Official Languages Committee on Nov. 21st, 2006

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

What strategy will you use to ensure that the new entities, such as Air Canada Technical Services and Air Canada Cargo comply with the Act?

[Duncan Dee]

Our position on that has always been the following: any Air Canada subsidiary, whether it be Air Canada Technical Services, Air Canada Ground Handling Services, Air Canada Cargo or Air Canada Jazz, all companies, or even the corporate levels of those companies, must comply with the Official Languages Act. Even if they are not officially subject to the Act, each company must continue to train and offer to train its employees in both official languages. For example, in this year alone we provided training to approximately 2,000 employees in the other official language, that is, French for the anglophones and English for the francophones.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Will you be facing the same challenge with your staff? Given that there is insufficient bilingual staff in key areas, what do you plan to do? You offer training, but do you also have other strategies for the new entities?

[Duncan Dee]

That is an excellent question. There are two ways that allow us to achieve higher levels of bilingualism. The first is training. As I've just mentioned, we trained almost 2,000 employees this year and we still have six weeks left to improve our performance.

The second strategy we resorted to, given the lack of qualified bilingual candidates outside Quebec, Moncton and the National Capital Region, is to transfer bilingual personnel from one province to another, for the purposes of achieving higher levels of bilingualism. This is very costly, however, that is what we have done. Over the past three to five years we have transferred 575 flight attendants, mainly from Montreal to Toronto and to Western Canada, to achieve higher levels of bilingualism in those cities where there is an insufficient number of bilingual candidates to meet our needs.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Is language training mandatory for your staff or do you use incentives in order to promote language training in a second official language?

[Duncan Dee]

We mainly use incentive schemes to increase our bilingual capacity. For example, we have information sessions in airports on the requirements of the Official Languages Act. In Toronto, we provide training in the classrooms but we have also taken steps to encourage the use of French in our client services. One thing we have learned over the past 10 years is that many of our employees went to immersion high schools. They're able to read and write French without difficulty, but they have a harder time keeping up a conversation because in school the focus was on writing and reading.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

I apologize, Mr. Dee, but the seven minutes allowed have been used up.

That completes our first round. We will start our second round with Mr. Murphy. You have five minutes.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Dee.

I am the member for Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe. First, I would like to say that I got the impression, when I was listening to your comments and reading your brief, that you feel that your obligations under the Official Languages Act are difficult to meet. That is the impression I get when I read statements such as:

We have throughout our organization continually respected the obligations imposed on us and we intend, irrespective of any law, to continue to strive to provide.... ... No airline in this country and probably very few others worldwide, provides bilingual service as consistently as [we do].

There is talk of a “level playing field”. The words “obligations imposed by law” are replete in your presentation.

I have the feeling that you think that those obligations are very difficult to meet. You perceive yourself as a victim at the international level, and you do not mention that the bilingual nature of your company constitutes a very rare and effective tool at the international level. Nothing in your brief points out that aspect, not a word.

I am somewhat concerned by that because, as I said, I come from a bilingual city and region. To be more specific, we only have access to Air Canada Jazz, and not to Air Canada per say. The fact that Air Canada Jazz is not bound by Part V of the Act, the part dealing with language of work, is a sensitive issue for employees from New Brunswick working for Air Canada Jazz across the country.

Do you think it is fair that Air Canada Jazz, which employs many bilingual people from New Brunswick, should not have to comply with Part V of the Official Languages Act, the part dealing with language of work? Do you think that is right? If you had many bilingual employees from New Brunswick, do you think it would be difficult to comply with Part V of the Official Languages Act?

[Duncan Dee]

In this statement we're saying that we feel it makes good commercial sense for us to be able to serve our customers in the language of their choice. We have never pretended that being able to serve our customers in the official language of their choice was not un atout. We have always felt that doing so was in our own best commercial interest, and that should dictate our service in various official languages.

I've already said in this statement that we go over and above the obligations imposed on us by the Official Languages Act, because the Official Languages Act says we are to provide service in both official languages where numbers warrant. We actually don't respect that part of the Official Languages Act because, from our perspective, we are to serve our customers in the official language of their choice anywhere we fly, regardless of where the numbers warrant. So if there is any example that our commercial interest encourages us to provide official language services wherever we fly, that is it.

