Transport Committee on Jan. 26th, 2026

[Janet Campbell]

They are often lured to Canada under the pretense of being able to build a better life for themselves. What happens in these situations is all of these administrative factors that we've been hearing about: the labour violations, tax misclassifications, immigration and compliance. All of these things basically don't reveal themselves in their full picture to any one of those entities. Law enforcement often doesn't have visibility to that, to be able to look at these pictures from a Criminal Code assessment standpoint.

These workers come to Canada. They are promised that they will be supported to follow proper immigration pathways and that they'll have great jobs, but when they arrive in our country, all the things that we've been hearing about today happen. Then they become so fearful of reporting that ultimately these cases end up falling into the gaps between these various jurisdictions and administrative processes, but the signs are there.

[Will Greaves, Liberal, Victoria, BC]

Thank you for that.

In light of exactly what you just spoke to, are there particular measures or best practices that have been implemented in other jurisdictions that we might learn from to help mitigate the flow of workers into an unsafe industry on the basis of these false promises?

[Janet Campbell]

There are a number of steps that we can take. For instance, the Drivers Inc. model, the misclassification, really adds to the layers of vulnerability for somebody who comes to our country through some sort of temporary worker permit. We need to look at those kinds of things and remove the ability for that layer to occur.

You need a lot of cross-agency collaboration and enforcement. There's some great data in the different agencies, whether it's ESDC, CRA, IRCC or CBSA. It's taking the data and the information that we have and having the training and understanding of those indicators from a forced labour standpoint to then be able to elevate them into pathways where they can be considered for criminal offences.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Ms. Campbell and Mr. Greaves.

Mr. Barsalou‑Duval, you have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here. I think their testimony is truly important for our committee's study.

I'd like to take this opportunity to express my frustration that we weren't able to hear your testimony earlier. In my opinion, we should have heard your comments last year. I find it unacceptable that the committee wasted so much time before resuming work on this important study.

My first question is for Ms. Aujla, the service director at Labour Community Services of Peel.

In your opening statement, you mentioned that you oppose the Driver Inc. model, but also that there are other problems in the trucking industry. We heard from witnesses who claimed or would have us believe that each problem experienced by the industry is an individual problem—that is, isolated from the others—and that there is no connection between these various problems.

Here's what I'd like to know: With regard to the companies or drivers who come to us to complain that they are unable to get paid by their employer, is there a link between these companies and the Driver Inc. model?

[Navneet Aujla]

I would say the link is in the sense that companies are being allowed to use various methods to basically put liability back on workers and not follow the labour rights that they're supposed to give to drivers. Misclassification is one of those pieces, alongside the other rampant labour violations that we're seeing.

It's linked in the sense that companies are being allowed to break the law in a myriad of ways. Misclassification is one of those, but it's certainly not the only one. Because they're being allowed to steal workers' wages and, again, to put liability back on drivers, we really just need better laws and protections to make sure that drivers are able to access their rights, and again, this needs to happen through the Canada Labour Code.

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

You mentioned earlier that over 300 drivers contacted your organization with complaints.

First, do you feel that the practice of flouting the law and mistreating drivers is widespread in the industry? Or is it more of an isolated phenomenon?

Second, with regard to drivers operating under the Driver Inc. model, do you think that incorporation is generally done willingly, or is it often imposed by the employer?

[Navneet Aujla]

The statistics show that it's a widespread issue. We get hundreds of calls from truck drivers, but even statistics from the Canada Labour Code itself, as I mentioned in my presentation, show that in 2022, 80% of confirmed Labour Code violations were from the road transport industry, even though trucking only accounts for 17% of federally regulated truck drivers. It's clearly a systemic issue and it's really widespread in trucking.

As for the second question, I'm sorry; can you repeat it?

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

Often, the drivers who seek you out are forced to incorporate, meaning that it's not a voluntary choice on their part. Is that correct?

[Navneet Aujla]

Yes.

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

Thank you for confirming that.

You mentioned your dissatisfaction with the processing times at the Canada Industrial Relations Board. It seems to be difficult to get cases resolved.

How long does it take, for example, from the time a driver comes to you until a case is resolved at the Canadian Industrial Relations Board? Are we talking days, years, weeks, or months?

[Navneet Aujla]

That is a great question, because one thing that using the CRA to enforce misclassification does not address is the power imbalance between drivers and employers. Drivers often do not have a choice in how they are classified, and there are a lot of reasons that they are pushed into it. It may be a lack of education, but there is a clear power imbalance that the Labour Code recognizes. When you enforce this only through the CRA, it's missing that power imbalance, so there's often no meaningful ability to refuse incorporation or challenge your status. When the enforcement is happening through the CRA, the drivers are not going to be penalized, but it's not going to restore their lost wages, their unpaid overtime or the statutory protection that they've been denied.

