Human Resources Committee on Dec. 7th, 2006

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you very much.

Thanks for being here today. This is important business that we do, as you've all pointed out. For me, yes, it's trying to create some harmony. It's also about creating stability in an industry and about creating stability in a community.

I was part of the Ontario legislature in the 1990s when anti-replacement worker legislation was brought in, and it did in fact, for the short period of time that it existed, create a level of stability. I know in my own community...I come from sort of a blue-collar steel city, and when I first got elected in 1990, there was a very difficult strike on there. We haven't had another strike since, actually. But that was very difficult for the whole community, the people on the picket line plus the people going in, because we all had to then live together. We had to go curling. We had to go to the hockey game. We had to maintain our lives.

We in northern Ontario had a very difficult strike in Red Lake. I don't know how many of you remember that. It went on for years in Red Lake. What it did to that community was unbelievable. It just destroyed relationships and removed from that community significant economic opportunity, because a lot of the workers who were brought in to replace were from out of town. They weren't living in that community and investing and spending their money. Finally, everybody caved in, in the end, and nobody won, in my view.

I remember in Ontario, when we then got rid of the anti-replacement legislation under Mike Harris, a group of women called me from Kirkland Lake. They worked for the community living association. They looked after some of our more at-risk and marginalized and vulnerable citizens. There was a work stoppage. There was no legislation to stop replacement workers, so the association brought in a strike-breaking firm from Windsor. The first thing they did was collect everybody, all these very vulnerable individuals, and took them to a camp on a lake—that's how they managed this—and then created all kinds of havoc for the workers in that community.

I know that's not always the case. We all have anecdotal evidence of both sides of this, but I think the question for me is still that it's creating stability, and yes, harmony in a community, which I think is what we all want, as Canadians, for each other.

You may know better than I, on the Quebec and the Ontario situation—and I have another question for Mr. Facette and Mr. Kelly-Gagnon as well—but are there any statistics or is there any information that you might share with us today from the labour side that would indicate that in fact having anti-replacement workers does create that stability, for the workplace and the workers and for the community, but also for investment?

[René Roy]

In Quebec, the anti-scab legislation has been around since 1977. The statistics go back further than that and are mainly on violence on the picket lines .

Mr. Martin, surely you know the biggest and most difficult strike was the United Aircraft workers strike. It lasted 20 months, and the issue was union recognition. The company used replacement workers, with all its counterproductive consequences: Jailings, injured or fired workers, and so on. The strike was so difficult that the company had to change its name. It now called Pratt & Whitney and is located in Longueuil.

In Quebec, the anti-replacement worker legislation has, for all intents and purposes, restored a balance and eliminated violence during labour disputes. The Conseil du patronat actually acknowledged that, at a meeting in 1983. I agree with statistics that show a decrease in labour disputes, in Quebec and in other provinces. There used to be more disputes in Quebec, as Ms. Carbonneau pointed out. There has been less of a decrease in other provinces.

I am going to turn it over to her, because she appears to have some statistics for you.

[Claudette Carbonneau]

I took a tally of the major disputes in Quebec over the past five years. Five per cent of CSN members are federally regulated. Of the 10 longest disputes, two were under federal jurisdiction. That figure alone indicates an imbalance.

I fully agree with what M. Roy said about violence in disputes. Some disputes were well known for that: Robbin Hood, United Aircraft, Firestone.

If asked, the police forces of the big cities could confirm that it is extremely rare these days for the riots squad to be called out to the picket line, although it was common place before the anti-replacement worker legislation was enacted. In terms of quality, the legislation has turned things around.

Disputes are quite painful at the time, but they also unfortunately leave major scars. It takes a very long time to restore some semblance of proper labour relations. A difficult and agonizing dispute brings out the strongest emotions in people.

It is felt that using strike breakers steals jobs and destroys any bargaining power or attempt to force management to focus on the legitimacy of any given demand and on the search for practical solutions.

[René Roy]

I would like to provide some statistics on the length of disputes. In 1976, the average length of disputes in Quebec was 40 days; in 2001, with anti-replacement worker legislation, it was 27 days.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

To Mr. Kelly-Gagnon and Mr. Facette, you've looked at the legislation. Are there any things we could do to make this more acceptable to you and to your industry? I understand your responsibility and your concerns, but are there things we could do with this bill--short of pulling it off the table--to make it more acceptable and supportable?

[Jim Facette]

The first thing you can do is take it off the table.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

We're not going to do that.

[Jim Facette]

But to be very honest, that is our first answer.

That said, in our reading of this there is an inherent conflict, in some of the language as written, between the English and the French. That needs to be carefully reviewed.

For example, if you look at proposed subsection 94(2.4), there is in our opinion a distinct difference between what the English version says and what the French version says. That would need to be resolved.

