Human Resources Committee on April 11th, 2024

[The Chair (Mr. Robert Morrissey (Egmont, Lib.)), Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

I call this meeting to order. It is 8:15, and the clerk has advised me that we have quorum. The witnesses and committee members who are appearing virtually have been sound-tested, and all are good.

Welcome to meeting number 107 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person, as well as remotely using Zoom.

I would like to give a few points to the participants.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. If you are participating by video conference, you can click on the microphone icon to activate your mic. Please mute yourself when not speaking.

Those on Zoom have the choice, as do those in the room, of participating in the official language of their choice. In the room, interpretation is available using the headset and earpiece; just select the language of your choice. Those appearing virtually can click on the globe icon at the bottom of their Surface and choose the language of their choice.

If there is an issue with sound quality and interpretation, please get my attention. We'll suspend while it's being corrected. Those appearing virtually, use the “raise hand” function.

As well, please direct all questions and inquiries through me, the chair.

Those in the room, please remember to keep your earpieces away from the microphones to prevent injury to the interpreters, who do an extremely valuable service for us. As well, if you could remember to speak slowly, that will give them the opportunity to translate effectively.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, October 18, 2023, the committee is continuing its study of Bill C-58, an act to amend the Canada Labour Code and the Canada Industrial Relations Board Regulations, 2012.

Appearing in the first hour, we have, from the Confédération des syndicats nationaux, Caroline Senneville, president, who will deliver the opening comments; Ioanna Egarhos, lawyer; and Pascal Jean political adviser. From the International Longshore and Warehouse Union Canada, we have Robert Ashton, president, by video conference. From the United Steelworkers union, we have Marty Warren, national director, who will deliver the opening statement; and Meg Gingrich, assistant to the national director.

We will begin with Ms. Senneville.

For your opening comments, you have five minutes or less, please. You have the floor.

[Caroline Senneville, President, Confédération des syndicats nationaux]

Good morning. Thank you for having us.

I'll give a brief introduction to the CSN. The CSN is a union organization dating back over 100 years in Quebec and Canada. We have over 330,000 members in all industries, in both the private and public sectors. In terms of federally regulated organizations, we represent employees in the communications and grain elevator industries. The CSN also counts the Union of Canadian Correctional Officers among its members. We call ourselves the federation of national trade unions because we're active only in Quebec and Canada. We don't have any international ties.

I'm pleased and touched to be here today. You're studying a bill of vital importance to all Canadian workers. This doesn't happen often. There are all kinds of bills. However, for Canadian workers, Bill C‑58 is essential. I think that many people share this opinion. All parties in the House voted in favour of this bill at second reading.

As you know—and I'll say it again—the right to associate is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In recent years, this right has been tied in with good faith negotiations. When we associate, we have the right to negotiate in good faith. We also have the right to use a balance of power to negotiate in good faith and obtain a good collective agreement. Two Supreme Court rulings have set out these rights.

It's simple for us. If replacement workers are allowed in the event of a labour dispute, this flies in the face of the constitutional rights of Canadian workers as they now stand.

A strike is no picnic. The decision isn't made lightly. Labour codes provide a strict framework for exercising the right to strike and for obtaining a right to strike. We must have a secret ballot. When we're alone in the voting booth and we mark X in favour of a strike, we know when it will start, but we don't know when it will end. We often talk about the economic impact of a strike. However, these effects are mainly felt by the people exercising their right to strike. The decision is never made lightly.

For us, the right to strike is part of the balance of power. When the employer can hire replacement workers, it really upsets the balance of power. It even eliminates that balance, especially in the case of a lockout. Think about a lockout. A lockout isn't a democratic decision. It's a management decision. There isn't any vote on a lockout. The employer can make the decision well in advance and prepare by hiring workers or preparing to hire replacement workers. The employer holds all the cards. The balance of power on the workers' side is gone. In our opinion, this isn't right. I would even say that it completely contravenes the spirit of the charter or the latest Supreme Court rulings.

We're here to talk about Bill C‑58. We have some specific comments on the bill. We're pleased to see that it takes into account the new work reality and environment, including telework, and different workplaces. We come from a province with anti‑scab legislation. We're happy about that. However, the legislation has been in place for a long time, and adjustments are needed. This federal bill is completely up to date, and we welcome it.

