House of Commons Hansard #357 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was post.

Topics

Business of the HouseGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Business of the HouseGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I declare the motion carried.

(Motion agreed to)

The hon. member for Sherbrooke

The House resumed consideration of the motion, and of the amendment.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by saying that I will be sharing my time with my distinguished colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue.

I am very sad to rise in the House today to speak to Motion No. 25, which we are currently debating. This motion sits in the broader context of back-to-work legislation for Canada Post employees that will be introduced and debated a little later today, from what the government is telling us. That is why Motion No. 25 was moved and is being debated today.

It is sad because I honestly never expected this. I do not want to spend too much time repeating what they said, but some of my colleagues who were here in 2011 remember the Harper Conservatives and their special back-to-work legislation. Our NDP colleagues criticized it profusely and passionately, but so did our Liberal colleagues, who were on this side of the House at the time. I remember very well their position in that debate, and so I am very surprised and sad today. I honestly never expected the Liberals to do the same thing.

Back in 2011, I would not have thought it possible that the Liberals, who were in this corner at the time and were standing up for workers, would do exactly the same thing as the Conservatives seven and a half years later. I would never have believed that could happen, but the Liberals have shown us their true colours, and reality is staring us in the face. We now see that they too are comfortable tabling back-to-work legislation that infringes on a fundamental right in Canada, a right that is protected and recognized by our courts, a constitutional right: the right to strike.

Throughout our history, there have been some incredible battles to claim the right to strike, the right to protest by not reporting for work in order to exert pressure on the employer during negotiations. Workers also have a constitutional right to freely negotiate their working conditions with the employer without interference from a third party.

That is the core of today's debate, even though we are spending a little time talking about the process. Today, we are being hit with a motion that will fast-track the bill through all the stages so it can be passed in a few hours. As we know, bills go through many stages in the House. It normally takes weeks, if not months, before they are passed and receive royal assent. Today, we are being told that we will study and pass a bill at first reading, at second reading, at report stage and at third reading, and then send it to the Senate, all in a few hours.

Committees are often the best place to get more information and fulfill our duties as members of Parliament. This is where we can call in experts to talk about the clauses of the bill, share their opinions, and contribute to the parliamentary debate. However, today, for such an important bill, the government wants to speed through all these steps in a few hours, between 8 p.m. and 2 a.m. What a disgrace for our democracy.

I speak for all parliamentarians when I say that this government's cabinet is asking us to pass a very important bill in just a few hours without allowing us to call any witnesses or experts to give their opinions on the bill. Some Liberal members were even asking questions about whether this bill is constitutional. Why not take the time to study it?

That is what I have to say about the process. It is important to talk about it, but we must focus on the workers who will be affected by this bill, which will be rammed through a little later today.

This bill also affects the right to strike. We know that striking has consequences. Government members remind us every time they speak, but we know it. Fortunately, the union is being respectful. It could have organized an even bigger strike that would have been even more harmful to the employer, since that is its right, but it chose not to.

It is a strike that I think shows respect for Canadians and for society and shows a certain awareness on the part of Canada Post employees. During the lockout in 2011, Canada Post employees even agreed to deliver important cheques to many Canadians in Sherbrooke and elsewhere in Canada, citizens whose daily survival, their bread and butter, depends on getting this federal or provincial government assistance. They agreed to do it, so they are aware of the impact it can have and the value of their work. Their job is to deliver letters, cheques and parcels, which are even more numerous these days, in 2018.

Unfortunately, the government will not even recognize that the union has shown openness and respect for Canadian society by opting for a rotating strike, which affects certain regions at a time. It has affected Sherbrooke, I must say, but there was no general panic in Sherbrooke. No one shouted from the rooftops that they were not receiving their parcels or letters. There is no general panic in Canada right now because of the Canada Post strike. The only people who see it as a panic or a disaster are the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour and the Minister of Public Services and Procurement. They see a crisis where there is none, a crisis manufactured by them, not by Canada Post. The crisis does not exist, thanks to the respect shown by the union.

Let us ask ourselves one question. If the bill is passed later today, and the right to strike is taken away from the union and the postal workers, what do they have left to negotiate with their employer? What other leverage will this union have to sit down and demand compromises?

