Official Languages Committee on May 28th, 2026

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

I didn't hear them.

[Lyne Chayer]

I think my colleague might like to make a few small recommendations.

[Tristan Joanette]

Of course, there are always things that can be improved in regulations.

Let me give you the example of the use of a very technical term, the “adhesion contract.” When an employment contract is considered an adhesion contract, the contract must be provided to the employee in French. The term “adhesion contract” is a concept used in civil law, which is defined in the Civil Code of Quebec. It does not exist in common law. So, when the regulation begins to apply in the provinces and territories where common law applies, people will wonder exactly what an adhesion contract is. It might therefore be necessary to propose a definition in the regulation, or to adopt the one from the Civil Code. In any case, for the provinces where common law applies, that would be practical.

Let me give you another example. When establishing a committee to promote the French language, half of the representatives must be selected by management and the other half by the employees—that is, by the unions. Quebec's Charter of the French Language is very clear on how to do this when there are multiple unions. The regulation, however, provides no details.

I'm not saying this is wrong or bad, but it's unclear. We don't know what to do. The ministry could issue guidelines later, or changes could be made directly to the regulation. In Quebec, this was done directly in the language of the law rather than through guidelines. The unions meet and select the committee representatives. They do not necessarily work with one another. It is therefore easier for each union to choose its own representatives, and that would be our recommendation.

There are several recommendations, and I am sure we will have the opportunity to submit them in writing during the more formal process of the Canada Gazette. We would be happy to—

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Making recommendations is also part of the process we are currently engaged in. So, if you have any to make, please send them to us in writing.

We're also talking about other very specific locations in the west where there is a strong francophone presence. I'm thinking of the Bonnie Doon area, which is part of Edmonton, and Beausejour, I believe. So, these are larger centres, like Edmonton in Alberta, or in Manitoba. So, it could be much more than what you have now.

Are you ready to hire? Is hiring people a big challenge? Do you currently have the number of fluent French speakers that you need? Tell us a little about recruitment.

I used to be a high school teacher. Do you have booths in French-language schools or immersion schools to encourage twelfth-grade students to consider working for you? Is that something you do?

[Lyne Chayer]

Thank you for the question. I'll try to be brief.

Currently, there are not enough bilingual flight attendants to provide service in French at all airports. So, over the next two years, we will certainly have to recruit flight attendants or provide training so that employees become bilingual, as we discussed earlier.

It is certainly a challenge. I think all the companies that will come to meet with you will tell you the same thing. Securing a qualified bilingual workforce will be our biggest challenge over the next two years. We will certainly have to be creative—we always are. So, we will find solutions, whether that means setting up kiosks, as you suggested, providing in-house training, or partnering with schools. There are organizations, too, that can help us. In Quebec, at least, there are several that can assist by providing grants or offering courses to our employees.

So, we will certainly explore all the solutions available to us so that we can offer service in French in two years. However, the biggest challenge is the workforce. In fact, that is why, in my introduction, I spoke, among other things, about French language training across the country. We are well aware that building schools or offering courses will not happen overnight. However, one of our recommendations is to explore how the federal government or the provinces can help improve French language courses in different regions of the country so that we can have people who speak French upon completing their studies.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Ms. Chayer, your time is up. Thank you.

I now give the floor to Ms. Chenette for five minutes.

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Ms. Chayer, Mr. Joanette, thank you for being with us today. First of all, I would like to congratulate you, because as we listen to you, we can see your commitment to providing these services and this support to francophone employees. That is music to our ears.

I would like to follow up on a few questions that were asked. We have just discussed the issue of the Charter of the French Language and the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act.

Mr. Joanette, you said that working under a single regulatory framework would simplify things for you. You are used to dealing with a lot of regulations in the aviation sector. Can you tell us specifically what the additional burden would be of operating under two regulatory frameworks?

[Tristan Joanette]

I would say that, in this case, the substantive obligations are quite similar. It is more of a procedural issue. When we work with two regulatory bodies, there must be two different channels of communication. We may also have to deal with recommendations that could differ from one authority to another and that could conflict, which could create confusion.

So, for us, working with a single regulatory authority—in this case, the commissioner or the department—would simplify the procedural process. For example, rather than registering with two different channels, we register with just one. So, it's not so much a matter of substance. It's really more a matter of procedure. It simplifies the work. There's less bureaucracy and half the registration paperwork.

