International Trade Committee on Dec. 5th, 2023

[Devin Dreeshen]

I think the federal government could make changes to the Canada Labour Code and add additional tools to the tool box when it comes to these types of labour disruptions. The idea would be that the federal Minister of Labour, or the federal cabinet, could impose binding arbitration if collective bargaining fails on critical infrastructure.

I know Mr. Ashton was talking about employees, employers and unions, but when it comes to critical infrastructure, such as ports and airports, this isn't a regular employer-versus-union type of relationship. These are critical pieces of Canadian infrastructure that so many industries and workers across the country depend on to operate efficiently.

As far as the province of Alberta is concerned, obviously the collective bargaining agreement is important. There is a place for unions within Canada, but when it comes to our critical infrastructure, we need to be a country like many other countries around the world that views critical infrastructure as a priority for the nation, to make sure that goods can come in and be sold around the world. We can have good-paying jobs across the entire country and not let a union with 8,000 terminal workers, at a physical site of critical infrastructure, keep an entire country hostage when it come to exporting and importing goods.

That is something the federal government should do to make sure we can protect critical infrastructure in Canada.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

I don't know if you'll be able to answer me or comment on the following question, but I'll ask it anyway.

What is your opinion on Bill C‑58, which would prohibit the use of replacement workers?

Could that help in terms of negotiations and speed things up?

[Devin Dreeshen]

When you look at Canada's competitiveness overall, we need to look at other countries and how countries that have better competitiveness markers deal with their unions and their businesses and how they operate.

As Mr. Kingston mentioned, there's always a path. Whether it's rerouting certain goods through the U.S., workflows will find a way. When it comes to labour, we want to make sure we are there for Canadian businesses, because they essentially are providing opportunities for people to feed their families. We want to make sure that, especially here in Alberta and across the country, we have a business-friendly environment that allows for good-paying jobs across the country and across Alberta, specifically. As a province, we always want to make sure that we're pro-business and pro-worker, because that will take us a long way toward finding a good quality of life in this country.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Mr. Kingston, you spoke earlier about reputation. The last strike was in 1969. We had another strike this summer, and you're saying it's tarnishing our reputation.

How does this other strike damage our reputation?

[Brian Kingston]

It's had a real impact on our reputation, because it wasn't just the strike. We have had numerous strikes at ports and rail over the past three years. It feels as though not six months passes where CVMA is not somehow engaged in some forthcoming labour disruption in Canada. This is a real problem.

As a result, companies now have to plan to avoid, where possible, or have contingency plans in place, for Canadian ports and key pieces of transportation infrastructure that can disrupt their production schedules. It has done reputational damage, and Canada has a reputation for being an unreliable jurisdiction for moving product.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We'll move on to Mr. Miao for five minutes, please.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

First, I'd like to thank all the witnesses for being here today.

Last Friday, I had the pleasure of joining Minister Wilkinson in echoing the announcement made in Halifax by Minister Rodriguez, at the Canada Place cruise ship terminal in Vancouver. We were joined by representatives from the Vancouver port authority and the Vancouver board of trade.

Our government is introducing the creation of the green shipping corridor program, which is an investment that will help establish green shipping corridors and help decarbonize the marine sector in major shipping areas in the Pacific, the Great Lakes, the St. Lawrence Seaway and across Canada.

The importance of this green shipping corridor program is to continue our government's commitment to net zero emissions by 2050 and to invest in energy efficiency, which is key to the development of a sustainable and prosperous future for our country.

Mr. Kingston and Mr. Adams, how do you think this program will benefit the automotive sector in the future?

[Brian Kingston]

I admit that I'm not deeply familiar with the program, but I will say that as the industry transitions to electrification, one key benefit of EVs is reducing your life-cycle emissions, which includes everything from the manufacturing of a vehicle to its time on the road.

Reducing emissions throughout the automotive production cycle—including shipping and moving components and parts around the world—will ultimately make this transition have a bigger impact on emissions reductions.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

Mr. Adams.

