Human Resources Committee on Nov. 20th, 2025

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

I understand it's not your fault.

Mr. Chair, when I am speaking, is the sound acceptable? I see that Mr. Piper did not hear the interpretation, so I simply want to ensure that it's not too difficult for the interpreters.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Madame Gill, there are issues with the Internet connection that you have.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Is it better if I do a sound test with the technical team? I don't want to waste the witnesses' time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Madame Gill, you....

[A voice]

It should be better now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

We'll give you the time.

Madame Gill, could you repeat your question?

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Indeed, I will move to another question. My intervention was rather long, but I think my question was answered.

Mr. Perry mentioned he had a number of recommendations to make regarding section 107 of the Canada Labour Code. He mentioned them very briefly in his opening remarks. I would like to know if it would be possible for him to send them in detail in writing to the committee for the purposes of our study.

[Capt Tim Perry]

Thank you for the question.

Of course, we would be more than happy to provide any recommendations in writing to the committee.

I'll back up by saying that what we want.... I think we should all agree that disputes are not the point of bargaining. The point of bargaining is to reach collective agreements that work for everybody. If you shortchange the process, then they don't work for everybody in the long run. The reason we're talking about section 107 and the reason it's so important to us is that it undermines the good process from which a good outcome can ultimately be reached.

To answer your question, which I appreciate very much, focusing on section 107...we believe it should be removed from the Canada Labour Code, but our attention should then be directed to the process that precedes it. We want meaningful bargaining to happen right from when a notice to bargain is issued—right from the very beginning. We're finding this is not happening. We're finding that employers are disinterested in having the meaningful, difficult conversations and are leaving so much of it to the end.

When we end up in arbitration, it's quite often the case that it's just a very small number of issues that get addressed. To my colleague's point, many issues go unaddressed, simply by the way things get narrowed through the process of arbitration. There are all sorts of things other than money or pay tables that need serious consideration, and when they go unaddressed, it leads to destabilization of labour relations.

We're talking about a number of things, and I'm just going to try to characterize them, because it really is to provide focused negotiations early in the process that will lead to better outcomes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mrs. Gill.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Mr. Reynolds, go ahead for five minutes.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much, witnesses, for coming here today. I really appreciate your attending in person.

I know that this government has been saying a lot about supporting workers and that they favour workers, but I think we can all agree that actions speak louder than words. The government's actions are very contradictory to what they have been saying regarding the rights of workers.

My first question is for Mr. Piper.

The very foundation of the relationship between an employer and its unionized workforce is based on the ability to collectively bargain in good faith. Do you think that the government's repeated use of section 107 is undermining those relationships?

[Kevin Piper]

We do. We think that section 107 is detrimental to the bargaining process. It unfairly levels the playing field toward the employers.

During the ILWU-BCMEA dispute, they appointed two federal mediators, Mr. Ready and Amanda Rogers, and they came back with recommendations about changes in the way that bargaining should be addressed and the implementation of mediators, and they upheld the right to strike.

That's where our concern is. If recommendations like that aren't implemented, the employers won't change their MO. They're going to continue on the same path that they're on now.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

With the government's tendency to rely on section 107 to force unionized employees back to work and their respective unions into binding arbitration, which prevents strike action, do you think the process shifts the contract negotiations in favour of the employer?

I'll ask that of you, Mr. Perry.

[Capt Tim Perry]

I believe that there's no question that it does shift the bargaining landscape in favour of the employer. It's because no employee group wants these discussions delayed, and this is something that delays meaningful bargaining. To me, it's clearly not in the interest of members or unions, and it's not in the interest of the processes that will lead to stable outcomes.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Again, Mr. Perry, and I'll ask the same question of Mr. Piper: Do you think that this process leads to unions and its members feeling cheated out of their right to collectively bargain in good faith?

[Capt Tim Perry]

Is that for me?

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Yes, Mr. Perry can go first.

[Capt Tim Perry]

I'm going to answer this by saying that no collective agreement has ever been concluded without establishing some trust across the table and some trust in the system. That trust can be fragile, and it takes a long time to re-establish it once it goes away.

I will say that when section 107 or government intervention in general is seen or understood as taking sides, as I said earlier, it creates an unlevel playing field in favour of employers. It undermines trust, which I think is another way of saying that it leads members to feel cheated out of the process.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Go ahead, Mr. Piper.

[Kevin Piper]

I would agree wholeheartedly.

When organized labour believes that the employer and the federal government have an edge—section 107 being that edge—when you begin bargaining, it's problematic. A good round of negotiations and a settlement at the end is generally when both parties leave the table somewhat dissatisfied. That would be the definition of a good round of bargaining and a conclusion to bargaining.

When the employer isn't living up to their end of the bargain, their end of the deal during bargaining, and they're just going through the motions waiting on section 107 to be implemented, that's when everything falls apart. That's a building factor going through negotiations, because you can see that's what is happening across the table. It's not a surprise to anybody as that process builds.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you for your time.

Mr. Joseph for five minutes.

[Natilien Joseph, Liberal, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will address Mr. Tim Perry.

I do not want to go on and on, so I will try to keep my questions brief.

I would like to reiterate that Mr. Tim Perry is a pilot.

That is what you said in the beginning, did you not?

[Capt Tim Perry]

Yes, sir.