That said, one of our main criticisms concerns the list of exceptions regarding employees who may not be hired as scabs. We find that the list of exceptions is quite long, and that it undermines the spirit or purpose of the bill. I would say, to use an image, that we're starting to see a few too many holes, and not enough cheese.

In our view, the only real exception that justifies hiring replacement workers is when essential services must be provided. Let's be clear. Essential services come into play when people's lives and safety are at risk. In Quebec, we have operated in this manner for over 40 years. No one has ever died or gone hungry because of a strike.

We also hope that the Canada Industrial Relations Board will have the resources needed to ensure the implementation of this bill. When a bill is passed, only half the work is done. The next step must involve ensuring the implementation of the provisions in the bill. It's vital to have an investigative process. We're all law‑abiding citizens here. However, if people knew that there weren't any police on the highway, I'm not sure that they would respect the speed limit.

In closing, since this bill is essential, we would like to see it come into force as soon as possible.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Senneville.

Next is Mr. Ashton for five minutes or less.

[Robert Ashton, President, International Longshore and Warehouse Union Canada]

Thank you, Chair.

Good morning from B.C. Thank you for allowing me this opportunity to be before you all today.

My name is Rob Ashton. I'm the president of ILWU Canada, which represents 16,000 workers in B.C. and Saskatchewan in a variety of sectors, our largest sector being the maritime sector.

Members of ILWU Canada strongly support Bill C-58, and we urge this committee to wholeheartedly support this bill to make it better for workers who vote in Canada.

Strikes and lockouts are not easy on workers, and that's why the decision to go on strike is made by the rank and file of the union. The decision to go on strike is one that workers make as a last resort to try to get a fairly negotiated settlement with their employers, but it's definitely at a financial loss for these workers.

In regard to a lockout, the worker has no say in this, and employers impose this on them to break them as a united workforce. In fact, employers use this option to cripple workers financially in the hopes they will become desperate and accept a lesser deal just to go back to work.

Employers use terms like “team member” or “you're part of the family”, but then turn around and use scabs when the bottom line might be impacted. Employers that use scabs do not, never have and never will, care about their workers. They only see a path towards more profits, and in doing so, they hurt their employees, while tearing communities apart. In my opinion, employers who use scabs have no regard for these consequences.

When a strike or lockout happens, employers currently have an option to use scab labour. This puts the balance of power in the employer's hands, as it keeps their products moving, while at the same time turning worker against worker. This is a weapon of the bosses, and can and will be used to break the backs of Canadians so they can pocket more of the profits that are made off the backs of their employees.

In the history of ILWU Canada in the longshore division, scabs were utilized on June 18, 1935. This day has been immortalized as the Battle of Ballantyne Pier. On that day, longshore workers marched to the terminal to explain to the scabs that scabbing on them was not the right thing to do, and that standing shoulder to shoulder with their fellow workers would help strengthen all workers and give the longshoremen of the day a better chance at the bargaining table. What happened was these workers and allies were attacked by police and private constables with batons and other weapons, who also used tear gas as well at the women's auxiliary aid station. This, I might add, was the first time tear gas was used on Canadians in Canada. This was done just because they were there.

The use of scabs created conditions for violence perpetrated by employers and others against peaceful picketers, who were only fighting for a fair collective agreement. This attack is an example of what some employers and some governments feel is the only way to end a strike or a lockout while scabs are being used.

We wholeheartedly support Bill C-58 so that history does not have a chance to repeat itself and that will get workers get a fair shake to get a freely negotiated collective agreement by the banning of scab labour federally.

We are asking with urgency that this committee reduce the wait time for implementation of this bill to zero wait time. Canadian workers need this bill passed and put into law with zero delay to level the playing field, as they say. Canadian workers have waited long enough and expect our elected representatives to do what is right for workers.

In closing, I'd like to offer a message to the working class. If you are an environmentalist or a pipeline worker, a small shop owner or a longshoreman—we're all workers—do not let the employing class split us, as division is the weapon of the employing class.

To our elected officials as well as anyone else listening, I leave you all with a question from Pete Seeger in regard to Bill C-58—Which Side Are You On?

Thank you for giving me this time to speak.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Ashton.