Yes, both sides have to compromise. That is what negotiation means. If the government tells the union that it no longer has the right to strike, what other recourse does it have? Workers will no longer have the right to protest against the employer and form picket lines around their workplaces. They will no longer have the right to show the employer that they are important and that the employer is nothing without them. Without workers, the employer is absolutely nothing.

That is why there are economic impacts. That is why strikes are important. Strikes force employers to acknowledge that workers make a vital contribution to the business and to the bottom line. Without workers, Canada Post cannot make a profit at year end. Office-bound managers who have never set foot on a sidewalk to deliver the mail are certainly not going to be doing the work. That is the point of the right to strike.

The government is ready to sacrifice that power, that vital leverage in the negotiation process. It is ready to sacrifice the only tool available to Canada Post employees, the only avenue they have to make their employer listen to them. As a result, the members of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers will end up with the same working conditions they have had for the past 10 or 20 years, working conditions they want the employer to acknowledge and improve.

There has been a staggering number of injuries on the job at Canada Post. There are issues of fairness between urban and rural workers, which are also leading to issues of gender inequality. The fact that the government is taking away the right to strike, and therefore the right to negotiate, will in reality only perpetuate the problems at Canada Post that the employees are trying to get the employer to recognize. The workers will no longer be able to make their case to their employer, because it is not in the employer's interest to sit down and negotiate. Once the law is passed, why would Canada Post managers negotiate? If the union asks them to improve working conditions, why would the employer agree? It can just say no. The employer will keep saying no to all union demands because the employees will no longer have any leverage to make their case. That is what the Liberals are taking away from them.

Unfortunately, this is what it took for the federal Liberals to show their true colours.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC

Madam Speaker, some people seem to be forgetting that the bill imposes a mediator-arbitrator. Does my colleague believe that this mediator-arbitrator will not be impartial? Does he believe that there is a conspiracy against the union? Does he believe that this mediator will have a hidden agenda and favour the employer?

This does not prevent the parties from negotiating. When an arbitrator is appointed, a party that does not show good faith runs the risk of receiving a decision that is not in their favour. It is in the interest of both parties to show good faith in order to reach a mutually satisfactory agreement.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

November 23rd, 2018 / 4:15 p.m.

NDP

Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC

Madam Speaker, I do not know what universe my colleague from Lac-Saint-Louis is living in. I imagine he lives in a world where everything is sunshine and roses.

In the real world, the employer has no interest in sitting down and negotiating. The employer was just handed incredible bargaining power on a silver platter. It has no interest in negotiating since there is no longer a balance of power. There will be only one mediator-arbitrator. The employer can simply ignore the mediator and the negotiations.

What will change if the employer keeps saying no to all the demands? The government will still be here to protect it and say that the parties are unable to come to an agreement. Obviously, the government will blame the employees, claiming that they are unable to compromise, when it is the employer that is acting in bad faith. There is nothing stopping the employer from continuing to act in bad faith, since the government will always be there to protect it and to trample on the workers' rights.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:20 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, we continue to hear the same thing from the NDP today, basically that we should never put ourselves in a situation where we force people to go back to work, as is being proposed today.

At what point is it acceptable? Where is the threshold according to the New Democrats? They say it has only been about a month since the rotating strikes started. Can the member give us some insight with respect to at what point it becomes sufficient to do it? If there is no maximum, if nothing ever happens and people do not return back to a harmonious work environment, do we just live with this forever?

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:20 p.m.

NDP

Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC

Madam Speaker, there is an important distinction to be made between forcing workers back to work and a government that sees when Canadians are in danger. A few of my colleagues have made that distinction.

When we talk about essential services, we mean police and firefighters. Everyone agrees that those are essential services, because their absence puts Canadians at risk. In this case, we are talking about the economic impact. Of course this strike is having an impact; no one is denying that. However, the only means that employees have to express their point of view and demonstrate their own value to a company is to go on strike to show the company that it is nothing without its employees. No more employees means no more profits. Without its employees, a business falls apart.

Unfortunately, the government wants to take away the only means that workers have to demonstrate their value to the company.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:20 p.m.

NDP

Anne Minh-Thu Quach NDP Salaberry—Suroît, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Sherbrooke for his speech.