To answer your question, oftentimes they do not have a choice.

Your second question was on the length of time it takes when drivers file complaints. It can easily take two to three years. At this point, if a driver files a complaint with the Canada Labour Code today, it's going to take 14 to 16 months just for a labour program officer to be assigned to the case. Then you have another year or two of the investigation taking place before a payment order is issued.

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

Okay, thank you. Since I don't have much time left, I have to stop you there.

I must say that it is utterly scandalous that it takes two to three years to process a case before people can get paid. It makes no sense when you consider that these people need this money to get by and that they are often poorly paid or underpaid. In any case, I am truly outraged to learn this.

I have two quick final questions for you.

Are the measures in place to deter companies from resorting to such practices sufficient?

Do companies comply with orders when they receive them?

[Navneet Aujla]

We need more, 100%. Not only does it take a long time, but there are huge rates of non-compliance. Even when payment orders are issued, many employers do not actually end up paying. There are no meaningful consequences or fines. Basically, right now the system encourages employers to break the law because they profit from it. There are no real consequences for breaking the law.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Ms. Aujla and Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

We'll now go to Mr. Seeback.

Colleagues, just to meet our resource deadline of 1:17 p.m., I am going to cut back on everybody's time just a little bit. I appreciate your understanding.

Mr. Seeback, the floor is yours, sir.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to go back to the CCRSA for one question.

I know that the issue with respect to the illegal operation of truck yards is not necessarily a federal issue, but you mentioned issues around fines and how the fines weren't sufficient.

My understanding is that the mayor of Caledon and some other mayors have written to the Province of Ontario asking for the ability to levy increased fines for these types of things as a way to deter them and to be able to put those fines on title so that it's difficult for those bad operations to sell the land.

Is there any update on the status of that?

[Carmela Palkowski]

The mayor of Caledon came back from a ROMA meeting last week and confirmed that there are going to be some legislation changes, but we don't know what those legislation changes are going to be. That's what we're waiting on.

We have tried to meet with the province, with our own MPP, Sylvia Jones, who is the deputy premier of Ontario. It's been very challenging to get through to her with our asks. We've had one meeting by force, because somebody else had the meeting and we just joined. We asked her for exactly what we needed and what the mayor of Caledon, Mayor Groves, needed, to deal with these illegal operations. We're still waiting to hear back from her.

We've been waiting to hear back for about four months now. Queen's Park will be back March 23, so we need to wait almost two months to see what they have. Our guess is it's not going to be strong enough to deal with whatever has been asked, so we will still be advocating past when Queen's Park opens.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Thanks very much.

Ms. Aujla, you mentioned the Canada Labour Code the two to three years at the CIRB. I've heard similar issues with union matters being adjudicated through the CIRB. It seems to me there's a resource issue here and an underfunding issue perhaps with the CIRB. I wonder if you wanted to comment on that.

[Navneet Aujla]

Yes, I would agree that enforcement is grossly underfunded. There need to be more labour officers, stronger powers for the labour officers to ensure they can enforce payment orders and collect drivers' unpaid wages, and there stronger consequences and meaningful fines for employers who break the law.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Has your organization ever contemplated any changes to the Canada Labour Code that would deal with some of the issues you're talking about? I think you were very clear that it's not just a tax issue; there's 100% a bargaining power imbalance between the drivers and the company owners. I agree.

Do you have potential changes to the Canada Labour Code that would help on this? If you could describe them, that would be great. If you don't have them, could you please submit them to the committee so they could be part of this report?

[Navneet Aujla]

Definitely. We have made submissions in the past. Since 2023, we have made submissions to the Ministry of Labour's staff.

This includes, as I mentioned, making sure there is more funding for enforcement; making sure drivers have more than six months to file a complaint; making sure there are meaningful fines and consequences, including changes to the Canada Labour Code itself, to make sure drivers are actually paid adequately for all the time they work. Right now, there's a huge issue of a lot of labour that goes unpaid as well. We need more measures to ensure drivers are able to speak up and access justice.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Thank you.

You submitted these in 2023. Have the changes that you've requested been made or are they in the current budget or any legislation the government has?

[Navneet Aujla]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Nguyen, the floor is yours. You have four minutes, please.

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for joining us today. It's extraordinary to hear about your efforts to come together and advocate for the community in terms of safety where you're living. For those who are online, thanks for your time today.

I want to ask about other tools in other jurisdictions. One of the things that came to mind is a whistle-blower line or other ways to get information around what's happening in the industry. Would measures like that help people who are being exploited, as these drivers are, come forward in a way that protects their safety?

Ms. Campbell, do you want to start? Then I can go to Ms. Aujla.