Transport Committee on Oct. 26th, 2022

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

My question is for Mr. Gibbons of WestJet Airlines.

Today, the Competition Bureau Canada issued a report saying that it considered the WestJet-Sunwing transaction, where WestJet would acquire Sunwing, could cause a lessening of competition.

On the Quebec side — this is where my concern lies — Aéroports de Montréal had mentioned that it feared a concentration of flights to Toronto as a result of this acquisition. On the Air Transat side, there was more talk of a concentration of players, that is, a reduction in competition created by a duopoly-like situation.

I have two questions for you. First, what do you think of the report? Second, what would Quebec get out of this transaction?

[Andrew Gibbons]

Thank you for your question.

I'm not sure that the Competition Bureau concluded some of those things. In fact, in the report, they identify 31 roots of concern—25 in western Canada and five in Ontario—so in fact it does not highlight a negative impact for the province of Quebec.

With respect to the province of Quebec, it's important to note that the Competition Bureau has a narrow focus on individual roots, but the comprehensive review is conducted by the Minister of Transportation, and that's the public interest review. This is a report that feeds into that process. It's obviously not a determination.

With respect to the province of Quebec, I think our own company has had some difficulty making inroads over the years. That's one of the things we're most excited about with respect to this transaction. Sunwing has a head office in Laval, which we've committed to the government that we'll maintain. They have excellent services in French, which we're committed to maintain, and the Sunwing brand itself is going to be maintained.

This is not a takeover in any way, shape or form. It is two complementary businesses coming together, and we're confident that the Minister of Transport will see that and approve the transaction.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Very well.

Mr. Perry, I told you earlier about the Mirabel flight school. As people in my riding sometimes call me, I recently spoke to a somewhat desperate pilot, who had taken all the necessary courses to obtain the pilot's licences, but unfortunately had been waiting for almost a year for an answer from the federal government about his licences.

I was wondering how often you see this kind of situation on your side, and whether it would be worth including it as part of the strategy, especially with regard to the labour shortage issue.

[Capt Tim Perry]

I think it's important that any barrier to have a pilot enter or re-enter the market as an employee has to be addressed. Whether it's a pilot certificate or a medical certificate, we've seen delays, but much like my colleague at CATCA, we find that those have actually been improving.

There's still more to do to make sure that once there is a qualified pilot, whether it's medically qualified or technically qualified, they're able to enter the flight deck. It absolutely has to be a part of our strategy as we address this—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Perry.

Thank you, Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

Next we have Mr. Bachrach.

Mr. Bachrach, the floor is yours. You have two and a half minutes.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to pick up with some questions to Mr. Perry.

Mr. Perry, in your presentation, you mentioned something called “wet leases”. Could you expand on what wet leases are and their impact on employment?

[Capt Tim Perry]

Sure. Thank you for the question.

A wet lease is when a company leases not only an aircraft but a flight crew as well. Often all of the associated expenses are covered in a single transaction rather than by leasing an aircraft and hiring a crew separately.

If this is done improperly, it can disrupt the labour market and undermine collective bargaining for unionized groups, because it's basically contracting out what could be—and in some cases, should be—work that belongs to the bargaining unit.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Perry, following up on Mr. Barsalou-Duval's question about the WestJet-Sunwing merger—or proposed merger, rather—I'm wondering what your association's perspective is on that proposal and its potential implications on employment.

[Capt Tim Perry]

We have commented extensively on this transaction. Our position has been that as long as there are no layoffs that come with this transaction, it's something we could support. As an organization, we're not opposed to the amalgamation of different businesses as long as there are appropriate labour protections in place.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

In your view, would that include restrictions on wet leasing?

[Capt Tim Perry]

Yes, we would certainly like to see restrictions on wet leasing, as well as no layoffs and other labour protections.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bachrach.

Mr. Muys, the floor is yours. You have five minutes.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Thank you.

Thank you to all the witnesses for your testimony today, your observations and, in particular, your recommendations.

My question is for Mr. von Schoenberg and Monsieur Vachon, because you've mentioned that in some instances, maybe with smaller towers, there is only a single controller there at one time. I would imagine that's a concern from a safety perspective.

Maybe you can elaborate on how that might be an issue and a concern. In my riding there is Hamilton airport. I'm not sure that would be one of the towers that would be impacted by that situation. At Hamilton airport, there's a lot of cargo coming in as well, so it impacts our supply chain when there are disruptions as a result.

[Nick von Schoenberg]

There are two things I would say.

First of all, a single controller working doesn't in and of itself present a safety risk, necessarily; however, in a system that depends on redundancy to ensure safety, we feel it's important that, as in other equipment areas, this redundancy should occur in staffing as well. If someone is working alone and something happens and they need some additional help, there's no one else there. No help is coming. For the system overall, I think there's a challenge there with respect to resilience.

