Debates of Nov. 23rd, 2018

Postal Services Resumption and Continuation Act

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a few remarks, and then I have some questions for the minister.

There have been many references to 2011, when the Conservatives ended rotating CUPW strikes. However, this Liberal motion and the legislation that follows it, believe it or not, is even more restrictive than Stephen Harper's was, because the motion that preceded this bill limits debate to the shortest possible timeframe. We are expected to wrap up this farce before the end of this sitting day tonight. It is an outright affront to democracy, and the Prime Minister and his caucus do not even have the decency to be ashamed.

It is just another broken promise thrown on a heap of abandoned election promises from 2015. We heard about electoral reform, treating veterans and their families with dignity and fairness, promises to never take veterans back to court, balanced budgets and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and effectively addressing climate change—

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order. I realize that committee of the whole is a less formal proceeding. However, there is a little too much chaos in the chamber, with people standing and having side conversations. I would ask hon. members to keep conversations at a low level. We know it works not too badly to a point. If you really want to engage in that kind of conversation, perhaps do it in your respective lobbies.

We will go back to the hon. member for London—Fanshawe.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, there have been all kinds of promises to effectively address climate change, but sadly, the fact is that our greenhouse gas emissions increased significantly in 2015. Let us not forget the promise to restore home mail delivery. All this brings us back to Canada Post and its refusal to bargain a fair and equitable collective agreement with its CUPW members.

Let us examine the facts. There are many facts to look at in this conflict. Workplace injuries at Canada Post have increased by 43% over the last two years, largely as a result of Canada Post's transformation, which requires workers to walk longer routes carrying heavier loads. It is not just letters. It is letters and parcels. Some parcels can be quite large and quite heavy.

Today the disabling injury rate for a letter carrier is five times the rate of the rest of the federal public sector. Just imagine if our workplace were such that it jeopardized our physical and emotional well-being. When CUPW president Mike Palecek asked his members about injuries, in a couple of hours he received more than 450 responses. The stories are quite heartbreaking. I would like to give members a sense of the kinds of things CUPW members are facing.

One young woman writes that she tripped and fell on an icy sidewalk. She was seriously injured, and it took several months for her to get back to work after having received physiotherapy. When she went back, she was supposed to be on light duty. Despite that, she was harassed by her manager to do more and more heavier work. As a result, she was re-injured, and she has not been able to get back to work. She has small children who are depending on her ability to earn a living.

Another individual reported that he fell and landed on his right knee. He twisted his left knee in the process, and now he has severe arthritis in both. He was accommodated at the plant, but that accommodation has not worked out, and as a result, he cannot work. He cannot work the way he had intended, and he has many years ahead of him in terms of his working life.

This means that not only are these people injured but they cannot provide for their families in the way they had expected, and quite simply, families are suffering. I cannot begin to explain how important it is for the government to understand that this strike is about not just money but about the well-being of families and CUPW members. It is about their health and safety, and that should matter.

We hear other stories about workers being sent out on nights, not unlike tonight, to wear headlamps to find their way over dark, slippery snowbanks and snow covered sidewalks. If a worker cannot finish a route in eight hours, that worker is sent back out to finish delivering the mail. The fact is that people cannot work 10, 12 or 14 hours a day, as we heard from people in the gallery.

The government has chosen to come to the aid of Canada Post instead of the aid of CUPW workers. Before I ask my questions, I would like to quote once against from Dru Oja Jay and his observations about this strike. He said, “Every successful strike has to pass through a storm of negative media coverage and worse. It's no different for Canada Post employees. They're striking for their own health and safety. They're endlessly overworked, and they're frequently injured. They have a plan for transforming Canada Post into an engine for economic and environmental transition. They're also bargaining for equal pay for rural mail carriers, who are not paid the same rate as their urban counterparts.”

In some cases, they receive no money at all for work done, simply because it does not fit into the four or six hours that Canada Post has determined for a mail route.

I do indeed have some questions for the minister. I would like to know if the minister is aware that the injury rate for postal workers is more than five times that of other federal workers. Does the minister condone the perpetuation of this unsafe reality in the workplace at Canada Post?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, I thank the member for her obvious compassion for the workers of Canada Post. We share that compassion.

