Human Resources Committee on Dec. 7th, 2006

[Nancy Hughes Anthony]

Absolutely. Our members include many Canada-wide companies; others operate at the local level, in a municipality, or a region. There are many of them.

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

How many? Can you tell us that? How many are strictly provincially regulated?

[Nancy Hughes Anthony]

I cannot give you the exact number.

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

You cannot say.

Like other witnesses before you, you raised a concern about balance. As you know, in labour relations, there are also concerns about democracy. You intervened on the context surrounding the secret nature of the vote. All aspects of our society are based on relations that are, in my view guided by democracy. That means everything is based on power relationships, including in the House of Commons and in provincial legislative assemblies, which have government and opposition parties, as well as in the courts, with their Crown prosecutors and defence counsels, etc. Each party tries to present the best arguments, which will prevail.

The same dynamic exists in labour relations. I think you will agree with me on that. Both the employer and the union have their claims.

When we are concerned about balance and the issue is underway, for example negotiations, do you believe that having a third party get involved to support one of the players helps preserve the balance?

[Nancy Hughes Anthony]

Look, Mr. Lessard, that can be useful in some circumstances but not in others. I am simply emphasizing the fact that the Canada Labour Code currently allows for that recourse. However, as mentioned by Mr. McDermott and by others, there are restrictions designed to ensure that the authority will not be abused. I feel that the balance in the current code is fair, and that is the opinion I have expressed today.

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

It may be helpful if I refer you to your report, to the brief that you presented here this morning. I skimmed over it. It might help you. For example, you say that Bill C-257 would negatively impact the workers. So the best way to ensure there is balance would be by allowing a company to remain operational during a strike.

Is that what you mean by balance?

[Nancy Hughes Anthony]

We are talking about federally-regulated companies. That is different from the Société des alcools. I am saying that with all due respect.

I think that to have balance, corporate managers must have sufficient authority, should they deem it necessary, to be able to maintain certain activities for the good of Canadians.

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

You discussed that on page 3 of your submission, and I understand that.

Let's go a step farther. Since the issue is one of balance and power relationships, I will illustrate my comments. In various competitions, such as wrestling, boxing or hockey, there are two sides, or two teams. It's the same thing in negotiations. How would a power relationship be judged by the people?

Let's take an example. A hockey game is underway and one of the two teams has the right to double the number of players. Would you not agree that the public would boo that team? It wouldn't agree. I am not saying that to trap you or to cause you problems, I am simply trying to understand your logic.

Let's take another example. You're watching a boxing match. Personally, I find it quite violent, but nevertheless, it is allowed. If at some point during the fight, one of the two boxers is allowed to get help from someone else, do you think that is right?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Mr. Lessard, that's all the time we have, but we'll get a quick response from Ms. Hughes Anthony.

[Nancy Hughes Anthony]

I would never compare labour relations to a boxing match.

I think, as I said before, there are provisions in the existing Canada Labour Code. There is recourse to the Canada Industrial Relations Board, which is there precisely in the case when someone has a complaint or someone has a feeling that they are being dealt with unfairly. I would say the recourse is there.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much.

We're going to move now to the last questioner. Ms. Yelich, you'll have five minutes, please.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Thank you.

I want to talk about small business, because that is who is coming to me in numbers.

My question is, do you think small business will be disproportionately affected by this legislation?

I had a constituent who wrote saying he really wants me to vote against Bill C-257; that the biggest obstacle faced in operating small business has been labour and unions slanted in their favour; they already possess a legislative power to shut down or cripple any business.

This is just one person. I know you represent 170,000 people, but I can't imagine how many people you really represent in a shutdown in federal jurisdiction.

I think that's what's missing in the arguments from the Bloc. We continue to talk about a liquor board store that is in a province. That's not shutting down a nation, because we can cross that border and get some in Ontario, I think. I really don't find that a valid reason, or that we can use this as an argument to say it would shut down an economy.

I really want your response concerning the fear, the climate. I think good companies can keep good employees, that there are good ways of having good relationships with employees. I can cite many businesses in my riding that have unions and haven't had strikes for years and years. At one time they were a crown corporation, they were a public service, and I think they've done very well.

I want to know whether this perhaps creates more of a hostile environment as well, rather than a friendly environment.

[Nancy Hughes Anthony]

Yes, I would agree with you.

I would go back again to the whole concept of why certain industries are federally regulated. They are federally regulated because they are so important to the web of services Canadians expect, and on which that small business therefore depends. Whether you're talking about interprovincial trucking, rail service, port service, or airlines functioning, you have literally millions of businesses—and obviously Canadian society—depending on that to be well managed, on time, etc.

It absolutely has a huge impact, not only on society, some of whom won't go down to the corner to get the Pampers they need that day because they haven't come in, but on the corner store itself, which has nothing to sell because the goods have not come in, because a particular industry is on strike. I certainly agree with you that it has a huge impact on the very foundation of our economy, which is the small business.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

What about investments? A lot of the groups you represent talked about the potential impact on competitiveness as measured by increased investment. Do you think this discourages investment in any jurisdiction that has increased labour legislation?