Other issues came up in our clause-by-clause review of this. If in the future this committee wanted to sit down with us, we'd be happy to look at it in some great deal of detail.

But our preference, Mr. Chair, is that this legislation is taken off the table.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Mr. Kelly-Gagnon, a quick response?

[Michel Kelly-Gagnon]

No.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

We're going to move to our next questioner.

Mr. Lake, you have seven minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank you all for taking the time to come here today. I want to ask fairly quick questions and have you respond. I want to hear what all of you have to say.

Starting with you, Mr. Facette, I want to know what effect this legislation would have on airports serving particularly remotely located communities and the people of those communities who rely on the functioning of those airports.

[Jim Facette]

If a major airport were to have labour problems and had to shut down as a result, or had severe delays, it could essentially mean that smaller airport communities would not have access to other communities. They would not be permitted to take off.

I explained earlier that we have some regulations that we must abide by. If safety and security are in any way compromised, we have to take appropriate measures or else our members will lose their operating certificates. If we have severe backups, or if a major airport like Vancouver or Toronto is forced to shut down as a result of this piece of legislation, then those smaller communities will not have access to the big communities for such things as medevac, which is extremely important to smaller communities.

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

Thank you.

Further to that, in light of what you were saying before, let's say we were to enact this legislation, there was a shutdown of the airport system across the country for whatever reason, and then we had a national emergency of some sort. Let's say this happened in the middle of the summer.

I guess the argument could be made that we could bring back some back-to-work legislation and force the workers back, but would we MPs, coming from Alberta and B.C. especially, even get back here in sufficient time to do so?

[Jim Facette]

Mr. Chairman, like they say, you are pushing it.

You would be on a journey of anywhere from two to three to four days, depending on where you're from.

While we jokingly respond to something like that, it's a very serious question, Mr. Chairman. All of you would have a very difficult time getting back to Ottawa to pass that legislation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

A quick response from Ms. Carbonneau. She had her hand up.

[Claudette Carbonneau]

I would just like to point out that in Quebec, public transit is governed by the Quebec Labour Code. When it comes to protecting public health and safety, we know all about that. Along the same lines, I would remind everyone that section 87.4 of the Canada Labour Code already makes full provision for that. In that sense, we are not venturing into an area where we have no experience whatever.

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

Mr. Chair, I want to--

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

[Inaudible--Editor]

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

Okay, but my question was to Mr. Facette, because he's with the airports.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Mr. Giroux.

[André Giroux, Lawyer, Conseil du patronat du Québec]

I have to disagree with something Ms. Carbonneau just said, because essential service as it's known in Quebec is not exactly the same thing as what operates in Canada. In Canada, you need to have imminent danger for the safety and health of the public, and this would include various things, but it would not include public transportation as you have in Quebec, where it's called an essential service regardless of whether or not it touches health and safety. Those are two different things, and I don't want them mixed up.

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

Okay, thanks.

My next question is for Mr. Kelly-Gagnon. Regarding the tone of the conversation, it seems so far as if the overwhelming rationale given by union leaders who have been before us on this legislation...virtually every one has appeared to be violence-related, that these work stoppages and the use of replacement workers lead to violence. Upon further questioning, usually they will say half-heartedly that the violence isn't justified.

I want to ask you a question, and I totally reject the notion that violence should come into the equation. It's not justified one way or another. Is it true there's been less violence in Quebec due to this law?

[Michel Kelly-Gagnon]

It's a subtle answer. I would first like my colleague, Mr. Giroux, to give part of the answer, and then I will come back for a complement, if you don't mind.

[André Giroux]

My first answer to you would be, yes, there is less violence today in Quebec than in the seventies, but that situation is not different across the country. It may have served its point then, but there is still violence today on picket lines in Quebec. I'm not saying I'm the same type of attorney as Mr. McDermott is--I don't have his experience--but I'm a practitioner. I practise labour law, I represent employers, and I do have to appear before Superior Court when there are conflicts because there is violence on picket lines. So disregard the fact that there is anti-scab legislation in Quebec. It has not removed all violence on the picket lines.

Take, for example, office workers who have nothing to do with the dispute and who report for work because they are not on strike, and who are exposed to vandalism and threats because they cross the picket lines to get to work. They are not replacement workers, they are people who keep working for the employer in another area. There are situations where you are forced to go to court for an injunction to stop people from committing acts of violence on the picket line.

In my opinion, there is no place for violence in labour relations. The enactment of anti-replacement worker legislation had an impact in the 1970's, when violence incidences were much more frequent. I could also talk about the 1980s, before I became a lawyer. I was a Montreal police officer back then, and I experienced some violent situations on picket lines. But I do not think anti-scab legislation is a miracle cure. It is not a panacea.