On language of work, our employees are trained in and have the ability to access employee services in both official languages, regardless of where they are. And I think that is a reality of our employees today.

Complaints received regarding language of work are almost unheard of in many instances. In the last couple of years I think there have been under five per year, and in the last year there was one. In a few of these cases it was the result of a misunderstanding of the obligation on the part of either the employee or the manager responsible. But we try to train our employees and our managers on what those obligations are, and as Mr. Lemieux suggested earlier, we do it in a positive way, not just in a negative way.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Sorry to interrupt again, Mr. Dee, but five minutes have gone by.

We will now ask Mr. Petit to ask a question for five minutes.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning, Mr. Dee, Mr. Galimberti and Ms. McEvoy. I would like to make a few comments and then ask you a specific question. Mr. Dee, I believe you can answer my question.

We understand that Air Canada is a company that is being restructured. Everyone is aware of this. I was not part of the government at the time of its restructuring; the Liberals were in office. Out of an interest in protecting your employees, you ended up with more unilingual than bilingual employees. It is to your credit that you put your employees' interests first.

I would also like to point out that if Air Canada or Air Canada Jazz were not present in some regions of Quebec, there would be no air connections, there would be no service at all. I am proud you are there and that you have taken responsibility for serving those regions.

One thing, however, puzzles me. Your company is called Air Canada. That's a mythical name, an important one. You have a mandate of linguistic duality. However, there are also other important companies serving the Canadian territory, such as WestJet and Air Transat, that are not associated with your company and do not appear to have the same obligations. You came to an agreement with the Liberal government of the time, in order to comply with certain language obligations.

I would like to know what you think about this. You seem to be saying that you are capable of fulfilling those obligations but you also appear to be questioning the fact that the obligations imposed on your company are not imposed on other companies. There seem to be two markets: an Air Canada market, subject to linguistic duality; and another market, made up of companies that are in some cases just as big as your own but are not bound by the same obligations.

[Duncan Dee]

Air Canada sees this as an issue of equality. Transport companies such as WestJet, Air Transat and others are not bound by the same obligations as Air Canada. Regardless of our legal obligations, we will meet our obligation to provide service to our clients in both official languages because that is what we must do to retain their loyalty: it makes business sense. If we cannot continue to provide services to our clients in the official language of their choice, then we will lose them. From a commercial viewpoint, we take this to heart.

WestJet, for example, decided against serving Quebec City because it could not recruit enough bilingual employees to serve that market. That company publicly stated that it would not serve Quebec City before it could achieve an adequate level of bilingualism. Quebec City is the Capital of Quebec and a government and business centre.

As Mr. Murphy pointed out, bilingualism is an asset for us because we have no problem in serving the Quebec market in both official languages. Yes, there are some cases in which we have not provided services in both official languages but I dare say that is the exception and not the rule.

Before Air Canada restructured and saved jobs, the level of bilingualism was 65%. After the restructuring, which ended up saving jobs, that level fell to less than 40%, due to the influx of unilingual anglophone employees into Air Canada's staff.

Unfortunately, because most of those employees had the most seniority, they obtained the best working hours and conditions. I do not blame those employees for that. However, at the time, the Senate and House of Commons Joint Standing Committee on Official Languages had recommended that Air Canada be assisted in integrating those employees, and that did not happen.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

I apologize, Mr. Dee, but I must interrupt you.

Ms. Brunelle, you may ask the next question.

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Good morning, gentlemen. Good morning, madam.

I will continue along the same lines.When a company restructures it has profitability in mind. I would like to know if Air Canada is profitable. Is bilingualism a competitive disadvantage? You're saying that it is perhaps an advantage.

Last summer I took an Air Canada plane to Paris, France. Air Canada announced its services in French, English, Spanish and even Dutch. Being able to speak to clients in their own language constitutes a significant competitive advantage.

Should all companies, therefore, be bound by the Official Languages Act or would that be an impossible mission to accomplish?

What you require ultimately is a little more time to integrate all your employees, is that not so?