In his view, by attacking workers, what message is this Liberal government sending to young people who want to enter the labour market?

Labour unions fought for years to get better maternity leave and EI benefits. They fought so that children could go to school rather than work. They improved working conditions so that everyone could have a better standard of living. When the Liberals trample on the right to negotiate working conditions, they are destroying the improved working conditions created for the entire community.

What are my colleague's thoughts on that?

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:20 p.m.

NDP

Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

Unfortunately, yes, the government is sending mixed messages. The Liberals say they care about the middle class, but Canada Post workers are part of the middle class, and this is a direct attack on them.

The Liberals are launching a direct attack on 45,000 middle-class workers. We are already seeing a race to the bottom. Employees' working conditions are being driven down because the government is caving in to large corporations, to corporate Canada. It is caving in to pressure from companies like Amazon and eBay. They are being told they are right, that employees make too much money and that cuts are needed because profits are too low.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:20 p.m.

NDP

Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Madam Speaker, I am truly appalled to have to speak to a motion and special legislation forcing Canada Post employees back to work. I was here when the same thing happened in 2011. At the time, I had only been a member of Parliament for about two months, and I thought it was a terrible thing to do.

I was very upset with the Conservatives, but I have to say that even though we could not stop debating the motion they presented once we started, at least they did not limit the time for debate. I was therefore able to speak at each stage of the special legislation.

Now, the Liberals are doing something that I did not even think was possible. They have moved a motion to limit debate on the special legislation that would force Canada Post employees back to work. That means there will be only two hours of debate at second reading. Then, the House will resolve into a committee of the whole. Finally, only 30 minutes will be granted for debate at third reading.

That is absolutely pathetic and ridiculous. What is more, it is a serious attack on democracy. To top it all off, we will not even be able to ask those who give speeches at third reading any questions.

In concrete terms, this means that about two opposition MPs will be able to speak to the bill forcing employees of a Crown corporation back to work. This is a serious attack on workers' rights. I wish I could say that they are simply copying what the Conservatives did, but it is worse than that. What they are doing is even worse than what the Conservatives did, which I did not think was possible. At least when the Conservatives introduced their special legislation, they said they knew they would have to work, but that was the life of an MP.

However, the Liberals are too lazy. They think two hours is enough. They could not care less, because the rights of workers are not important to them. They think they can solve all this in two hours.

It is also an attack on women. One of the union's key demands is that rural mail carriers receive wages equivalent to those of urban mail carriers. Incidentally, 75% of rural mail carriers are women.

The government is attacking those women directly by imposing special legislation, preventing them from going on strike and preventing them from fighting for better working conditions.

There is another major impact on women that is caused by the current working conditions at Canada Post. Since they finish their work day at 8 p.m. or 9 p.m. because the routes are too long and they have to finish their deliveries, what are they supposed to do about day care?

Most day cares are almost ready to kick children out if they are still there five minutes after closing time. How can someone manage a family if they never know when they will finish work or when they will be able to pick up their kids? That is why many women simply have to give up their jobs at Canada Post, because it is impossible to manage if they have children, especially if they do not have a partner.

When I talk about the working conditions of rural workers, a large part of the vagaries of rural life and the working conditions are not directly related to the mail carriers. Mail carriers cannot control snow removal in rural areas. I can say that thanks to all the cuts to the transfers to municipalities, more and more municipalities are having difficulty clearing snow on rural roads.

When a mail carrier has to start delivering mail at 8 a.m., through snow that comes up to their ears, driving along a three-foot-wide track in the middle of the road, of course it takes longer for them to get around and deliver the mail.

This is in addition to the fact that many people may not have had time to clear their front walkways. Female letter carriers have to brave the snow and the road conditions. This creates total uncertainty as to when they will finish work. How can they manage a family life when they simply have no idea when they will finish work?

To add insult to injury, after a certain number of hours of work, mail carriers work for free. They are not paid for overtime. That shows precious little respect for the working conditions of women in rural areas.

The right to strike is another key factor. It is important to understand that the right to strike is protected by the Constitution and by many court decisions.