If someone calls in sick, as happened recently in Hamilton.... There was a single controller scheduled for a 12-hour shift. He was ill, and the tower had no choice but to close. That's obviously not a situation that we want to see.

The simple solution is that we need some more people. When you have more staff, there's a little more resilience to the operation, and from a safety perspective, in the event that something happens, that person has additional help.

In addition to that, on occasion a controller needs to be relieved if something serious happens. Perhaps he's made a mistake or some sort of incident has occurred. That person is supposed to be relieved from duty. If there's no relief, it makes it difficult for the company and the employee to handle that situation.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Looking ahead to the Christmas season and even further ahead to next summer, I think we've heard that we're going to see a ramp-up in travel, but from our perspective, we'll see it in cargo too. In terms of closing down a tower because we only have one person and they have to go elsewhere, are we going to continue to see these sorts of problems? What are your concerns about staffing in that regard?

[Nick von Schoenberg]

I think we will see them. Our position is that the company.... We're not going to be able to completely address the staffing issue by next summer. I think that's clear. I think that with some creative solutions, we might be able to at least mitigate it to some extent, but I think it's unavoidable that there will be some service disruptions.

Our position is that we should, for the sake of the entire industry, make those disruptions as predictable as possible, instead of having them occur at the last moment. I think that would help the airlines too with respect to their planning, and it would be better for everybody.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Thank you.

While I have just a few minutes left, I suspect, I'll ask a question of Mr. Strickland.

I know that skilled trades are an important part of Canada's economic future. You've certainly been outspoken on that point. I know that in my home province of Ontario, one in five jobs by 2025 is reported to be in the skilled trades. You've touched on the perceived value of truckers and skilled tradespeople and the promotion of that area. I know that the Ontario government has done a lot of work on it in the last couple of years. Kudos to Ministers McNaughton and Dunlop and those who have done that, not just at the training and college levels, but at the high schools and before that.

I think we've seen a lot of hot air from the federal side on skilled trades, and no real results or progress. What does the federal government need to do to get its act together on this issue and realize that this is quite a big gap?

[Sean Strickland]

Well, I would agree with you that in the province of Ontario, which is also my home province, the government has done a really good job of promoting skilled trades with career options and opportunities, largely through the work of Minister McNaughton.

I would disagree with you with respect to what the federal government is doing with skilled trades. They have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in the Apprenticeship Service grant program, which was rolled out a few months ago. There are incentives in place for employers to hire new apprentices. It's $5,000 for an apprentice and $10,000 if that apprentice comes from an equity-deserving group. There are also other things the federal government has done to support the skilled trades—which, quite frankly, is a real departure for the federal government. Training, as you know, is the purview of provincial governments. I think the federal government has stepped up in some meaningful ways that maybe aren't broadcast as widely as they should be.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Strickland.

Next we have Mr. Badawey. Mr. Badawey, the floor is yours. You have five minutes.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to start off with Mr. Veldman.

Mr. Veldman, you made a point earlier with respect to more capital funding for strategic trade corridors. Can you be a bit more specific on the capital funding that you think is required for those trade corridors?

[Ken Veldman]

I sure can.

I think there are two different elements to this. One is from a corridor perspective. I'll speak to the northern B.C. and Alberta corridor that is associated with us. As we see increased volume move through specific corridors, growth in traffic, and communities—largely smaller communities in this region—grappling with growth and long-standing infrastructure challenges, the ability to attract population and the ability to continue to be comfortable with economic growth really take a strategic focus to ensure that public sector, private sector, local government and local community challenges are all considered from a corridor perspective. If you don't have strategic views, visions and lenses to look at that corridor going forward, then growing supply chains and making the investments needed are going to be challenges.

When we look more specifically at the community level—and I'll use Prince Rupert as an example—we have a community that's come through some difficult economic times over the last few decades. We see an industry that is very much growing that community. For those local governments to really be able to deal with the livability of their communities, to make them communities that are very conducive to growth and new residents, they need to be able to get past some really basic infrastructure challenges. The reality is that to do that, they really need senior government support.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Veldman.

Mr. Gibbons, you mentioned the partnership with Alberta. Can you explain a bit about what's happening in Ontario and what the challenges are with respect to trying establish the same kind of partnership in Ontario?

[Andrew Gibbons]

There are no barriers that I know of, simply because we have not approached them and positioned a similar agreement.

We began our process with our home government. That's where our headquarters are. It's where we employ the most and where the majority of our operations are. For that and no other reason, we've prioritized the Alberta government. They were a willing partner. We'd be glad to sign a similar MOU with any willing partner.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Gibbons. Let's get that ball rolling.

[Andrew Gibbons]

Sure, let's do that. You got it.