I wouldn't want to speculate on the subject of language of work, but I could undertake to answer your question. I'm not sure I know the answer and I don't want to mislead you.
However, as the minister said, the purpose of the bill is to maintain the level of bilingualism that existed immediately before Air Canada was restructured, even though various affiliates were divided during the corporate restructuring, which lasted 18 months.
So, the consequence, which we see in this bill, is that Air Canada isn't affected because it's already subject to the Official Languages Act as a whole. The bill would cover affiliates such as Ground Handling, Technical Services and Cargo, and it wouldn't apply just to language of work; all those services would be subject to all parts of the Official Languages Act, as was the case when they were part of Air Canada. Airlines which are subsidiaries, other than Air Canada itself, would be subject to Part IV of the act, which concerns service to the public.
I would point out to you that the bill goes a little further than the previous act in that, until today, the affiliates have never been directly subject to the provisions of the act. Air Canada had an obligation to ensure that its affiliates provided services in both official languages wherever Air Canada was required to do the same.
The bill proposes that the affiliates have a certain amount of direct legal responsibility. So in that sense, the bill goes a little further. If Parliament saw fit to pass this bill in order to maintain the level of bilingualism that previously existed, it would directly impose on Air Canada's affiliates, which have hitherto never been subject to the Official Languages Act, an obligation to provide service to the public under Part IV of the Official Languages Act.