Whyte]

No, we did not.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

You never heard about the fact that there are some situations in Quebec—

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Okay, that's all the time. We're into overtime.

We're going to move to Mr. Lessard for five minutes, please.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think we should always listen to people when they say they don't have time to express their views. We can make mistakes in life, but we do have the responsibility of taking what has been done into account. For example, over the past ten years, year in, year out, this bill was tabled and discussed over months, not weeks. In May, it was examined at first reading. We hear a great deal of testimony outside the sessions. We now have a framework to receive you. We thank you for being here today. You tell us that we might have to hear other witnesses. We will debate that issue.

As our colleagues said, we will soon have to make recommendations to the House of Commons. Those recommendations must reflect how things really are. I must point out that the debate started off quite badly when you told us that, if we were on the side of businesses, we would not be voting for Bill C-257. It's like when Mr. Bush told representatives of other countries that if they were not with him they were against him. That is the kind of message we received.

I think that everyone here—except the Minister—came before the committee with the intention of making relevant remarks. We cannot always all agree, and you have expressed your views extremely well, including your comments about Georges. You said that he and his friends as well as others and many businesses are worried. What I would like to know is what they are worried about, and whether Georges' company's is unionized. If it is not, there would be no strike. You say there are other people like Georges in many companies. Small businesses generate $900 million per day in the Canadian economy. For those $900 million to be in jeopardy, those people would all have to be unionized, and all be out on strike.

In small businesses which do have an employer and a union, needs are determined in terms of essential services. On that score, I would agree with you again. At the same time, I'm trying to respond to your concerns. For example, if Georges is delivering food in the Far North and is the only person to do so, then we and the union would consider that an essential service. However, if the client consists of a group of friends having a party and wanting to go hunt caribou, we would conclude this was not an essential service. Perhaps some other company may provide the service. We would have to see. Those things are done in a civilized fashion, we don't just go out and do things any old way, without even thinking about it.

You say that people are worried. To reassure you, I would like to draw your attention to Quebec's experience of 29 years and British Columbia's experience of 14 years. Both provinces, including the small businesses there, are not concerned about the experience. They are not waging a campaign to change the way things are. You say that you have no evidence. But doesn't their experience constitute evidence that labour relations can indeed be harmonized.

[Garth Whyte]

First, provincially in Quebec, if there's a larger company and they have plants outside Quebec, they can reallocate stuff.

Secondly, under federally regulated businesses--these are businesses like Canada Post that go across the country, and it can be really harmful.

Thirdly, what does the smaller airline do in the middle of the strike? Where does he go to deem his service essential? By the time he figures that out, he's out of business.

I've been involved with labour issues in Geneva, in ILO, and in different places, and I've worked closely with union representatives from across the floor who worked on some stuff. Let me give you an example of what I'm trying to say. Legislation was passed that says employers should give two weeks' notice to employees when they let them go. That's fair. What we were going to introduce was that for a smaller employer, the employee should give two weeks' notice. What I'm trying to say is, we're different from a big business and a big union.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Mr. Whyte, the idea here is not to try to convince me but to help me understand what you are saying. For example, some bus carriers in Quebec are unionized. They cover Quebec city, Montreal, Laval and other places. I have even been in negotiation with those companies, which come under provincial jurisdiction. They have not gone bankrupt, nor have they left anyone to die. Essential services have been guaranteed. That has been within the framework of Quebec's anti-strikebreakers legislation.

What would you say to that? I'm trying to reassure you, because you say you fear the repercussions of these provisions. I'm telling you that they won't have the negative impact you fear. We have had concrete examples of how this sort of legislation operates in Quebec and British Columbia, as I explained.

[Garth Whyte]

You seem—

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Just a quick response, because we're out of time here.

[Garth Whyte]

A quick response would be, if I could sit down with you and talk about it when we had some time, let's work it through.

What I've been saying, and I want you all to hear this...I'm just saying we are not—

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

You don't need to negotiate with me. This is committee work we are doing here.

[Garth Whyte]

Exactly, but do you know what? We've been involved with hundreds of bills, and surprise, surprise, there have been some mistakes, and you had to go back and amend them. Why would you then want to push this through very quickly? We were not approached. We have 24,000 members in Quebec. Give me more time, and I can certainly find some examples where there have been some problems, but I can't on a day's notice.

All we're saying is, you cannot on one side say we really support the PME and on the other side say we're going to this bill without giving the PME time to respond.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I would like us to move to Ms. Davies for five minutes, please.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much.

I want to disagree with you, because there has been adequate time to respond. A committee is not the only venue where we hear points of view. We get lobbied probably almost every day, and much of that is from business interests, but not exclusively. It's from NGOs, from associations, professional associations. But I have to say that I don't think I've ever been lobbied by any business organization about this bill prior to today. It has--

[Garth Whyte]

Well—

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Could you just wait a moment? You'll get an opportunity to respond.

If this were of huge concern to either your organization or the B.C. Business Council, for that matter...we've never heard anything. This has been in the public eye. It has now been debated for seven months going on eight months. I think people got worried and have been drumming up business in the last few days. We certainly haven't heard from the B.C. Business Council, not a word, prior to them now saying they want to appear. I know the B.C. Federation of Labour wanted to appear as well. They're not here either.

