Transport Committee on Sept. 12th, 2017

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

It think that's important because we've talked about supply chains today, and you want to make them as efficient and smooth as possible because we have the products that the world wants, and those small, niche crops that we're developing in Canada are really crucial to developing larger markets.

[Greg Northey]

Absolutely.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Graham.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Sikand has a great question before I start.

[Gagan Sikand, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Greg, do you classify soy as a pulse?

[Greg Northey]

Technically, we wouldn't classify it as a pulse. We represent the growers of pulses, because it's grown, but it's not.... We wouldn't describe it as a pulse.

[Gagan Sikand, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Thank you.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Hackl, I'm going to come back to you. I'm sure you're not going to be surprised by that.

Nine years ago today, one of the worst railway accidents in North America happened at Chatsworth, California, when a Metrolink commuter train crashed into Union Pacific freight train. Twenty-five people were killed and 135 injured. The operator of the train was on his cellphone texting at the time. In your view, if he had known he'd be on an LVVR, would that accident have happened?

[Roland Hackl]

I don't know that. I know that since that time there's been technology in place, through the Wi-Tronix, that can evaluate whether there is a cellphone signal being received or transmitted from a locomotive. It can tell you if a cellphone is on in a locomotive. That technology exists. Most of it is already installed on a locomotive, so if they really wanted to go after cellphones they could flip the switch on that and tell you if a cellphone is on and could investigate that.

There is no need to have live video monitoring. It's something the airlines don't have, something that no other country has. This would be a first in the world. To institute this type of technology with employer access at this level would be a first in the world. I simply don't see a need for it when you have the technology that would do exactly what you ask.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

You've already mentioned that many locomotives already have the technology in place. Are you already seeing abuse by employers of this technology?

[Roland Hackl]

Yes, I am. As I reported, there's been a couple fairly recently—I'd say within the last couple of years because it takes a while for an arbitration case to get through—showing abuse of video technology with respect to existing employees.

There are currently outstanding grievances with respect to the Silent Witness, the forward-facing camera. Those have not progressed through the arbitration process yet, so it's difficult for me to comment on the facts of those cases, but they would involve the company going and reviewing after the fact. These track data for 72 or 96 hours. A shop employee would be recorded in that data and then a manager reviews it, just to check and see if there's anything out of the ordinary. There was no incident to prompt an investigation, but the use of video technology in that manner we think is abusive and shouldn't be allowed. We don't see any need to open up the door further.

There are existing measures. The TSB and Transport Canada have both endorsed efficiency testing as a means of checking for crew activity and rule compliance. I don't see the need for the unprecedented use of this technology.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

If the technology exists, which we know it does, should or could the equipment indicate to the operators of the train that they're being monitored actively, telling them when a light comes on that they are being watched by a manager right now?

[Roland Hackl]

I don't think it's appropriate that a manager does that, but the technology is live today.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

That's what I'm asking you. Given that it already exists, is there any way of having feedback when you're under way saying that you are being watched right now?

[Roland Hackl]

That a manager is...?

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

You said you can tap into an engine and live-stream that. You just told us that, so can they go the other way?

[Roland Hackl]

The technology exists and it's currently for use by TSB only. That's what the law provides for today. What you're asking me, I guess the way I see it, is that if I know my rights are being violated, that's okay. I can't agree with that, I'm sorry.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

That's a fair point.

Metrolinx was here yesterday and I'm sure you saw the testimony. They were very clear that in their view the LVVRs, which they already have in place and which I believe are already with the union members on those trains, are intended as preventive and they intend to review the tapes on a preventive basis rather than a disciplinary basis. How do you feel about that? If they're not listening to the conversations to hear what you're saying after 15 hours of service on a 12-hour shift, but to make sure you're calling the signals and clearly enforce whatever you're doing, do you see a role for it in a preventive capacity?

[Roland Hackl]

I'm not familiar with what Metrolinx said yesterday, but I can tell you that Metrolinx, the GO train, which is obviously the largest conveyor of passengers in the country, has an exhaustive LVVR policy that was negotiated with the Teamsters Union—and the Ministry of Transport, and I believe the federal ministry was involved as well, because the tracks that Metrolinx operates on are federal ones—that allows for TSB use only. This is what's in place today. It allows for TSB use only in the event of an incident or accident. There is a defined chain of command. There is one person, and the position is specifically named in the policy—who has access. It is put onto an encrypted key and hand delivered to the TSB for evaluation. That is the process in place today, and if they have advocated for something else, I'm not aware of it. I haven't seen any submissions from Metrolinx so I can't really comment on what they've said, but that's what's in place today at GO.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

If the companies are to get access to this data, should the unions also get access to it?

[Roland Hackl]

I don't want access to this data and I don't think the employer should have access to this data.

If I could clarify one thing, Metrolinx does not employ any conductors or locomotive engineers.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

No. They're using Bombardier, I know.

[Roland Hackl]

Bombardier, yes, is the employer. Metrolinx is the umbrella organization, so they do not have any actual employees, which was the subject of the arbitration case and how that policy came to be.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Did you want to clarify that?

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Yes. Are Bombardier crews Teamsters members?