moved:
Motion No. 2
That Bill C-12, in Clause 10, be amended by adding after line 8 on page 22 the following:
“132.1 (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, an employee described in section 132 may, after informing her employer, avail herself of the legislation of the province where she works that relates to the applicable measures, including those relating to preventive withdrawal, transfer to another position and financial compensation to which she would be entitled under the legislation of the province where she works.
(2) After informing the employer, the employee makes application to the agency appointed by the province for the purpose of administering provincial occupational health and safety legislation and the agency may refuse the application.
(3) The agency referred to in subsection (2) shall process the application according to the laws of the province applicable to pregnant or nursing employees in that province.
(4) An employee who makes the application referred to in subsection (2) may avail herself of the remedies provided for in the legislation of the province where she works.
(5) The Minister shall, on behalf of the Government of Canada, with the approval of the Governor in Council, enter into an agreement with the government of a province or its agent to determine the administrative and financial conditions of applications from employees referred to in subsection (1).
(6) The exercise by an employee of the right under subsection (1) is without prejudice to any other right conferred by this Act, by a collective agreement or other agreement or by any terms and conditions of employment.”
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to move this amendment to Bill C-12. Its purpose is clear—to ensure that all workers, particularly those who are pregnant or nursing, are covered by the legislation in force in their province.
This amendment would mean that workers in Quebec would not be penalized by the federal legislation. Members should know that approximately 100,000 workers in Quebec are covered by the federal rather than the provincial labour code. Workers covered by the federal code will be protected by the bill we are now debating. However, as far as pregnant and nursing workers are concerned, this bill is far inferior to existing provisions in Quebec.
The purpose of this amendment is therefore to ensure that the provincial code applies to all employees described in clause 132 of the bill.
The amendment was drafted by the member responsible for this issue, the member for Laurentides, our labour critic.
I am pleased to be replacing her today, for a number of reasons. The result of the struggles which, in Quebec, gave rise to the present legislation on occupational health and safety and its protection of women, must benefit not only women covered by Quebec's labour code but also women subject to the federal code.
It is ridiculous that, within one province, and even within one federal building, where some employees come under the provincial code, there are women operating under two completely different codes. What we are talking about is the protection of pregnant and nursing women.
This bill is an improvement over the provisions of the Canada Labour Code as they were previously. It does, however, stop short of providing pregnant or nursing women with complete protection. There are several weaknesses in the clause in question, and we are especially flabbergasted that, from the moment their physician declares that there is a danger, women will no longer receive their pay and will be forced to go on employment insurance, if they are eligible.
This is a great departure from the Quebec legislation, which provides for women to retain 90% of their salary. It makes no sense for this to apply in one province. I am not familiar with the legislation of other provinces. I do know that, overall, provincial legislation follows federal legislation rather closely, and I find that regrettable. We in Quebec cannot stand for there being such a difference between the coverage provided to women under provincial legislation and what is provided to women covered by the Canada Labour Code.
That is the reason behind our calling for this amendment. We know that we are again dealing with the matter of Quebec versus Canada. In this case, it is very frustrating because these are social policies.
I was vice-president of the CSN at the time that the Quebec legislation was introduced and discussed, in 1997. It was no easy task to get the provisions contained in the Quebec occupational health and safety legislation passed. Nor has it been an easy task to maintain them. On a number of occasions, the employers who are equally represented on the committee overseeing the implementation of the occupational health and safety act said several times “But that is costly and should not be covered by the CSST”. But the debates and discussions have continued.
The principle is that a pregnant or nursing employee who may feel she, her baby or the fetus is at risk because she is working, should not find it difficult to be moved or, if she cannot be moved to another job, she should be able to stay at home and wait to return to work as an employee and a contributor to the production and enrichment of the compagny.
What we did in Quebec was spread the costs among everyone. It then becomes a general social benefit paid for by everyone. It makes no sense for the present legislation to compel the woman to stay at work. This is the serious part. If the woman does not accept it, what does she do? Does she agree to stay at work, despite the risks? That is what this means, exactly what this means.
It does not encourage a woman to question. It encourages her, if hers is the only income or if this income is vital, to agree to conditions that are dangerous to her or her child or to not nurse the child. This makes no sense. Let no one try to tell me she can receive employment insurance benefits. First, she needs to be eligible for them and then, if she ever needs them because of a layoff or for other reasons, she will no longer be able to draw them.
That means that the health of pregnant women is not given the attention it is due. I do not understand how we could come to that.
I heard the NDP member say earlier that that could be considered elsewhere, but the legislation will be there. Once it is passed, that is what will apply and, as far as I know, there is no thought being given to amending it again.
It seems to me that this amendment is acceptable. I think this is an opportunity, in this House, to allow women in Quebec to be treated on an equal footing with women covered by Quebec's labour legislation.
I am basically begging, because it is women who will be penalized, when all that is needed is agreement for provincial legislation to apply. Furthermore, I should point out that this was the case until 1988, until a constitutional ruling. I should also point out that there is an agreement with one department concerning certain workers.
So, if it can be done by agreement, why could women not benefit in all cases from this right acquired and maintained at such cost by women in Quebec and their male colleagues?