No committee hears all the witnesses that want to appear. It wouldn't be possible. As long as we have a balanced representation of various interests, that's what we strive to do. I think that's what's happened here. So I take issue with this idea that somehow you've had no opportunity to say what you think. The fact that labour was on the Hill should be applauded. They're using their democratic rights to come to speak to their MPs. There's nothing to prevent your organization from having done the same thing over the past six months, frankly.

You say you're now serving your members. It hasn't been an issue in B.C. That's why you're only at the point of looking at surveying your members, because it hasn't been an issue. I really believe that.

Anyway, I value your point of view, but I think there's a lot of overreaction and that a lot of fear is being created about this bill. I'm hoping as a result of this process we can undo some of that and make it a rational thing that isn't dramatically going to change the world. It is going to create a balanced playing field for both employers and workers. That's what it's going to do.

[Garth Whyte]

It was a private member's bill that wouldn't have gone through, I believe, if it wasn't for a minority government.

Having said that, we've spent ten years working with your government to rewrite the Canada Labour Code. We've had some rock-em, sock-em debates. We shouldn't be doing this in committee. We've sat down and we've done consensus building on a whole bunch of issues. One of those issues was replacement workers. Now we're hearing that even if you say it's several months...quite frankly, the bill didn't reach second reading until a couple of months ago, or just before the summer, I believe--October, sorry--and it's galloping through.

All I can say is this. This is important to us. The one thing we are is experts on our membership. We do survey them, as you know, and you do get our results, and I'm telling you that our members, when they hear about this bill, are very nervous and very upset about this bill. We've had votes in the past about this, and they will be surprised if this came through. All I'm saying is let's take the time to do it right. If you're getting one side of things...and that's what I've been hearing in this whole committee. It feels like a gang-up to me. That's how I feel. I'm not criticizing anybody, but that's how I feel, and I know our members all feel the same.

We don't feel we've had enough time to present. We were told it was going to committee on Wednesday, I think, and we were told that we may or may not be on the list, and then we were told on I think Thursday that we were going to present.

We've delayed a 12,000-survey response on immigration policy, which is being endorsed by all parties, because we've had to deal with this private member's bill. We've been working on that for a long time. We've been working on things to help the country, we believe. I'm not dismissing this bill, but I have not felt that we've had the time to be able to deal with this bill. And even when you hear presentations, it's big business and big labour. No one ever talks about small and medium-sized enterprises. I've even had some members saying, are you guys under the Canada Labour Code? Yes, we are. Think about it. That's understandable, because part I is focusing primarily on large firms and large workplaces. You didn't know this; you didn't realize it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

We're almost out of time.

Mr. Forder has a comment--just a small comment.

[Paul Forder]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman.

Earlier, Ms. Davies asked if there were some suggestions we had. I think this is the primary fundamental bill that we support. If we can deal with the essential services question, which I know concerns the members, I think that's being addressed. We think that's fine and well.

Also, Denis Coderre asked how many members of the CFIB were in the union. They're a minority for sure of their 105,000 members. So when you say 84% say something and they're not in the union environment, it doesn't affect them in any event, that's important to keep in perspective.

Finally, George's employees chose to have a union. If they're not happy with the union, there's a decertification process, and that happens from time to time when people are not happy with their bargaining agent. So there are remedies there that already exist in the law to deal with situations such as this. But for the most part, orderly labour relations are desired by everyone, and I think if the members keep focused on that, then this will be a very good bill for progress for the future.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Forder.

Mr. Gervais, just a quick comment, please.

[Mario Gervais]

Out of 400 local sections in Quebec, over 200 have fewer than 25 members. But I have not yet seen any local section devoted to the goal of bringing their members to the point of going on strike. Their goal, rather, is to maintain harmonious working relations with the employer.

The people from Videotron were in partnership with their employer. They had developed their working relationship to the point of including the development of occupational health and safety measures, working on evenings and weekends, and even looking at market development.

So what happened? All it took was the replacement of one CEO for labour relations to go back to what they were. In our view, those are the situations in which we need anti-strikebreakers legislation.

When it comes to small employers, let's stop seeing boogie men where there aren't any.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Gervais.

We're going to move to Mr. Lake for the last five minutes.

Go ahead, please.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Thank you.

For the record, I want to start by saying that I don't think Mr. Coderre has ever cried. Actually, even as a baby, I imagine that you...other babies cried probably more than you cried yourself.

I want to get to a couple of points, and I want Mr. Whyte first to respond. You were asking a rhetorical question, when you were interrupted by Mr. Coderre, about a Liberal majority government, what they did to pursue this when they had a majority. I would like you to finish your comment.

[Garth Whyte]

We did get several quotes from Minister Bradshaw and others. I can go down the list. They said this was not good policy and that they would not pass it, and they didn't pass it. I believe this is only getting through now because it's a minority government. This is what I am saying.

One thing we do is tell it to your face. We're straight up, and we're saying this is not a freebie. Up to now, there was an idea that this was a freebie. It was just big business and big unions and that was a no-brainer. That's what I wanted to identify.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I heard various comments, too, from the other side. They're talking about it being the first time it has really been debated. In fairness, I believe this is the first time this has been studied in committee. I'm not sure, especially after this many years of talk, that taking two days when we're three weeks before Christmas is enough time to have a proper discussion with proper witnesses.