Some classes of workers do not have the right to strike. They are governed by essential services legislation. Generally that means police officers, firefighters, or nurses. Their absence from work has a direct impact on public safety. Obviously, safety is at risk if there are no police officers patrolling the streets. If someone shows up at an emergency room and there are no nurses on duty, then that is not good.

Although postal workers provide a very important service to the public, it is not considered an essential service. They have the right to strike. That right is protected under the Constitution.

When the government announced two weeks ago that it was introducing back-to-work legislation, the balance of power was lost. Of course, strikes have repercussions, but that is what it takes to maintain the balance of power. It is very hard to negotiate without the right to strike.

For example, the government is failing the House of Commons security personnel, who do not have the right to strike. They have been wearing their green hats for three years now because that is all they can do, is change the colour of their uniform since they have been denied the right to strike. Their work falls under the category of essential services. If the House of Commons security officers decided not to come to work, there would be serious concerns. For three years the government has been failing them and doing nothing to speed up negotiations.

Without the right to strike it is very hard to negotiate and improve one's working conditions. I experienced that as a nurse. When the only way to pressure the employer is to go to work in pyjamas, it is pretty hard.

The workers' right to strike is protected. Nevertheless, these workers decided to hold a rotating strike because they care about the people they serve. They said that they would not hold a strike that affects the entire population all at once. There are cheques to deliver. They want to strike but they do not want to have a major impact on people. Since the start of the rotating strikes on October 22, there was no mail delivery in Abitibi—Témiscamingue on just one day, November 6. There were delays only on one day out of the entire month. Personally, I think I can live without postal service for one day a month in order to recognize the right of these workers to improve their working conditions. It is just one day a month per location.

Do we understand what the government is doing? It is imposing special back-to-work legislation. It is using the biggest hammer possible. It is mobilizing all of Parliament to force these people to go back to work even though the strike affects mail delivery only one day a month in a given region.

In real life, it can be a little complicated to get presents by mail in time for Christmas, especially when you live in the country. You do not order something just two days in advance if you want to get it by mail. As Christmas is still one month away, everyone can get their gifts in time if they order what they went in the next few days. There is no need for special legislation. People just have to get organized a little in advance.

Postal workers have said that the cheques will be delivered. All government cheques will be delivered. The less fortunate will not be impacted.

The government is totally ignoring what is really going on on the ground. It says there has to be special legislation. It is forcing that special legislation down MPs' throats by preventing them from debating it and moving the most restrictive motion I have ever seen in my entire career as a member of Parliament. This motion, the most restrictive one I have ever seen in my career as an MP, was moved not by the Conservatives, but by the Liberals.

Despite their claims of being open and working to ensure respect for democracy, the Liberals have moved the most restrictive motion to limit debate I have ever seen. They have also scrapped electoral reform and many other key measures. They are laughing in our faces. They said there would be transparency and democracy, but they are doing the exact opposite. They are failing workers, and I do not think they should ever be forgiven for that.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:30 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, there is a double standard, and let me point out a couple of very obvious things. The member said that this is the most restrictive motion. We have seen the NDP members stand in their place and ask for unanimous support on a motion, without any debate or discussion. At the end of the day, when one is in government, there is a sense of responsibility in making decisions.

I remind my friend across the way that many New Democratic governments, NDP premiers, have recognized, as we have recognized, that at times it is in the national interest to bring in back-to-work legislation. It is only the NDP in opposition which seems to deny that fact.

We need to recognize that Canadians, seniors, individuals with disabilities, and businesses are being affected. There are going to be job losses. It is a serious situation. The NDP members need to sometimes get off their high horse and recognize, as NDP governments in the Prairies have recognized, that at times there is a need.

Would my colleague at least acknowledge that when the NDP did it in the prairie provinces and in Ontario, were they not doing the right thing at that time, as we are doing the right thing today?

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

NDP

Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Madam Speaker, first, I would like to remind my colleague that he is my colleague and not my friend.

Second, we are talking about a bill on a strike that really only affects people one day a month. We are debating a labour dispute at Canada Post that affects people one day a month. Does one day a month justify back-to-work legislation? No, I think not. I do not think every dispute should be dealt with the same way. In this specific labour dispute, strikes are affecting regions one day a month. That is definitely not a good reason to trample on Canada Post employees' right to strike and force them back to work.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Madam Speaker, I would certainly not be one to profess that the Conservatives and NDP would agree on a lot of issues when it comes to labour. However, I would agree with her on the point that when we brought this issue up in 2011, we did give members of the opposition every opportunity to speak for their constituents. However, this speaks to a larger narrative, and I would like my colleague's opinion on this.