I share a profound conviction that people should be safe at work. As Minister of Labour, one of the most devastating parts of my job is that I receive notices, from across the country in federally regulated workplaces, of significant injury and death that occur in workplaces. It is a profoundly sobering part of my job to see how many injuries and deaths arise in federally regulated workplaces to this day, most of which, if not all, are preventable.

I stand with the member opposite to say that we all deserve to come home safe and sound at the end of a day. It is my commitment as the Minister of Labour to continue to work on making sure that workplaces are safe and healthy.

That is why the first guiding principle in the legislation is to ensure that the health and safety of employees are protected. We have heard from union members about their concerns regarding their health and safety in the workplace, and that is why that principle is incorporated into the principles that the arbitrator must consider when making decisions, if the parties cannot make those decisions on their own.

I will also say—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order. We will go back to the hon. member for London—Fanshawe. Normally, in this format the length of the response is as close as possible to the time that was taken to pose the question.

The hon. member for London—Fanshawe.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, I appreciate your clarifying that for the minister.

The minister has talked a great deal about the cost of the rotating strikes to the economy. Is she aware that one of the key issues of this strike is indeed the injuries suffered by CUPW workers? Given that injuries cost the economy in Canada about $26 billion a year, is the minister at all concerned about the cost to the economy of this reality of injury at Canada Post?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, I will complete my response to the member about the very compelling story she told about a particular worker who had been injured, had returned to work and who felt harassed to do more than her return-to-work plan indicated she was capable of doing.

I will point out that Bill C-65 was passed thanks to all, very supportive, members of the House, who agreed that workplaces should be free of harassment and violence. All workers will now be protected by the new legislation this government has introduced. In fact, now when people are harassed, regardless of the workplace in which they find themselves, if they are in a federally regulated workplace, they will have measures to protect them and support them as they move through processes for which they may not have had support previously.

In terms of the—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order.

The hon. member for London—Fanshawe.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, Canada Post was, in fact, a federally regulated workplace before this legislation, and those issues were never addressed and the harassment continues.

I would like to now ask the minister if she supports management's directive, which we have heard something about, that Canada Post CUPW workers withheld government cheques that included child tax benefits and social assistance cheques. Was she aware of it and does she condone it?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, in fact Canada Post and the union agreed prior to the strike that they would continue to deliver government cheques to Canadians. What we know is that some of those cheques may have arrived slightly late as a result of the rotating strikes, and that has created hardship.

What is even more difficult for Canadians who rely on government cheques, and in fact all kinds of cheques, is the uncertainty. I repeat that I have heard from members of my own community that even the uncertainty of not knowing if a cheque will arrive in time to pay rent can be extremely difficulty for people who are often in the most vulnerable situations.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, I thank the minister for that answer, but unfortunately it does not bear out in terms of the truth of the matter. Cheques were delivered to Canada Post outlets and there was a message that they were not to be delivered until after November 22. That came from management. That seems to me to be at the crux of it, the manipulation by Canada Post, and the minister does not seem to be able to understand it or control it.

I wonder if the minister believes that it is okay that for the past 10 years the CUPW workers' pay has remained below inflation.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, these are exactly the reasons why collective agreements exist and why bargaining is so important. Bargaining determines wages, increases, in some cases practices and principles, working hours, leave and a number of issues. That is why we have worked so closely with the parties through this process to get them to a place where they could agree on the terms of the next collective agreement. It is not for me to say what the increase should be of any corporation. However, collective bargaining is an opportunity to arrive at a mutually agreeable solution. That is what we have been working on so hard with both parties through all of the tools available to us.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, I am afraid that the minister does not seem to understand that back-to-work legislation short-circuits this collective bargaining that the minister said is going to produce fair wages and make sure workers are protected.