[Duncan Dee]

That is an excellent question. Does Air Canada feel that all other transport companies should be subject to the Official Languages Act? We don't think that's a bad idea but it is ultimately up to members of Parliament to make that decision.

Why have there been so many problems with official languages since the year 2000? Because that's the year the real problem started. I note that Mr. Godin does not agree, but if I may say, prior to that year 64% or 65% of our staff was bilingual and there were less problems. The problem started with the integration of Canadian Airlines because the level of our staff's bilingualism dropped from 65% to less than 40%, approximately 38%, and that had a rather significant impact on Air Canada's activities.

We were able nevertheless to take several steps in order to mitigate those inconveniences. For example, under Air Canada's policy, for two or three years now, only bilingual candidates have been hired. When we cannot find qualified bilingual candidates in one region, then we attempt to find those people elsewhere and transfer them to that region. For example, we have flight attendant staff based in Vancouver. Unfortunately, that region did not have enough bilingual candidates. We therefore transferred flight attendants from Quebec to Vancouver in order to achieve a higher level of bilingualism. We have done that on a regular basis to improve our level of bilingualism.

Are we asking for government assistance to achieve this? No, however the fact remains that a large number of our employees are still unilingual anglophones. We do not want to fire them, we want to train them. However, as you may have noted yourselves within the federal government, training 38 to 42-year-old individuals in a language they have never learned is not only difficult but very costly because daily immersion in a language is necessary in order to learn it. From our perspective, we absolutely agree that other airlines should be encouraged to become bilingual or obliged to offer services in both official languages, but that is a decision for Parliament to make.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Unfortunately, Ms. Brunelle...

I would now call on Mr. Godin to ask his question.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

You stated that Air Canada chooses to serve its clients in both official languages because otherwise you would lose them. However, in those regions that are only served by Air Canada or Air Canada Jazz it is impossible to lose clients. People aren't birds: they can't fly. You have to pay to get onto one of those big birds.

I share the opinion that the government is responsible, not because this is Air Canada but because it helps many sectors in providing training. It would be unfortunate if we did not help people capable of learning another language. I myself was fortunate in that regard: I am a francophone Acadian, I had the opportunity of learning another language and I appreciate that. Supporting people in that manner in their area of work is just as important as getting them the opportunity to learn how to use other tools. I'm convinced of that.

A former joint parliamentary committee recommended this. It recommended that training be provided to people. The recommendation was unanimous: they said yes, there is money for this. To be perfectly honest with you, Air Canada was no more the focus than any other company. The consideration was for employees who would be able to keep their jobs, it was an issue of humanity. They had the right, like everybody else, to work.

You stated that WestJet could not find enough bilingual employees to serve Quebec City. I don't know if this observation also applies to Air Canada, but I never saw any ads in the Acadian Peninsula for recruiting employees on behalf of WestJet. We have a 20% unemployment level; we can send you candidates. If you give me your coordinates later, I'll give you names.

[Duncan Dee]

I apologize for interrupting you. With respect to the Acadian Peninsula and—

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Perhaps I don't speak French well enough, I don't know.

[Duncan Dee]

No, my wife comes from that area of New Brunswick. I would never comment negatively on her way of speaking both official languages.

We do undertake recruitment. Take Air Canada Jazz, for example: 54% of its employees, that is, 100% of its new employees, are bilingual.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

That's all very well, but we are here to consider this bill. Is there a problem with both official languages being the languages of work of Air Canada Jazz or do employees use the language of their choice.

[Duncan Dee]

The language of work for Air Canada Jazz is already their language of choice. Any communiqué published by Air Canada Jazz for its staff or for the public... This is already how things work.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

If that is the case, do you object to this being set down in the Act? We are here to discuss the bill. You're saying that that measure is already in place. We're recommending to Parliament that it be set down in the Act. You yourself are very nice, but there may be other witnesses who would not be quite as nice. The Act is there for those who will follow. We live in a changing world and people change.

If I have understood you correctly, you do not object to this.

[Duncan Dee]

No, we have no objections. I am 36 years old and I do not intend on retiring any time soon. You'll still be seeing me for a while.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Dee, that does not mean that you will not change jobs. You are only 36 years old and you may not stay in your current position.