We will now go to Marty Warren for the United Steelworkers Union.

Mr. Warren, you have five minutes or less.

[Marty Warren, National Director, United Steelworkers Union]

Thank you, Chair.

Through you, thank you to the clerk and to the members of the committee for the chance to join you today.

I'm Marty Warren. I'm the national director for the United Steelworkers Union. The USW is the largest private sector union in North America, with 225,000 members in nearly every economic sector across Canada, including federally regulated members in rail, telecommunications, airport security and ports.

Steelworkers have been part of the anti-scab fight for decades. Our experience shows that bans on replacement workers improve labour relations, reduce the number and lengths of conflicts, and lead to better working and living standards for workers.

Strikes and lockouts are hard enough on the community, but the use of scabs pits workers against workers, neighbours against neighbours and, sometimes, even family members against family members. Further, it leads to decades of poor labour relations moving forward.

Anti-scab legislation already exists in B.C. and Quebec. Soon, Manitoba will be added to the list. We were happy when the NDP included the anti-scab legislation in the supply and confidence agreement, and when the Liberals tabled that legislation.

That said, it still falls short. It currently has loopholes, and employers will hire scabs and not live up to the intent of the legislation. Further, the delay of its coming into force is not reasonable. It's way too long.

As you can see from our submission, we have some clear recommendations to solve the problems.

First, anyone doing the job of a worker who is on strike or locked out must be included in the ban, no matter when they were hired. As it stands, as long as they were hired or contracted on or before the notice to bargain was served, employers could still use scabs who are from outside of the bargaining unit, from other locations, managerial or confidential employees, or contractors or employees from another employer.

Of course, we accept exceptions for work needed to prevent an imminent threat to life, health and safety, destruction of property or environmental damage.

This brings me to the second recommendation, which is that an agreement about who would perform the conservation work needs to be made between both the employer and the union. The bill currently leaves it to the employer alone. If both sides can't agree, it should go to the Industrial Relations Board. Unions should have the right of first refusal to perform such work.

Third, any temporary employee hired to do conservation work cannot automatically become an employee in the bargaining unit. The current language would give preferential reinstatement to scabs over existing employees after the strike or lockout. That just doesn’t make sense.

Fourth, it needs to be clear that dependent contractors are not allowed to perform bargaining committee work. The bill specifically excludes dependent contractors from the ban, even though the Labour Code defines “employee” to include dependent contractors. The exception needs to be removed from proposed paragraph 94(4)(b).

Fifth, the waiting period for the IRB needs to be cut from 90 days to 45 days. At very least, the IRB needs to issue an interim or bottom-line decision within 45 days. Employers already take advantage of delays at the IRB for months and even years. Again, that has to be fixed, not allowed to get worse.

Finally, and very importantly, the delay before the implementation of this bill, once passed, needs to be scrapped. We have heard from public sector servants with experience that there's no need for this delay. If the government is serious about the law, it needs to come into force before the next election. It's far easier for the next government, whatever stripe it may be, to scrap a law that people haven't yet been able to use.

Workers can't afford to wait. In just the last year, we had members at our tugboat operations in Quebec and our telecom workers in B.C. stuck on the line when scabs came through.

In both of these cases, if they had been provincially regulated, they would have had the protection of anti-scab legislation, but since they were not, they did not.

For the good of all federally regulated workers, and to set an example to the provinces who still fall short, please accept and pass these amendments, and let Bill C-58 pass for implementation.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Warren

We'll now begin the first round of questioning with Ms. Ferreri for six minutes, please.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you so much to our witnesses for being here. Thanks for representing so many amazing Canadians across the country who literally take care of us in so many different ways.

To Mr. Warren, I have a wonderful facility in my riding of Peterborough—Kawartha, the Canadian Welding Skills college. It's a great organization, and a lot of those folks go on to be steelworkers, obviously.

A lot of the messages I'm getting from some of these steelworkers, including some of the amazing women who are in this trade, whom I'm so proud of, are that they're really having a hard time—and we've heard this from other witnesses—with housing and the cost of living. These kinds of things are impacting them to a great degree. Child care is something we've heard about from other witnesses as well.

Are these issues you're hearing from your workers as well?