When the Liberals were campaigning in 2015, they promised to do things differently. They promised they would never take veterans back to court. They promised to restore door-to-door mail delivery. They promised to have modest deficits. They have accomplished none of these things. They are certainly eroding the trust of Canadians.

In her opinion, can employees of Canada Post, CUPW employees or small business owners have any reason to trust that the Liberal government has their best interests in mind?

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

NDP

Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Madam Speaker, no one can trust the Liberals anymore.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

Ken McDonald Liberal Avalon, NL

Madam Speaker, in listening to the debate today, I will say there is a difference between being the third party or the opposition party and being the government. Being the government comes with a certain amount of responsibility. Earlier, one of the members mentioned essential services. In my riding, which has many rural communities since the riding is all rural, the post office is an essential service to the area so that people can get their mail.

Does the member think it fair to let people strike while seniors and families are not getting their mail, cheques or parcels, and at the same time bring business activity in the country to a standstill?

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

NDP

Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Madam Speaker, as I have said many times, my region has had just one strike day in the entire month. My riding is a rural one, and it had one day in one month.

The government is taking a sledgehammer to Canada Post employees, when these are rotating strikes that affect people one day a month. Canada Post workers are committed to delivering cheques on time. We learned that Canada Post executives withheld the cheques to prevent workers from delivering them so that Canadians would have a negative opinion of the strike. The executives are the ones behind the cheques not being delivered, yet the workers volunteered their time to deliver them during the lockout.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

NDP

Anne Minh-Thu Quach NDP Salaberry—Suroît, QC

Madam Speaker, before I begin, I would like to say that I will be sharing my time with the member for Hochelaga.

Today is a very black Friday, a day on which postal workers' rights are being completely undermined.

The Liberals promised in 2015 that they would never go as far as the Harper government to force workers back to work. They were up in arms in 2011 when the Conservatives legislated postal workers back to work. Today, they are doing the exact same thing, but it is even worse because the super-closure motion currently before the House, on which the Liberals thought it would be a good idea to limit the length of debate, is completely undemocratic.

We are debating a motion that explicitly states that the bill to be debated later this evening, shortly after 8 p.m., can be debated for less than three hours. Furthermore, at third reading, we will not be allowed to ask questions.

Is this the kind of transparency and democracy that the Liberals promised when they came to power in 2015?

I do not think so.

We are here because the government that promised—and I repeat this often—with hand over heart to defend the rights of workers and the middle class is belittling the work that we can do to improve the working conditions of postal workers in particular. That sends a rather strange message to all of the other workers who may want to fight in the coming years to improve their situation and that of the entire community by extension.

The Liberals are really being shamelessly hypocritical today. I cannot believe they are doing this. They too have many workers, mail carriers, who are literally working themselves to death every day.

There has already been a 25% increase in injuries for 2017. An increasing number of mail carriers are experiencing stress because they are overworked. The number of parcels to be delivered is growing. There has been a 100% increase in the number of parcels over the past two years. Since Canada Post was restructured, there are also fewer workers. I will give more details about that a little later in my speech, but I just wanted to point out how postal workers' working conditions are becoming increasingly precarious.

For 11 months, Canada Post did not put forward a single proposal. The government did not make a single public statement about intervening in negotiations either, and that is what would be expected of the government. Then, all of a sudden, two weeks ago, the labour minister threatened to use every means available to end the labour dispute. As many of us have pointed out here, rotating strikes—and it has been five weeks of rotating strikes, not a general strike—are a pressure tactic postal workers are using as a tool to put pressure on their employer, to make their demands heard. That is all. Yes, that job action has an economic impact. We agree that can be inconvenient. Nobody is happy about it, but at the same time, there have to be consequences at some point to prove just how important and appreciated postal workers' work is.

If businesses cannot receive their parcels and people do not receive their letters, that puts pressure on management to negotiate in good faith and consider the unionized workers' offers. If there are no consequences and no pressure, how are the workers going to make management listen to them? They will not really have any leverage.

