Human Resources Committee on Jan. 30th, 2007

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I'm delighted to join the committee and join my fellow parliamentarians, some of whom I know, some of whom I don't, but I look forward to getting to know you and I look forward to being on this committee with my colleagues.

This is hitting the ground running on a new committee, this is not easing into it. This is a very significant issue for Canadians. I have supported Bill C-257. I supported a similar bill last year when I was on the government side. Having had a chance to look at some of the past testimony—and I haven't looked at all the witnesses, but I spent a fair amount of time, as I'm sure my colleagues have—it's a complicated issue and it's not quite as cut and dried as it might seem. So I look forward to the opportunity to hear witnesses. It means a lot to me to hear from Mr. Hattin particularly, whose company is potentially directly involved in the ramifications of what this bill might do. I appreciate your coming and talking to us.

I was struck by something Mr. Sinclair said, which was quoting the B.C. Minister of Labour in the Liberal government asking why upset the quietest labour relations in 50 years.

If legislation like the one we're looking at but at the provincial level in B.C. hasn't caused problems, maybe it's not so bad. I wonder if the representatives of business would indicate to me.... You must have had some representation to government in B.C. since the government changed. Are you surprised or disappointed that the government hasn't seen fit to rescind the replacement workers legislation that was brought in by the NDP?

[Doug Alley]

Let me answer part of it, and I'll turn to Jerry to answer the other part.

There's a perception that there isn't a problem. There is a problem in B.C. with this legislation. There have been businesses that have shut down because of it, and we've got examples of that, if you'd like to hear them some other time. We have made representations to the government, and Jerry can comment on that.

[Jerry Lampert]

It might be useful if you gave one example, Doug.

[Doug Alley]

Yes. There's a newspaper company, for example, in the Comox Valley area, at which 140 employees went on strike. The employer told the union well in advance that he had to make changes to his operations in order to survive. Within a couple of weeks of the strike starting, people who had used him as their printer and everything had found alternate suppliers. So by the time they got ready to even resolve it, they couldn't, because the guy had gone out of business. He couldn't get his customers back.

This inevitably happens in a labour dispute. Once there is a dispute, whoever you are, if you're relying on somebody to get you something, you find an alternate. So when people say that it's not a difficulty, you know what people will do? They'll start transporting their stuff through the States instead of through Canada, or they'll find alternate ways of doing it. Once you've lost it, you've lost it, and it's very difficult to come back.

[Jerry Lampert]

In terms of the direct question, we are disappointed. We have advocated on an annual basis since the current government took power that there be a change to the labour code. I think for political reasons the government has chosen not to move on this, and that's legitimate. They have their political reasons for making these decisions. We have tried to convince them to take another look at this part of the B.C. code, and they've decided, to date, not to, but that's not to say that we won't continue to try to have them do so.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I'd be interested in those examples, because I haven't seen specific evidence of how evil this is going to be at the provincial level. If you can give me that, I might even talk to somebody in that company and try to understand that.

[A voice]

He's no longer in business.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Yes, but he's still alive, I hope. It didn't kill him.

[A voice]

I don't know. I don't know if it did.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Mr. Hattin, regarding your business, I have heard from businesses in my own riding that have said they're concerned about this, and they've given me different reasons. You were asked a little bit, I think by Mr. Hiebert, about the example. Can you tell me specifically what infrastructure you are most concerned would be affected if Bill C-257 became law?

[Robert Hattin]

For us, any disruption is like when you talk about the “value chain” and any link in the chain that gets broken is the one that is your weakest link. I guess really it's the transportation of the goods and services that would be most affected by a disruption, just because there are so many people who touch that particular good or service. That's probably the biggest one that would immediately impact us. The fact that it's such an omnibus bill--we talked about essential services and things like that, and I'm not a labour lawyer, so I can't address that specifically--is probably more overhanging.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Have you had those kinds of disruptions in the past ten years?

[Robert Hattin]

No, and that's been the good part about it.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Savage.

We're going to move to our next questioner, Monsieur Lessard, for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I also wish to thank all those who travelled some distance in order to share with us their opinion on this piece of legislation.