[Nancy Hughes Anthony]

One of the indicators any foreign investor looks at when going into a jurisdiction, wherever it is--Canada, United States, Sweden, Singapore--is that they want to look at certain factors. What's the tax regime like? What's the regulatory situation like? What is the labour situation like? How many days of work have been lost in strikes? What is the situation and how easily can I function in this environment? How fair and balanced is the system?

Canadians want a balanced system, but certainly we also have to present a face to the world that says, yes, we are competitive with other jurisdictions. We have a balanced system here that is fair on both sides. In my view, the current system is fair and is balanced.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Why do you suppose not all provinces are adopting this? We know this legislation exists in two provinces, but there must be a reason other provinces don't. Would you like to comment?

[Nancy Hughes Anthony]

Some of the statistics I put in my brief that relate specifically to the province of Quebec underline the fact that this has not been good for days lost and duration of work stoppages in Quebec. I believe you have another witness today from the Conseil du patronat from Quebec who can perhaps shed more light on that specific situation. I think other provinces look at that experience, compare their own situations, and say this is not the way to go.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

I will ask Deborah Bourque, because she challenged Mr. Whyte's statistics. I think it's fair that you got it in dollars and cents, but what I think is unfair is that perhaps you don't understand how many.... I don't know if you can measure in it dollars if Canada Post shuts down service, because either we find an alternative....

Mail to me is essential, and I've seen in my own province sometimes the mail delivery diminished or some of the decisions made that have caused us undue stress. I wonder if it's fair to say this is statistics, or if you understand how businesses are affected, such as the person who wrote me. He wasn't even talking about Canada Post when he said this. He was talking about the chain he depends on for a lot of his essentials--either supply or to send out.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Ms. Bourque, I'll ask for a quick response, because we're way over time.

[Deborah Bourque]

My only point was that the CFIB tends to play pretty fast and loose with statistics, and one should be very cautious about relying on them. We understand the impact of a postal strike on communities, businesses, and individuals, and that's why we take the right to strike very seriously. There's been one strike in the Post Office in the last 15 years. We're in collective bargaining right now, and our commitment is to try to reach an agreement without a strike. We understand how important these services are to business communities.

It stands to reason that if employers have the ability to use replacement workers, and therefore the economic impact on employers isn't as great due to a strike, those strikes are going to be longer, and the mail is not going to move when they're using replacement workers. We have two examples of when they've tried to move the mail with replacement workers, and it hasn't worked. It's not in the interest of the small business community to have longer strikes at Canada Post, because there's no economic impact.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

I'm sorry, Ms. Yelich, you're way over time.

I do want to add one comment. I'm surprised the MPs didn't talk to you a little more about process, Mr. McDermott. I talked about it at the beginning.

You talked about 18 months. My thought is, using experts in four years...and I realize there are maybe two years. We're MPs trying to get our heads around legislation that, quite frankly, we are not experts in.

Mr. McDermott, a final word in terms of process and the importance of hearing and seeking expertise to look at making this a balanced approach to move forward--just a parting comment.

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

Your observation is very relevant, Mr. Chairman, and I think we should not deprive ourselves of this expertise. We could perhaps agree among ourselves to take time to hear from another expert witness or two. There is one person whose name has been mentioned often here. It is Mr. Rodrigue Blouin, who, in Quebec, is a leading expert on labour relations. I think that together we should perhaps look at the possibility of hearing from him. We would have to agree to that, but I think your observation is very timely.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

Mr. Coderre.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

I think that would be important too, because we will be hearing from another group of witnesses later. We have heard the views of the union and management. We have of course heard their arguments, but I think that testimony by Mr. McDermott, and perhaps Mr. Sims and Mr. Blouin, would be useful, provided that Mr. McDermott can come back next week.

I think we have reached a stage where we will need an overview of the impact of amending various sections, based on expertise. We do not want to re-invent the task force, but we must focus on the impact, namely, the issue of essential services, on the definition.

I am sort of going back to what my friend D'Amours said earlier. We are not at the point of determining whether we are for or against replacement workers. In our case, it is clear. What is important for us is to ensure we are aware of the impact on the Canada Labour Code and that we obtain expertise on the very definition of what is meant by essential services.

You have already heard our point of view, Ms. Hughes, on the topic of subsection (2.4), which deals with the production of goods and services. I think we are at a different stage.

Mr. McDermott, if you are available, we would like to hear from you again next week, with other experts, to hold a discussion based on what we have heard this week regarding the views of the two most affected parties. We must also think about citizens and have an overview of the issue with the help of people who have expertise. I will make a motion to that effect later.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Okay, thank you very much.

Once again, I want to thank the witnesses for being here today.

The meeting is adjourned.