This financial pressure is therefore necessary. There is no danger to public health or public safety. The Liberals need to stop saying that the government must take responsibility. There is no responsibility to be taken; all they had to do was let the employer and the union negotiate in good faith.

Labour organizations have been negotiating for years. This is not the first time. No one is outraged. No business owners have come to my office to complain about the mail carrier situation. I have not gotten any calls, any emails, or any letters. The Liberals sided with Canada Post and there is not even a national crisis. The Liberals have entirely manufactured this crisis.

I would like to acknowledge postal workers, who are doing everything in their power to ensure that no one is short of anything. They are continuing to deliver all government cheques. They do their job in a respectful manner and ensure that there are no major consequences for the public. As we have repeated today, some of them work on a volunteer basis for several hours, because in rural areas like mine, Salaberry—Suroît, where 29 out of 30 municipalities are rural, overtime is not paid. Is that normal? Would any members of Parliament agree to work overtime on a volunteer basis every week? I seriously doubt it.

However, I would like to remind MPs that union struggles have served to improve the living conditions of millions of people in Canada and around the world. They have led to employment insurance and maternity leave. Working hours were also regulated, being set at 35 or 40 hours a week. Children were also prohibited from working and given the right to attend school. Several significant improvements in workers' lives have resulted from union struggles. I tip my hat to all unionized workers who stand up every day despite the threat of special back-to-work legislation that governments can impose on them.

I would remind members that negotiation takes place between two sides. For several months now, Canada Post has said nothing and has not tried to negotiate, and then it completely dismissed the union's proposals. Today the Liberals continue to trample 50,000 workers' right to negotiate, so this is affecting 50,000 families in this country. The Liberals continue to act as though this right does not exist, as thought postal workers are not human beings. These people have families and want to see their kids in the evening. The Liberals keep going on about how important work-life balance is, yet they are doing absolutely nothing to recognize that postal workers are being affected by an explosion in the number of parcels.

Some of my staffers spoke with Julie today, a rural mail carrier who interrupted her delivery route to speak with them. She begins her route at 7 a.m. and finishes around 4 p.m. She is paid for nine hours of work, which comes out to $20 an hour. However, when she goes over that time, she does not get any more pay and she still has to finish her route. She does not get paid for overtime.

My colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue talked about road conditions. When Julie's truck breaks down, she is not paid for that time, and she also has to use her own telephone, since no phones are provided.

Trucks are not provided in all rural areas. As a result, there are inequities between rural and urban areas, but also between men and women. Most carriers in rural areas are women.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC

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.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Anne Minh-Thu Quach NDP Salaberry—Suroît, QC

Madam Speaker, I do not understand what the MPs in the Liberal camp fail to grasp.

Introducing special back-to-work legislation takes away any bargaining power from the workers. That means that the employer has won. There is no longer any incentive to negotiate because the employer knows that the workers have to return to work. In this case, the employees will have to return to work under the same conditions that they are currently challenging. The workload is excessive because Canada Post is understaffed. Workers are required to work unpaid overtime hours, in other words, mandatory volunteer work.

It is disrespectful. I cannot understand how the Liberals can keep using this argument as though it were valid when it absolutely is not. The balance of power is completely lost if the workers can no longer use pressure tactics. What do they have on their side? They have nothing left to bargain with. They have to swallow whatever they are offered because, in any event, they no longer have the power to negotiate freely, which is a constitutional right that the government should uphold and it clearly is not today.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON

Madam Speaker, to follow up on that point, it is about bringing as much equality as possible to the negotiating process through the mediation/arbitration process. If the member reads the legislation, she will know that when the arbitrator is appointed, it has to be in consultation with the union. What she will also know is that when it comes to that mediator-arbitrator making any decision, it has to be after having heard the concerns of the union. The corporation cannot just say that it is not coming to the table. Actually, within 90 days, the mediator-arbitrator has to render a decision. If the corporation does not come to the table, the union wins on all counts. Both parties have to present a solution if they want their concerns heard.