I have 35 years of experience in labour relations, and when I approach such a situation, I try to identify which arguments are the most enlightening given the responsibility I hold. Our responsibility here is to either adopt or defeat the bill, or amend it so that it can improve labour relations. It is from this perspective that I welcome you here today, just as we have welcomed all other witnesses who have appeared before us.

I will draw upon a statement made by Mr. Laurin earlier, in response to Mr. Sinclair, or someone else, saying that in British Columbia, there are no problems. That would lead us to believe that an anti-scab, or lockout, or replacement worker legislation wouldn't be so bad. At the federal level, since everything is running smoothly, there is no reason to change the legislation either. I am wondering if that statement is indeed true. Just from experience, I would say it is not.

I can call to mind five recent events which occurred in Quebec not too long ago. The first example is Vidéotron. Vidéotron is a telecommunications corporation that specializes in fibre optics, telephony, it is a part of the Péladeau empire, and is subject to the Canada Labour Code. Vidéotron recently went on a 12-month strike, one of the longest strikes ever in recent years. Or was it a lockout?

[A Voice]

It was a lockout.

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

It was a lockout. A 10-month lockout. We saw everything: use of replacement workers, violence, vandalism. It was very rough.

Secur is a cash transportation company and recently experienced a strike of its 900 employees which lasted 20 months. Vidéotron employs 2,200 people.

Cargill is another company which employs longshoremen and specializes in shipping goods. Cargill underwent a strike of 38 months, which at some point turned into a lockout. It became an endless saga in terms of the power struggles, violence, and once again we saw it all. That company is also subject to the Canada Labour Code.

At Radio-Nord, a communications company, employees went on strike for 20 months. The same situation occurred. Replacement workers were used and there was violence and hostility.

These are situations that we are aware of. Such examples lead the Bloc Québécois to assume, at least when comparing the Quebec and Canada Labour Codes, that something is not working in the Canadian legislation, and that measures must be taken. Therefore, our conclusion is different from yours, and Mr. Laurin's.

I'm trying to be very receptive of your opinion, despite my own observations. I'm trying to be open-minded in hearing your arguments, in order, as Mr. Silva was saying earlier, to identify clear examples of the differences between Quebec legislation and British Columbian legislation and to see the differences between the Quebec experience, the British Columbian experience, and the Canadian experience.

I also listened quite attentively when Mr. Hattin talked about businesses that fall under provincial jurisdiction; he said that in order to do business, he must deal with businesses that fall under national jurisdiction. He gave the example of banks, and how cheques are circulated. Less than one per cent of bank employees are unionized, and there have been no conflicts in that area. It has been a very good experience.

In the area of railway transport, railway workers are irreplaceable because their jobs are specialized and require training. If you want to be a good railway worker...

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thirty seconds, Monsieur Lessard. Thirty seconds.

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

I'm still looking for the example which will enlighten me. I'm asking each one of you a question so that you can provide me with an example that will teach me something new and different from what I have gathered from my own research, and which will guide us in the decision that we have to make today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Mr. Laurin.

[Jean Michel Laurin]

How much time do we have?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

We're out of time, so it will be one for Mr. Laurin and one for Mr. Sinclair.

[Jean Michel Laurin]

First of all, I'd like to say that I appreciate your comments. In our opinion, what comes out of all this, according to what all the parties have said, is that nobody likes labour conflicts. With regard to the regulations that are before us, we are concerned because these are services that are said to be very important for the Canadian economy.

The examples you mentioned are examples that we remember, especially if we live in Quebec. However, we try to look at the big picture. We considered the number of grievances and complaints filed with the Canada Industrial Relations Board over the past seven years. There were 18, 13 were withdrawn, 3 were rejected and 2 are still under examination. These figures lead us to believe that the current system works relatively well. As some mentioned earlier, the last time the legislation was reviewed, there was a long debate. The current system does strike a rather delicate balance. Basically, the main concern that we wish to express here today is that there is enormous risk in disturbing that delicate balance. We're very worried about this and we think that passing this bill would be a bad decision.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Laurin.

We're going to give a quick response to Mr. Sinclair and then move to our next questioner.