Madam Speaker, I would like to come back to a point raised by the member for Sherbrooke.
I told him that the idea of appointing a mediator-arbitrator would not benefit either the union or management. He said that, under the bill, the employer would no longer be required to negotiate. In subparagraph 11(1)(b)(ii), however, the bill states that, if there is no good faith negotiation and agreement between the two parties, the mediator-arbitrator may ask them:
to submit, within the time and in the manner that he or she may specify, that party's final offer in respect of the matter and, subject to subsection (7), select, in order to resolve the matter, either the final offer of the employer or the final offer of the union;
How can we say that this approach, as described in the bill, favours one party over the other?
I do not understand how this could harm the union.