To ensure that the union's concerns are heard, subclause 11(3) states:

the mediator-arbitrator is to be guided by the need

(a) to ensure that the health and safety of employees is protected;

(b) to ensure that the employees receive equal pay for work of equal value;

There are a number of other principles. I wonder what the member thinks about that.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Anne Minh-Thu Quach NDP Salaberry—Suroît, QC

Madam Speaker, that sure sounds nice, but the hon. member fails to mention that it is under special back-to-work legislation imposed on postal workers.

It therefore takes away the balance of power. If we continue down this path, we forget that this prevents workers from using pressure tactics. If they no longer have any pressure tactics, then they can no longer make any demands. Management has the upper hand.

Again, this special back-to-work legislation is completely undemocratic and inconsistent with the constitutional right to strike and the ability of both parties to negotiate in good faith.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Madam Speaker, it is Groundhog Day.

On June 23, 2011, the longest Thursday of my life, a day that seemed like it would never end, I rose in the House to give my first speech as the member for Hochelaga.

Seven years later, we may have replaced Stephen Harper's Conservatives with a Liberal government, but we are reliving the same sad story. What is happening today is so similar to what happened back then that I feel like I am in the Bill Murray movie where he wakes up every day and relives the same thing over and over again. I can say that we are pretty much following the preposterous storyline of that movie when we look a little closer at what the Liberals are trying to do today. It is so absurd that the bill introduced in the House yesterday has the exact same title as the bill introduced by the Conservatives in 2011, namely an act to provide for the resumption and continuation of postal services.

They are not even trying to pretend it is not Groundhog Day. It really is not funny. I am upset by the government's attitude and actions.

For the past five weeks, 50,000 postal workers, 42,000 of them in urban areas and 8,000 in rural and suburban areas, have been holding legal rotating strikes across Canada. That means that workers in one municipality walk off the job for one day and then go back to work the next day and deliver the mail while postal workers somewhere else in Canada go on strike, and so on. They take turns because they want to strengthen their position vis-à-vis the employer, but they do not want to disrupt services and make Canadians mad at them.

The last thing public servants want to do when putting pressure on their employer is alienate Canadians. At this point, they are negotiating with the sword of Damocles hanging over their heads in the form of special legislation that will end the pressure tactics and impose working conditions. If they were to run afoul of Canadians as well, they would not last long. Postal workers have been around this block before. This really is their Groundhog Day.

The fact is, hardly anyone is complaining about interminable delays caused by rotating strikes, but Canada Post would have us believe the opposite and has invented a fake mail backlog crisis.

Some people have pointed out that even the Société québécoise du cannabis, which put a warning on its website saying that online orders might not be delivered within the five-day timeframe, has managed to deliver its parcels on time with the help of Canada Post's mail carriers.

One of my relatives is planning his wedding and ordered invitations that were supposed to arrive within 10 days. He got them in two days. One of my employees, who was fed up with his old ties, ordered new ones online. He received his package two days later, on the very day that the government began to talk about this special legislation. He told his mail carrier that he was surprised to receive his package so quickly.

Even after all that, the government is going to try to make us believe that the pressure tactics are disrupting the service, so they can impose working conditions on the workers. Here, we stand with the workers.

Why would they invent a fake crisis? Simply because Canada Post wants the government to intervene in the negotiations and impose conditions on their workers. It is not hard to understand. A Crown corporation is fed up with negotiating with a union with mobilized members and pretends that the house is on fire so that the government will jump in. Easy, right?

It must not have been very difficult. The Liberals are so gullible that it only took a short time for them to fall for it and use parliamentary procedure to disrupt the balance of power that the union is trying to build legitimately and with respect for the service that mail carriers provide to Canadians. However, it has been shown that the reasons given by Canada Post to force employees back to work are only pretences to counter the balance of power that the union had managed to build.

In fact, when they returned to work two days ago, on November 21, members of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers discovered that the mail backlog had been somewhat exaggerated. What a surprise. The CUPW Toronto local countered the employer's claims that there were hundreds of trailers of accumulated mail and instead put the number around 70, adding that they could be cleared in a few days. Postal workers saw only one trailer in London, six in Hamilton, two in Halifax and 15 in Moncton. They did not see any in Saint John or St. John's.

Some will probably say that it is the employer's word against the union's, and we know that the NDP is always on the side of unions and workers.

