Human Resources Committee on Dec. 14th, 2021

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

The purpose of our amendment is to ensure that where an employee has more favourable rights or benefits than those provided for in the bill, those rights and benefits prevail and replace those provided for in the bill.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Are there no further questions?

I will call for the vote on amendment CPC-2.

(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4)

(Clause 7 as amended agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)

I understand there's an NDP amendment, NDP-4?

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This is the last amendment. It aims to correct what we think is an inequity in the bill.

We asked the question earlier today and the answer was clear: in the legislation, all employees start at the same starting line. The new employee gets one day of sick leave per month, as does the employee who has worked for the company for several years. Therefore, an employee’s seniority does not confer any advantage.

What we are proposing is the recognition of this seniority as soon as the legislation comes into force. An employee with at least two years’ seniority in a company would therefore immediately be deemed to have earned ten days’ sick leave for the coming year, rather than having to wait and earn one day’s leave per month, as the new employee does.

We feel that this would be a recognition that the employee has been with the company for a long time and does not have to start from scratch in the same way as a new employee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Mr. Long.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Thank you, MP Boulerice.

Can I get an opinion from the officials on this?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

You certainly can. Who would you wish to speak to this?

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

It could be whoever would like to, maybe Mr. Brown.

[Andrew Brown]

Thank you. The amendment as moved would provide to employees referred to as having a sort of seniority—so having at least two years of experience with that employer—the ability to start at the outset with 10 days of medical leave with pay, without having to earn those in the first year.

Certainly as I understood that, it would impact the majority of employees, who would certainly have some experience. I don't have the figure for who would have more than two years of experience, but I would certainly say the majority of employees would be starting with 10 days rather than starting with zero and having to earn one day per month, effectively, to reach that maximum of 10. It would presumably make sense to frame this in terms of “continuous employment”, which is a term that is already used within the Canada Labour Code.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Is that okay, Mr. Long?

Okay. Are there any other questions?

Mr. Jeneroux.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Thanks.

Can I just get Mr. Brown's opinion?

Is this retroactive?

[Andrew Brown]

I think the way to refer to this would be retrospective, and I'll clarify the distinction there. It would be looking at the period of time for which an employee has been working with an employer, and so that could be looking at a period of time that predates a coming into force, assuming that this comes into force.

So it would be looking backwards to determine when the employee started to work for the employer. However, as to when an employee would be eligible to receive or be eligible to take those days of paid sick leave, that would be moving forward—so from the time that this legislation would come into force, assuming that it gets passage.

That would be the distinction between retroactive and retrospective. It would look backwards to consider the period of employment with the employer.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

The committee has heard amendment NDP-4, moved by Mr. Boulerice.

I will call for the vote on NDP-4.

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Amendment NDP-4 is defeated.

(On clause 8)

We will now proceed to clause 8.

Mr. Jeneroux.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

I'm sorry, is this the coming-into-force piece? Yes. I have no amendment, but I just want to highlight the minister's words. He was very clear that he wanted this to come into force, in his words, before Christmas. As I'm reading this, that will not be possible with this particular clause of the bill, which he wrote. I'd just ask for some clarification from the officials that I'm reading this correctly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Which official must address Mr. Jeneroux's question?

[Douglas Wolfe]

I can respond to that.

The coming-into-force date is upon order of the Governor in Council. That could be at a moment to be decided in the future, or that will be decided in the future. As you heard from the minister, I think there is a considerable interest in having this come into force as soon as possible.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Mr. Wolfe, it's good to see you again. We have a lot of history together on my bill.

Just to be clear, within the two sections, subclause 8(1) reads that it's coming into force “on the 30th day after the day on which this Act receives royal assent”. From our experience, royal assent took essentially three months in our case, but they're saying 30 days after the day. If it passes in the Senate, let's say, next week, it would still require those days to get to royal assent, and then an additional 30 days on top of that. Royal assent usually takes about a day or two after it passes in the Senate, so we're looking at, probably, some time later in January. Am I doing my math right here, Mr. Wolfe?

[Douglas Wolfe]

Excuse me, I think there's been a slight mix-up here. I think you may be referring to the Criminal Code coming into force.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

It's subclause 8(1), so sections 6 and 7, referred to in subclause 8(2), would describe when the sick days would come into force.

[Douglas Wolfe]

Yes, for the sick days provisions, they are coming into force by Governor in Council, but—

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Is it typical to have subclauses of the bill split like this?

[Douglas Wolfe]

It's fairly typical when different provisions are put together, as they have been in this bill.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Okay. Thanks for hearing me out, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Did that address your issues, Mr. Jeneroux?

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Yes, I think so. Part of what we were looking to do was to split the bill into two at one point. I think that probably highlights the initial need for that. In the interest of getting this passed for a variety of reasons, particularly the sick leave piece, I think it's important that we move forward. Again, when the minister comes here and states one thing and then we're left here to pick up the pieces on the rest, it gets to be a little bit cumbersome on our end.

Thank you to Mr. Wolfe and to all the officials for taking the time to explain the nuances of this piece of legislation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Jeneroux.

Shall clause 8 carry? It will be a recorded vote.

(Clause 8 agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)

Shall the title carry? It will be a recorded vote.

(Title agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)

Shall the bill as amended carry? It will be a recorded vote.

(Bill C-3 as amended agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 )

Shall the chair report the bill as amended to the House? It will be a recorded vote.

(Reporting of bill to the House agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)

Shall the committee order a reprint of the bill as amended for the use of the House at report stage? It will be a recorded vote.

(Reprint of bill agreed to: yeas 11, nays 0)

Thank you, committee members. That concludes the clause-by-clause reading of Bill C-3 and the approval to proceed from here.

I want at this time to thank the committee members for their work, and especially the staff of committee members and the minister's staff. I know that a lot of work has gone into this. It was a tight timeline, and this committee achieved consideration and approval of the bill. Thank you very much.

Mr. Ruff?