[Marty Warren]

Yes. There's no doubt that those are the issues of the day, but I can tell you, that's why belonging to a union, having collective bargaining and having anti-scab legislation are so important. We know that those who belong to a union have a better chance to push back on inflation and to go to the bargaining table to argue about the cost of living.

For many reasons, inflation is high right now, and again, I can't emphasize enough why the anti-scab legislation is so important to level the playing field, so when workers go to bargain, to offset stuff, as you've mentioned, there's a level playing field to do so.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Yes, I think so, for sure.

I think one of the crazy statistics that came out this past week was that you need 64% of your pre-tax income to cover housing. It used be 34%, and now we're sitting at 64%.

When we look at retention and recruitment, or just families—I'm shadow minister for families, children and social development—you see a real stressor on the families of trying to find that housing, if they can even find it.

Obviously, you represent across the country. Are you finding some areas worse than others or finding that housing issue being a key factor?

[Marty Warren]

No, I think, for sure, housing is a factor for all working people, whether it's the limited amount of homes or affordable living on the market, or whether it's structural change that has to happen in the real estate market.

Quite frankly, I don't want to go deeply into it, and I respect all the realtors—they are just working within their framework—but with the idea of this blind bidding, this “I have to go in with my best offer”, we hear stories of people spending $60,000 more on a home than the closest bid, but it was a blind bidding process. What does that do for the cost of housing? Once one house on the street sells for $60,000 over market price, obviously, that sets the new trend.

I think there are many factors, but everybody is obviously struggling or trying to find ways to have affordable homes and affordable rent.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

One of the girls I know, who is a steelworker—she's incredible—just sent me this message. She said that she just went to get butter, and it went from $4.99 and increased 83% to over $8 now.

These are simple things, when we look at the impact on these workers being able to show up for work and being stressed and all those things you also spoke about. I think it's good to hear from you guys because you represent these people who are truly building our country. It's nice to hear your feedback on that.

[Marty Warren]

As I said, that's why it's so important to be able to join a union and that it's not full of barriers and loopholes, and most importantly, to have a level playing field when you get to the bargaining table so that we can put those issues forward so that everybody—all workers—can afford the dream.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

One thing we heard about from some of the witnesses as well was contract services. We know that in 2015 in the Liberal election platform, Justin Trudeau promised to save billions by reducing the use of external consultants, but in realty spending on outsourcing has increased nearly 60% from the $10.4 billion spent when the Liberals took office.

[Caroline Senneville]

Ms. Ferreri, in my remarks, I said that this bill was essential for the working class. You used almost all your speaking time to ask questions that had nothing to do with the bill. If you want to invite us to a parliamentary committee to discuss housing or inflation, we would be happy to participate. However, this is a historic moment for working people. I would really like to hear questions about the bill.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you, Ms. Senneville.

Then you don't think these are important questions, in terms of the workers you represent and how it impacts them. The question I just asked is in regard to external consultants, so I'm curious—

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

There wasn't any interpretation of what Ms. Ferreri just said.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Please continue, Ms. Ferreri.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

I'll go back to Mr. Warren, if I may, because we heard about external consultants from other witnesses.

I'm curious how this impacts your workers when we see an increase of nearly 60% from the $10.4 billion that was spent when the Liberals took office.

[Marty Warren]

Again, I'd like to emphasize what Caroline said, as well. We're really here to talk about some important legislation that can level the playing field in collective bargaining, so people can carve out a better living for themselves and their families.

Your question, though, was....

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

It was about external consultants. We've heard from other witnesses about it.

[Marty Warren]

I'm going to stay in my zone, which is the steelworkers' zone and representing workers, so politically....

How many contractors are used? Yes, I'm very concerned about contracting out and offshoring in the telecom sector, but that's a separate discussion, so I'll leave it at that.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Okay, thanks for that.

Ms. Senneville, do you have any concerns about external consultants?

[Caroline Senneville]

I have many concerns about the bill, such as its effective date and the number of exceptions it includes. The fact remains that this bill is crucial to industrial peace. Like my colleague here, I would say that one reason for the anti‑scab legislation in Quebec is the violent incidents that occurred on picket lines and the breakdown of communities. These situations showed people the need for this type of legislation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Ferreri.

Mr. Collins, go ahead for six minutes.