Evidence of meeting #48 for Official Languages in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was subamendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
As I said before, we will skip amendment LIB‑9, which has become obsolete, as has the NDP‑4 amendment.
We now turn to amendment BQ‑4 on page 25 of your package.
Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor.
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
The purpose of this amendment is to introduce the definition of “employee”, so that it is interpreted broadly, to include staff supplied by employment agencies. The aim is to avoid other cases such as the UNIS agency, for example. Nor should volunteer staff be excluded, in cases where these people would need to use French to fulfil their role.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Are there any questions regarding amendment BQ‑4?
Ms. Ashton, you have the floor.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We believe this is a very important amendment, but we would like to move a subamendment to make it clearer.
We propose to remove the reference to volunteer work, since, as we know, the Canada Labour Code does not contain a definition or explanation of what a volunteer is.
We believe this is a very important amendment, but we do not want to create further confusion. That is why we propose to remove the reference to volunteer work, but keep the rest.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Ms. Ashton, the clerks and the analyst request that you send the subamendment in writing.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
While you are sending it, may I say that the proposed subamendment aims to modify the French version by deleting the words “la personne qui effectue du travail bénévole pour un employeur”, after the comma in the fifth line of the French version.
In English, it is “a person who performs voluntary work for an employer”.
The subamendment has been emailed to your P9 addresses.
Mr. Serré, you have the floor.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Marc Serré Liberal Nickel Belt, ON
Mr. Chair, may I ask the Treasury Board Secretariat representative for a clarification of the definitions in the Canada Labour Code?
I agree with Ms. Ashton about removing the reference to volunteer work. However, joint employers could also be considered in the context.
Could the Treasury Board Secretariat representative clarify whether the definition proposed here is aligned with the Canada Labour Code, and whether there are other factors we should know about?
February 7th, 2023 / 4:10 p.m.
Carsten Quell Executive Director, Official Languages Centre of Excellence, People and Culture, Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, Treasury Board Secretariat
At this point, we are not sure what impact amendment BQ‑4 will have on the interpretation of the provisions of the Official Languages Act.
At this time, there is no such definition in the act. Moreover, the definition proposed here is not aligned with what is found in the Canada Labour Code. In fact, it is broader. For example, it includes persons in managerial positions. Currently, these individuals are not subject to the language rights regime as employees.
We are therefore unsure of the impact that the proposed amendment will have on the interpretation of the Official Languages Act. Furthermore, it creates an inconsistency with the law that defines employees in the first place, i.e., the Canada Labour Code.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We just heard Mr. Quell mention that he is not sure of the impact of the amendment.
Personally, I am somewhat uncomfortable with the idea that a volunteer who is involved in an organization cannot choose the language in which they want to communicate. I understand that Bill C‑13 may not be the best place to add this clarification. However, we know that our communities need volunteers, and we need to be able to communicate with them in the language of their choice.
In my opinion, it is important to leave the word “bénévole” in amendment BQ‑4.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
By definition, volunteers are unpaid, so it's definitely not governed by the Canada Labour Code.
On the one hand, volunteers do have the right to communicate in the language of their choice. On the other hand, if they find themselves in an environment where there are many French speakers, this becomes a weakness.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
We are continuing the discussion on Ms. Ashton's subamendment.
Ms. Lattanzio, you have the floor.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
If we were to remove the word “bénévole”, would that make this amendment consistent with the Canada Labour Code?
4:10 p.m.
Executive Director, Official Languages Centre of Excellence, People and Culture, Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, Treasury Board Secretariat
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
That would not be quite the case. As I said, it would still include supervisors, that is, employer representatives, who are not currently included in the definition found in the Canada Labour Code. There would still be some inconsistency.
It is important to remember that we are talking here about public service employees, not employees of private organizations or civil society.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Are there any other comments on Ms. Ashton's sub-amendment?
Mr. Godin, you have the floor.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
We are doing some research.
A volunteer can also be defined as an unpaid employee. A volunteer is someone who does a job. I just want to protect volunteers.
Is this the best place to do it? Is it planned somewhere else? I'm wondering. The point is to make sure we do the job right. I don't have the answer.
Can anyone tell us where in the bill, what description or wording would be appropriate?
It seems that even if we remove the word “voluntary”, the proposed definition is not necessarily consistent with the Canada Labour Code.
I don't have the solution.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Are there any other comments?
So, we will vote on Ms. Ashton's subamendment to remove any reference to voluntary work in amendment BQ‑4.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
I am still considering my vote. I still think that voluntary organizations are important in our communities. Despite the fact that I have intervened as I should to protect volunteers, I do not want to short-circuit the committee, knowing that we have a limited number of meetings. I will therefore vote in favour of the subamendment, out of solidarity.
(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
So that brings us to amendment BQ‑4, as amended.
Are there any further comments on this?
Seeing none, we will proceed to the vote.
(Amendment as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Amendment NDP‑4, which is on page 26 of the amendment bundle, cannot be moved, as the previously passed amendment LIB‑8 deals with the same thing in the same place in the bill.
So we'll move on to amendment CPC‑9, which is on page 27 of the package.
Mr. Godin, you have the floor.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It's important that this amendment be accepted. We have heard from many witnesses, and this amendment is based on one of the six recommendations presented by the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada. In solidarity with the organizations that work very hard on a daily basis to defend francophone minorities outside Quebec, we should accept it.
I will not go on and on about it.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal