Evidence of meeting #4 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was officers.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
Mr. Chair, I think the questions have to be related to the subject. I don't care if the people have political principles or positions in life. I want questions about the study we're making.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Phil McColeman
Now you're making debate on this issue. This is not to be debated. I've made my decision. If you choose to challenge me on my decision, you're within your rights to do that.
No more debate; no more comments about it. If you choose to challenge me, go ahead.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Phil McColeman
We'll have a recorded vote.
The question is, should my decision be sustained?
(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 6; nays 4)
Conservative
Conservative
Devinder Shory Conservative Calgary Northeast, AB
I'm moving forward now, Mr. Chair, on Bill C-4.
I have a quote from Mr. Dias, from a Unifor press release. It's on Bill C-4. They say, “The government should look to strengthen health and safety provisions, not destroy them.”
Do you agree with that quote?
Conservative
Devinder Shory Conservative Calgary Northeast, AB
Thank you.
Well, now we have heard from officials that these amendments would not harm health and safety laws, the Canada Labour Code would continue to be enforced, and in fact worker safety would be improved. The right to refuse unsafe work remains intact. Some of these amendments give a stronger role to unions. Workers will be expected to report to and work with their health and safety committees, which include union representatives.
Is this something you support?
Conservative
Devinder Shory Conservative Calgary Northeast, AB
The question is, do you support the enhancement of union presence in those representations?
Director, Health, Safety and Environment, Unifor
Well, I don't know how union representation...not all workplaces are organized, so this would apply to workplaces that are unorganized as well.
The principle, certainly, of joint health and safety committees is the participation of all workplace parties to ensure health and safety in the workplace.
Conservative
Devinder Shory Conservative Calgary Northeast, AB
They have more than 20 health and safety committees.
I want to go back to your previous comments, because officials mentioned that all parties have that right to appeal. One of the answers I heard was that there is no right of appeal, and also that the minister is not responsible for the final decision; it will be the committee.
My question is, do you agree with the previous witnesses that the health and safety of workers under these amendments is maintained and in fact improves...? Of course, taxes are additional resources freed by the streamlining of the system. Do you not feel that it is disingenuous to suggest to workers and their families that there could be catastrophic effects from these amendments?
Director, Health, Safety and Environment, Unifor
I have certainly not used the word “catastrophic”. Those are your words. However, we do oppose the changes to the health and safety provisions contained in Bill C-4.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Phil McColeman
Thank you. We'll move on to our next questioner.
It's your five minutes, Madame Groguhé.
NDP
Sadia Groguhé NDP Saint-Lambert, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We are called upon to discuss a very important issue for employees. So I will focus solely on that topic.
The previous witnesses talked about a figure of 80%, but it is not known where that statistic comes from. How many cases are covered by that 80%? We don't know that either. What circumstances led to the conclusion that no danger existed? That question could not be answered either. Despite that, amendments to the legislation are proposed, so as to restrict employees' rights as much as possible.
What do you think will be the consequences of transferring to the Minister of Labour the powers of occupational health and safety officers? What will be the consequences of that transfer on the investigation process?
Director, Health, Safety and Environment, Unifor
As I maintained in my presentation, health and safety officers are neutral and they are trained. They are the experts on resolving issues in the workplace. To call a health and safety officer into the workplace, the parties have really reached the end of a resolution process in the workplace. The communication has broken. How do you fix that? Do you bring in a neutral party? But if the minister is getting those issues, how is the minister, then, the neutral and trained party for that? And who will the minister then call in? Why would we not leave the language already in the legislation, having the trained and neutral officers come in to help the workplace party resolve the issue? If we're so concerned about health and safety violations happening in the workplace, you need to have a well-trained workforce. Perhaps the answer is to have more training in the workplace so that the workplace parties have the tools necessary to look at preventative methods of looking at and identifying the hazards in the workplace. That's what health and safety's mandate is in the workplace. It's identifying the hazards and either eliminating or mitigating the exposure to those hazards. That's through training and knowledge.
NDP
Sadia Groguhé NDP Saint-Lambert, QC
What do you think will be the consequences of removing the words “exposure to a hazardous substance” from that definition?
November 19th, 2013 / 5:15 p.m.
Director, Health, Safety and Environment, Unifor
As our world of work is continuously evolving, so are the exposures to new chemicals that are entering our workplaces. Nanotechnology is a great example; it is entering our workplaces. If you don't have a broad definition, as we currently have, how would the workplace parties be able to rely on the structure for identifying it consistently so that everyone has the same understanding?
By the shift in this new definition, making it more streamlined—I don't know what “streamlined” actually means—in our belief, you are limiting what the focus will be on the different exposures, especially cancer-causing substances in the workplace, which are becoming more and more abundant.
When we're looking at changes to the global harmonization system and the safety data sheet information that we'll be giving to our members to decipher, how is that going to be helping with the new streamlined definition and all the tools that are available to the workplace parties to mitigate exposures to danger?
NDP
Sadia Groguhé NDP Saint-Lambert, QC
Following the changes made to the code, what do you think about the role employers will have to play when faced with their employees' refusal to work owing to a danger?
Director, Health, Safety and Environment, Unifor
That certainly places workers in very vulnerable situations. People rely on their work to be safe and healthy. If you are limiting their last resort of ensuring that they go home at the end of the day to their families and that they are able to continue being employed in a healthy and safe manner, it places many people in some very precarious positions.
Conservative
Brad Butt Conservative Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, ladies. Thank you very much for being here.
I think you were here for some, if not all, of the deputation by the two officials from the ministry of labour. They were unequivocal in their assertion that there are no changes proposed in this bill that would not allow a worker to refuse to work in an unsafe condition.
Do you believe this bill will not allow a worker to refuse to work in an unsafe area?
