Evidence of meeting #72 for Official Languages in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was languages.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
As an Individual
The fact remains that it is difficult to complain. It is so difficult that I challenge you to look at the case law and see who else but my wife and I has filed suit against Air Canada. Why does nobody do it? Because it is too difficult.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
That leads me to my next question.
The word "exit" comes from Latin. Ultimately, one could...but I do not want to discuss that word as much as the service that is provided verbally concerning an emergency measure, for example, an answer to a question, or an explanation regarding emergency exits.
There is service that is provided aboard an aircraft and service provided in an airport terminal. Are the breaches you have observed the same?
4:05 p.m.
As an Individual
Based on what I have seen, they are virtually the same. However, as I said, I do not have any scientific data to prove that.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Few complaints go to trial, and that fact is easily explained as a result of the costs and stress involved. People give up the fight against a big machine, and I understand why that is a reason.
Given your expertise in the matter, have you heard of any other people like you who have experienced this kind of frustration with Air Canada?
4:05 p.m.
As an Individual
Yes, people have called me at home, since I have been through it all, to tell me that Air Canada has violated their rights and to ask me whether I can help them. In fact, I have helped people by telling them what process they should follow and what they should do. So people have contacted me. Some have sent emails of encouragement, saying that the same thing had happened to them. Yes, I have heard from people.
It would be easy to conduct a study. For example, consider the way my rights were violated last week. Without seeing the figures, I am virtually certain that few people besides me will file a complaint. And yet there was a unilingual anglophone employee at the counter, whereas this region is designated bilingual for service purposes. I heard francophones talking in the waiting line; I would be curious to see how many of them will file complaints. Air Canada often says it receives only 100 or so complaints out of several millions of flights. People do not complain; I see that. This unilingual anglophone Air Canada employee served several francophones that day. So why are there no more complaints? Because it is difficult, because people get fed up, and so on.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Do you think there are far more pending or potential complaints than the number Air Canada reports to us?
4:05 p.m.
As an Individual
I think we may never see any complaints, but there are a lot more violations than complaints. That is for sure.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
September 28th, 2017 / 4:05 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for being here, Mr. Thibodeau. I already know something of your situation. When Graham Fraser's special report on Air Canada arrived, I thought we should to do something immediately, but we took the time to conduct the study, meet with Air Canada offices, see what could be done, meet with the unions, and so on.
I was listening to you earlier, and you actually described how I react when I realize my language rights are not being respected. I say to myself that I do not have the time to file a complaint and that I have other things to do. So I often disregard it, and I am convinced that many other citizens do the same thing. Consequently, we are not getting a true picture of the situation when Air Canada says very few complaints are filed.
4:10 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
That being said, how many times are language rights violated? That is much more important, and I think we should get a clear picture of that situation.
Now what interests me is what has resulted from everything you have done. You mentioned that you had won on the domestic flights issue and that Air Canada had to pay you $1,500, or rather that, consistent with the case law, $1,500 is awarded in every instance in which a language rights complaint is filed.
I believe you have already read the special report on Air Canada. Is that correct?
4:10 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
It contains four recommendations: enforceable agreements, statutory damages, fines and administrative monetary penalties. Based on your experience, what would be the best way to exercise a positive influence? Even if it is negative, the aim is to ensure that language rights are respected to a greater degree.
What do you think is the best solution?
4:10 p.m.
As an Individual
Thank you for your question.
I think it has to be a mixture or combination of what the Commissioner of Official Languages proposed. With respect to enforceable agreements, I know perfectly well there have been agreements over the years between Air Canada and the Commissioner of Official Languages that have not always been complied with. That is more the Commissioner's responsibility, but I would consider that a good option.
The Commissioner said he could not institute proceedings against Air Canada as long as an enforceable agreement was in effect. I think that, if one is in place, it should ensure that individuals can nevertheless file suit against Air Canada. I would not like to see my language rights violated while a one-and-a-half-year agreement was in place with Air Canada.
I do not know whether you know, but when the Commissioner submits his investigation report, a citizen has 60 days to file suit. The Commissioner may not be able to do so if that is put in place, but individuals whose language rights are violated might be able to do so. I think it is also important that something be done about statutory damages and fines.
To clarify what you said, the various judicial levels have held that $1,500 per violation is just and appropriate remedy in the case, for example, of an announcement made in only one official language. This is not something automatic. That must be clearly understood. You will not be awarded $1,500 per violation and a letter of apology merely for appearing in court, but that is a scale. You know the law: judges must rely on what has previously been settled in case law. We have seen it at three levels: the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. They have held that the sum of $1,500 per violation is appropriate.
Since individuals do not appear in court to fight—that does not happen; I have been doing it for 17 years and I am the only one—your proposal to Parliament should suggest a parallel mechanism that makes it more automatic or easier. In that way, people may feel they are potentially entitled to $1,500 and a letter of apology if an institution violates their language rights. For the moment, they may file a complaint, and Air Canada may eventually stop violating Canadians' language rights.
This is 2017, the Official Languages Act has been in existence since 1969, and, last week, Air Canada was still violating my language rights. If we continue on the same path and no one goes to court, nothing will change and the situation will be the same in 5, 10, 15 and 20 years.
I think that you, as a committee, can suggest much more obtainable penalties for passengers. Things will change because that will hit them in the wallet.
4:15 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Thank you very much.
What do you recommend regarding the Montreal Convention?
The Supreme Court has ruled that, in its view, the Montreal Convention takes precedence over the Official Languages Act. What would be your recommendation on that subject?
4:15 p.m.
As an Individual
I think it is quite easy. Former member Stéphane Dion introduced a very simple bill, which unfortunately died on the Order Paper, providing that the Montreal Convention should have no effect on the Official Languages Act. I believe the government should table a similar bill.
I do not know whether you understand what that interpretation means. Consider this example. Two passengers take the same Ottawa-Toronto flight. One of them deplanes in Toronto, while the other continues on to Paris. Air Canada is required to provide service in both official languages and it knows it. There are no francophone flight attendants on the Ottawa-Toronto flight. The language rights of those two individuals have thus been violated. The one who deplanes in Toronto is entitled to file suit and potentially to be awarded $1,500. However, the one who continues on to Paris is now on an international flight. We have the same Official Languages Act, the same violations, and the same lack of service in French, but the court will find that, if that person had deplaned in Toronto, she might have received an award, but since she continued on to Paris, she is entitled to no compensation. That is absurd.
With all due respect, when the Supreme Court held that it was taking nothing away from the Official Languages Act in deciding as it did, it nevertheless took away the $4,500 that we had received and deprived all Canadians who travel internationally of the possibility of compensation.
The law is very clear. As a lawyer, you know that. Where there are no restorative measures, the law is dead. At present, the law is dead at the international level.
The court may order Air Canada to write a letter of apology, but do you not think its officers will laugh at that? They will take a standard document, add a name and address, affix a stamp, and, voilà, case closed. Internationally, the law is dead.
I am saying that Parliament must act, and quickly. It must tell the legal system that the Official Languages Act is more important than the Montreal Convention.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Lefebvre Liberal Sudbury, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I also want to thank Mr. Thibodeau for being here and for continuing this struggle for the past 17 years. I tip my hat to him because that takes energy and courage. I myself am a lawyer, and I know that the effort involved in constantly bringing lawsuits puts enormous stress on one's family. You have to want to fight constantly.
I would like to ask some questions about the process. You just told us you filed a complaint last week. How many complaints have you filed in total?
4:15 p.m.
As an Individual
You have to distinguish between those concerning Air Canada and the others. I can tell you—
