Human Resources Committee on April 8th, 2024

[Bea Bruske]

I would absolutely be in agreement that this bill ought to be expanded to include all public service workers. We think that's an oversight and we think all employees should have the protection of this bill.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

I would like to address another aspect. The purpose of anti‑scab legislation isn't to create conflict. It's quite the opposite. We sometimes hear people say that, with this type of legislation in place, disputes will escalate and last longer. However, that isn't true.

One factor is missing from the equation. I would like you to tell me about it. You already touched on it. The replacement of strikers interferes with harmonious labour relations and may constitute a violation of the right to strike. This right is now recognized by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, an integral part of the Constitution.

Can you explain how this legislation will contribute to harmonious relations, rather than having the opposite effect?

[Bea Bruske]

Absolutely. We see the right to strike as a charter right, and we believe the right to strike really is the right to reach a fair collective agreement. Again, as I noted right off the top, no worker goes to a bargaining table and says, “I want to go on strike because I think it would be nice to have a break from work.” Nobody says that.

The reality is that people want a fair deal so they can clothe, feed and house their families; so they can have a good workplace relationship with their employers; so they can address the issues that are at play within their workplace, whether they're health and safety, respect and dignity, hours of work, training or otherwise.

This legislation forces both parties to be very thoughtful about their approach at the bargaining table. It forces the parties to actually want to conclude a collective agreement and to deal with the issues at hand and to take the opportunity to have in-depth, longer conversations, rather than glibly saying, “no” or glibly saying, “We actually need this and we're pushing this agenda through.”

The right to strike, the right to collective bargaining and the right to representation as charter rights are critically important to us, and this is simply modernizing what needs to happen in labour relations in Canada.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Chabot.

To finish, I'll give the floor to Mr. Boulerice for two and a half minutes.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Bruske, you spoke about the 90‑day period, which you find a bit long and which you would like to see shortened to 45 days.

In our previous discussions, we talked a great deal about the resources of the Canada Industrial Relations Board, such as its human resources, financial resources and training capacity. None of this is written in the bill. However, it does have an impact in real life. I'm thinking in particular of the ability to check whether replacement workers are secretly being used, to send inspectors out into the field, or to carry out investigations and audits.

In your opinion, how important is it for the board to have these resources?

[Bea Bruske]

I have a great amount of respect for the Canada Industrial Relations Board, for the chair and for all of the workers there who really work very hard to ensure that workers and employers get fair treatment when it comes to issues of dispute or whatever the issue of the day might be.

We need to make sure that board is properly resourced, that training and recruitment can happen and that we have long-term staff who are very well trained and have years of experience. These are difficult and challenging situations in which to try to intervene as a mediator or as a conciliation officer in a dispute, so you need to have the trust and respect of the parties. That means having a decades-long ability to understand the nuances that happen at the bargaining table and where the pressure is coming from for both the employer and the employee group, and being able to actually provide that assistance to those groups.

Making sure we have the resources at the Canada Industrial Relations Board is critically important so they can do the hard work that we as a society are all relying on.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you. I completely agree with you, of course. I just wanted to focus on that aspect.

You spoke about the 18‑month implementation period. It's spring 2024. The committee is currently studying the bill, which will then return to the House for third reading before being sent to the Senate. Since the current government is a minority one, we don't know when the next federal election will be.

You argued for a period shorter than 18 months. What would be the impact of maintaining such a long period?

[Bea Bruske]

Again, the impact would be more chance of ongoing strikes happening in that 18-month period of time.

We want to get to a point where there is more of an impetus for parties to gain a collective agreement struck at the bargaining table. We think 18 months, quite frankly, is far too long. We are looking for a much shorter window of time. That means the CIRB needs to be properly resourced and have their needs met in order to deal with the essential services component of it, give decisions in a more timely manner and make sure they are staffing up in anticipation of this particular bill being passed.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Boulerice.

That concludes this hour.

I want to thank the witnesses for attending and addressing the questions from the committee members.

We'll suspend for a few moments, then go in camera to resume committee business.

[Proceedings continue in camera]