I wonder if the minister also believes it is acceptable for Canada Post to be allowed to deny rural and suburban workers' pay for all hours worked.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, again I will draw the member's attention to the guiding principles in the legislation for the arbitrator, which clearly indicate that, along with the health and safety of the employees to be protected, the arbitrator consider that employees are ensured to receive equal pay for work of equal value and ensure the fair treatment for the more temporary or part-time employees and other employees in non-standard employment as compared to full-time or permanent employees. These principles are exactly there to help guide the arbitrator to address long-standing issues that the union has experienced.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would also like to ask the minister this. Is she aware that the employees who work for Purolator, which is a part of Canada Post, make $5 more per hour than CUPW members for doing essentially the same work? Two months ago they were granted a 3% wage increase, yet Canada Post is waffling and refusing to bargain with respect to the 2.9% requested by CUPW. Does the minister feel that is acceptable?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, I was just checking with my officials because I recalled that the Purolator contract was one of the first contracts that, in my term as Minister of Labour, was successfully concluded through a collective bargaining process. That was an agreement that was negotiated by the members of that union with their employer. This is exactly how the collective bargaining process should work.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, I wonder if the minister is aware that under USMCA, Canadians ordering packages shipped from the U.S. and Mexico by private couriers could receive a $40 discount with respect to duty on the goods. However, that is only if they use private couriers. The same exemption is not available to Canada Post. Does the minister condone this imbalance regarding private couriers and Canada Post? Is she prepared to ask her government to hold up signing the USMCA until this unfair practice is rectified?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, I am really pleased to get this question from the member opposite, because one of the things that makes the USMCA so progressive is the fully enforceable chapter on labour. It has been endorsed by Canadian and international labour organizations that say that this is in fact the most progressive labour chapter in the history of trade agreements. I would say that we care so much about the rights of labour that we insisted on a fully enforceable labour chapter as part of the USMCA. That is something that organized labour had been calling for, worked with us so carefully to craft, and stood with us, side by side, as we negotiated that agreement.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, unfortunately this agreement that the minister thinks is so wonderful simply sets up committees. It does not mean that labour relations and labour practices are going to be safe and secure and that Canadian workers are going to be protected.

Finally, section 9 of the back-to-work legislation that we have before us reads that, “the Minister must refer to the mediator-arbitrator all matters relating to the amendment or revision of each collective agreement that are, at the time of the appointment, in dispute between the parties.”

The problem is that section 9 provides the minister with unilateral power to determine the matters in dispute and the scope of the mediator-arbitrator's mandate.

Is this not of concern? Is the minister prepared to amend this section to provide for fair and transparent processes to determine the matters in dispute?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, I assure the member opposite that I will refer all outstanding issues.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Chair, my last question to the minister is in light of the response of the workers of Canada Post, the human beings who are on the street and deliver the mail and the packages. Is the minister prepared to meet with them and hear out their concerns? It seems to me that Canada Post is not listening very well at all.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, as a matter of fact my constituency office right now is occupied by Canada Post workers. There are about 10 people sitting and working with my staff. My staff has been communicating with me about their concerns. I certainly have met many times with union officials, with the president of the union and with many of the members of the negotiating team.

I will continue to make myself available as a member of Parliament to any constituency member or any individual in this country who wants to speak with me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Whitby. I will let the hon. member know there are about eight minutes remaining in the time provided.

[Celina Caesar-Chavannes, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would like to thank the minister for her interventions thus far.

Over the past few weeks, many people from Whitby have reached out to me with their concerns about the strike. The Government of Canada is committed to free collective bargaining. Introducing back-to-work legislation is sometimes necessary in order to meet the needs of Canadians. I would like to start off by reiterating that, as the minister has said many times, we are committed to a free collective bargaining process as the basis for a sound industrial relationship.

A lot of work has been done over the last year to ensure that we as a government have been committed and fair in providing resources to both parties. Could the minister clarify to people in Whitby, and other Canadians, the work that has been done so far to ensure that this has come to an agreement that would be amenable to Canadians?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, the member is right to point out that we have worked extremely hard to help this collective bargaining process move forward to reach a collective agreement.

First of all, about a year ago we appointed federal mediators through a federal mediation service to work with the two parties to begin early negotiations at my urging. Early and often is what I often tell parties who are entering into that process.

They continued to work with federal mediation services but when it was clear that they had reached an impasse, I appointed a special mediator to work with the parties to see if a new set of eyes, a fresh perspective, could help them reach a collective agreement. Those talks broke down. I reappointed the special mediator not once, but twice.

We have talked to the negotiating teams. I have met with both the union and the employer. The Minister of Public Services and Procurement and Accessibility has also met with the employer and the union.

We are confident that we have done everything in our power to help these parties negotiate. I would still urge the parties to get a deal. It is not too late.