Mr. Speaker, I was saying that the Canada Labour Code has not undergone a major overhaul in more than 25 years. It had to be updated with the future in mind. This is a commitment, my colleagues will recall, we made in the last speech from the throne.
My primary objective is to ensure an orderly approach is taken to industrial relations. I sincerely believe that clear rules striking a balance between the rights and responsibilities of all concerned are essential to the effectiveness of our collective bargaining process.
I also believe that the reform proposed by our government specifically meets this balance requirement. This has earned it substantial support from the parties covered by the Canada Labour Code.
The amendments to part I of the Canada Labour Code are important, timely and essential but not radical. They will not turn our system on its head but will encourage co-operative labour-management relationships as well as constructive collective bargaining.
We want to develop a positive legislative framework. The bill creates a fair and equitable set of rules for a collective bargaining process. It will allow the parties to frame their own agreements and have the flexibility to find appropriate solutions to the competitive pressures of our changing environment.
Our reform package reflects a broad consensus among stakeholders and the recommendation of the independent task group chaired by Andrew Sims. These recommendations have been published in the report "Seeking Balance".
We want to improve the administration of the code. This is why we are replacing the current board by the Canada Industrial Relations Board which, with its extended responsibilities, will be more effective and also more representative.
We have tightened up the negotiation process to allow a faster and smoother resolution of disputes, thanks to the following: a four month notice to bargain before the expiry of a collective agreement; a single one stage conciliation procedure; a secret vote within 60 days of a work stoppage; and a 72 hour advance notice before a strike or a lockout.
We want to promote better communication between employees, employers and the union. We also recognize the right of employers to express their views directly to the employees, provided they do not resort to unfair practices. As for the union, it will be allowed to get from the board the list of employees working off site and to contact them, as long as their privacy and their safety are maintained.
Traditionally, union and management groups were never able to reach a consensus on the issue of replacement workers. The government had to make a decision. After an in-depth analysis, it opted for a moderate and reasonable approach which, once again,
strikes a balance between the rights and the responsibilities of all those involved.
The equation is based on the premise that those involved will act in good faith. Under normal circumstances, the employer will be allowed to use replacement workers during a legal work stoppage. However, if it is established that such a practice is designed to undermine the representational capacity of a union, rather than to meet the legitimate objectives of a negotiation process, it will be deemed unfair.
We are giving unions the right to refer any contentious case directly to the Canadian Industrial Relations Board, which will have the authority to prohibit the use of replacement wokers during a conflict.
Our reform also provides that replacement workers must not be members of the bargaining unit. Therefore, they cannot take part in any vote, including a vote to return to work. At the end of a work stoppage, unions members will have the right to go back to their old job, before any other employee. They will also be still entitled to some benefits during the work stoppage, provided they keep paying related premiums. Moreover, any dismissal or disciplinary action could be subject to an arbitration process.
During any work stoppage we have to ensure that the measures necessary to protect public health and safety are maintained. No specific activities will be designated in the code. I believe that the parties should have the opportunity to negotiate an agreement. If they are unable to agree, the board will have the power to make that determination.
An important amendment ensures that the bargaining rights and the collective agreement will be carried over when an undertaking moves from provincial to federal jurisdiction. This is particularly important in these times when changes in ownership can occur frequently. It will prevent unnecessary disruption in labour-management relations and deter those who would use jurisdiction hopping to avoid bargaining obligations.
The next item deals with successive contracts for service in the airport industry. When a contract for services such as aircraft refuelling or security screening is transferred as a result of retendering, the new contractor will have to pay equivalent remuneration to employees. In the past the end of each contract has resulted in the loss of remuneration and employment for a group of workers mainly composed of women and immigrants. I feel it is our utmost responsibility to give them some protection against a competition process that would otherwise be based on who can pay the lowest wages.
This amendment will create a level playing field for contractors whose employees are unionized and reduce turnover rates, an important element to help maintain our airports at the highest security level possible.
In the new code grain handlers and their employers will retain the right to strike and lockout. In the event of a work stoppage involving other parties in port related activities, including longshoremen, service affecting grain shipment must be maintained.
The shipment of grain is a multimillion dollar industry. We export to over 70 countries and the livelihood of over 130,000 farmers depends on our reputation as a reliable supplier and exporter.
When a work stoppage involving employees in longshoring or other port operations impact on grain exports, special labour legislation has become the normal reaction. This has effectively removed the incentive for the parties to resolve their own disputes.
Taking grain shipping out of the equation will allow the parties to address their differences in a less destructive manner, accept the responsibility for their own actions and forego involving Parliament in the resolution of their disagreements. We are confident that this measure will address the vast majority of disruption to grain exports at Canadian ports.
In 1999 we will review its effectiveness and if necessary we will look at the stronger measures like those recommended in the west coast ports industry inquiry in order to deal with this important problem for the whole country.
Finally, let me make it crystal clear that the amendments to the Corporations and Labour Unions Returns Act, as we call it CALURA, do not in any way diminish the accountability process of the unions. On the contrary, Statistics Canada has found a better, more efficient and cheaper way to collect the data. It will be included in the labour force survey Stats Canada receives every month from the union membership.
This simple operation will save Statistics Canada $300,000 a year and give us regular, reliable data. This is, therefore, a noticeable improvement to the old procedure and I am very happy to present it in Bill C-66.
In conclusion, I would like to share with my colleagues a very wise remark made in the Sims report. The report maintained that the Canada Labour Code must strike a balance between conflicting values and interests; between the interests of the employees and those of the employers; between social and economic priorities; between rights and responsibilities; between individual and majority rights; between the public interest and free collective bargaining.
This is exactly what we tried to do with the review of the Canada Labour Code. Therefore, I would urge my colleagues to support this motion. Bill C-66 will then be immediately referred to the standing committee. All those interested will be able to express
their viewpoints to committee members, who will then report on the suggestions that were made.
This is how all my colleagues can help turn the Canada Labour Code into a modern and useful tool to help both management and unions to settle their labour disputes.