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

However, this is not a major issue. You are already working with the Office québécois de la langue française. So, choosing the framework of the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act is not a major change. There are harder things, such as recruiting good bilingual employees in Canada. I imagine the two challenges are not comparable.

[Tristan Joanette]

No, not at all.

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Experts have suggested that we expand the territory, as Mr. Dalton mentioned earlier. You spoke of provincial capitals as well as major cities like Toronto or Halifax. So, given your desire to make your services available in French and to offer bilingual service, is expanding the territory really a problem?

[Tristan Joanette]

I will answer that question.

The government has decided to implement certain measures. This is the first step in the process.

Let's take the example of the Official Languages Act. The territories mentioned at the beginning of the act are not the same as they are today. Things have changed over the years. What will happen, outside of Quebec, when the regulation comes into effect, is that businesses will face major challenges regarding their workforce. They will have to ensure they have the necessary workforce to provide services.

If we include the capital cities—I'll use Edmonton as an example—based on how the regulation is worded, all flights departing from or arriving in Edmonton would now be required to offer service in French. The same would apply to Victoria, British Columbia, for example. This would therefore be a major step forward. Obviously, in an ideal world, WestJet would absolutely love to offer service in French on every flight, but to achieve that, it requires staff.

We are truly proud of what the federal government has done in education. Significant funds have been invested in education outside Quebec; for example, there have been agreements with Alberta regarding French-language schools. That is very important, and it must continue. We urge the government to do more, because this will help prepare the workforce of tomorrow, which will give us the opportunity to expand these areas and territories. However, for now, the balance the department has established is realistic, in our view.

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Since I only have 40 seconds left, I'll ask you a quick question.

Right now, both official languages are very important for attracting labour and investment, whether in the east, the west, or the north. We feel that Canada is really going to strengthen the use of both official languages, which should help you have a francophone presence throughout Canada.

How do you plan to use new technologies for learning? Have you given this any thought? Physical presence and human interaction are important, but learning involves more than that. Have you evaluated all the interesting options that could inspire us?

[Lyne Chayer]

Looking at the tools we'll be using is part of our internal process; this is phase 2. Several technologies are now available, whether it's artificial intelligence or all sorts of other technologies. We're looking at the full range of technologies. We need to set priorities based on our financial and human resources, and see what we're able to implement. Indeed, these are avenues we are currently exploring, and we will continue to do so in the future.

Currently, our priority is to ensure that all our guests are served in both official languages and that our French is impeccable everywhere. Now, we still need to develop certain things internally.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Ms. Chenette.

Mr. Beaulieu, you now have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Ms. Chayer, you said that you are subject to the Charter of the French Language, but that you plan to opt out of the application of the Charter of the French Language in favour of federal law. Have I understood you correctly?

[Lyne Chayer]

As for the airline, yes. We need to be careful, because we have two companies. There is Sunwing Vacations, which is a tour operator. It is a tour operator that, as I mentioned, has its offices in Laval and employs 200 people.

We will always be governed by the Office québécois de la langue française. Every year, we make sure to submit all our information, such as the outdoor signage that was revised last June and the triennial report, among other things. That will remain the same. However, in the case of WestJet—

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Is that part established in Quebec?

[Lyne Chayer]

Yes, that's correct.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

So this is not really a business under federal jurisdiction.

[Lyne Chayer]

No, that's correct. That's why WestJet Airlines, for its part, will be subject to federal law. Obviously, it's the airline that is national.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Essentially, the Quebec government gambled that by securing certain concessions to strengthen federal law, businesses would remain subject to the Charter of the French Language. However, you are proof that this is not true. There are surely many businesses like yours that will tell themselves they do business outside Quebec and that it will be easier to opt out of the French Language Charter and fall under federal law.

[Tristan Joanette]

I would like to clarify something. When we talk about exempting ourselves from the Quebec Charter of the French Language, that is not entirely accurate, since federal obligations are virtually identical to those of the Quebec Charter of the French Language. What changes is the authority that regulates us. It will be the federal Commissioner of Official Languages and the Department of Canadian Heritage rather than the Office québécois de la langue française. However, the obligations are the same as those under the Quebec Charter of the French Language.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

They are not quite the same, because there are no financial penalties at the federal level. There are still considerable differences between the two.

At the very least, why wouldn't the banks do the same thing? Bank representatives told us they were subject to Bill 101 and that it would stay that way. However, banks also do business outside Quebec. So why wouldn't they use the same reasoning as you?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Mr. Beaulieu, your speaking time is up. I can accept a one-sentence response, but that is all.