[David Adams]

The only thing I would add is that I think it's relevant in that shipping has been one area where, frankly, there hasn't been a lot of attention placed on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. They're hugely intense.

To Mr. Kingston's point, any effort that we can make to reduce those emissions contributes to the overall reduction of the life-cycle emissions for a vehicle and its components that are being shipped from anywhere in the world.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

That's great.

Earlier in both of your remarks, you mentioned the impacts of the strike that happened over the summer.

What could be the long-term impact on the competitiveness of the North American automotive industry, especially with the delays in delivering automotive parts and components?

[David Adams]

I can say that from the manufacturing perspective, my two members—I think back to some of the earlier questions—had done some appropriate contingency planning and the manufacturers were minimally impacted by the strike at the port of Vancouver.

Where the impact was greater was with respect to the delivery of after-market parts, for instance, and getting the finished vehicles themselves into consumers' hands. We've already alluded to the fact—and I think everybody knows—that there have been delays in vehicle distribution. Consumers have been waiting months for vehicles, and this has only further exacerbated that situation.

I think that's the primary outcome.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

Mr. Kingston, do you have anything to add?

[Brian Kingston]

In terms of the even longer-term impact, I would just say that the industry right now in North America is going through this technological transformation. The United States is very much trying to create a North American electric vehicle supply chain, to reduce dependence on China and other countries.

As part of that transition, Canada is uniquely positioned. We are in the tent. We are considered an ally and a partner for those critical inputs, but if we can't deliver in terms of having functional transportation infrastructure, the Americans will look elsewhere for those inputs.

I think that in the long term we have a huge opportunity, but we have to make sure that we can actually produce and deliver those inputs on time.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

In your remarks, you mentioned some of the business being diverted to the United States.

Do you see this as a long-term solution to what was experienced due to the strike at the port of Vancouver?

[Brian Kingston]

Unfortunately, I do.

The example I gave is one company that reduced its volumes by 22% through the port of Vancouver. I feel as though we just came through that and now, if you look at the Port of Montreal, we're approaching yet another disruption at the end of this month.

If that's the cadence of these disruptions, then I fear that these diversions will be permanent.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

Mr. Adams, go ahead.

[David Adams]

I think the strike was extremely problematic in terms of having members have to figure out how to off-load through different ports. However, while that was difficult, now they know how to do it, so it will be that much easier to just divert the next time there's a challenge. To Mr. Kingston's point, we're slowly devaluing the importance of our own port infrastructure through these activities.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Trudel, go ahead for two and a half minutes, please.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Mr. Ashton, one of the issues you raised has to do with mitigating the devastating effects of port automation. In the agreement you negotiated, was that issue resolved?

If so, how was it resolved, specifically?

[Robert Ashton]

No, it hasn't been settled, quite frankly. What we have done is to protect a part of our workforce that needed protecting, which was our trades workers. Now, when they bring in new equipment, whether it is automated or conventional, we'll be able to do the trades work on that equipment, and they won't be able to farm it out to somebody else. We still have a lot to do with the member companies.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

All sectors of society are moving towards automation.

As the longshore workers' union, what do you propose to ensure that this automation has the least possible impact on jobs?

[Robert Ashton]

In the longshoring industry on the docks, we don't need to automate our terminals. You need to keep people employed. Why does auto manufacturing automate? It's so it can compete with the United States or Mexico. We don't have anybody to compete with. They come to us because we're the best on the west coast. When I say “we”, I mean the longshore workforce and the employers there. We do the best jobs. When you automate away jobs, that destroys communities. If terminal operators and if all levels of government are into wiping out communities and wiping out workers' lives, then automation is the way to go, but all levels of government as well as our employers should be employing people, not trying to wipe out their jobs.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Ashton, more generally, has your union developed a strategy on the issue of automation and the integration of new technologies? We see this issue popping up all over the place.