Well, duh. Let me clarify one thing right away. The government agreed with the employer's claims without consulting the union, thus choosing sides and revealing its true colours.

Liberals, Tories, same old story.

The Liberal government's willingness to force workers back to work is nothing short of pointless, anti-union interference in the bargaining process between the Canadian Union of Postal Workers and the Crown corporation.

On top of that, the fact that the government is already saying that it will limit debate on this bill is outrageous. One thing the Liberal Party should have taken away from the debate on the Conservative bill on June 23, 2011, is that the NDP has and will always have something to say about protecting workers' rights and about the fundamental principles of free collective bargaining and the constitutional right to strike. They probably do not want to hear the truth from us. We proved this in 2011, and they remember, because at the time, they were on the same side as us.

In other words, what they forgot, and perhaps would like us to forget, is that their principles switch from one extreme to the other when they move from the opposition benches to the government benches. In the previous Parliament, the Liberals systematically rejected every bill that Stephen Harper's government introduced to force striking workers back to work. What is more, in an open letter to federal public servants in 2015, the member for Papineau, who has since become the Prime Minister, promised to put an end to the Conservatives' practices and to respect the principle of free collective bargaining. This comes as no surprise to me. It is just another one of the government's broken promises.

The issues on which the union based its negotiations were extremely important, namely workplace health and safety, excessive workloads, job security and insecurity, pay for all hours worked, and a better work-life balance. The collective bargaining process started about a year ago, and Canada Post finally made an offer on November 14. The union responded with a counter-offer on November 17. The employer refused the union's proposals on November 19, saying, and I quote, “After having taken the time to assess them, we must advise that they cannot unfortunately form the basis of any potential settlements.”

Lise-Lyne Gélineau, president of the CUPW Montreal local, said that Canada Post waited 11 months, until the last second, to make an offer that was supposed to look like the beginnings of negotiations. Now we have this special legislation. If I understand correctly, and I know I do, the union had to resort to pressure tactics for Canada Post to wake up and begin to negotiate a little more seriously.

The fact that the government is meddling in negotiations and fast-tracking this legislation is frankly unacceptable. The Liberals are trying to defend their use of the same tactics as Stephen Harper by saying that they support the bargaining process, but if that were true, they would not have done such an about-face and imposed this special legislation. Today they are showing us what side they are on. They prefer to impose back-to-work legislation rather than encourage negotiation. On top of that, they are muzzling members during debate in this bill. This is worse than anything Stephen Harper did.

Before closing, I just want to remind the Liberal government that if it decides to go ahead, to fast-track this bill and use the same tactics as the previous Conservative government, perhaps the Liberals should keep in mind that on April 28, 2016, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice found in favour of CUPW and retroactively struck down the special legislation passed in 2011 because it violated the workers' freedom of association and expression. With that in mind, perhaps I should hope that today turns out to be Groundhog Day.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

5 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, we have heard today, from various members of the NDP, that there should be virtually no time that such legislation should be brought forward to get employees back to work. One member did say earlier that certain circumstances, such as for the police, might warrant it, yet NDP governments across Canada provincially have never even done that for the police.

The NDP did do it once in Saskatchewan for dairy workers, and the NDP in British Columbia did it for elevator operators. I cannot understand how either of those could be deemed essential, unless one was physically stuck in an elevator.

I wonder if the member can comment as to whether she thinks the decisions made by those NDP governments were actually made in error and that they should not have done that.

An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Postal ServicesGovernment Orders

5:05 p.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Madam Speaker, I wonder if my Liberal colleague knows the difference between a rotating strike and a strike. A rotating strike, as I mentioned earlier, is a day here, a day there. We saw that it had a minimal effect on mail delivery. Where, then, is this crisis?

The crisis was completely manufactured by Canada Post managers, and the Liberal Party fell for it. It is saying that the sky is falling because there is a strike. However, it is not a strike, it is a rotating strike.

There was a similar problem in 2011 when the Conservatives said that there was a strike, that it was preposterous and that people had to return to work. It was actually a lockout. A lockout occurs when the employer shuts its doors. They had no idea what they were talking about, and I think we are currently seeing the same thing on the benches opposite.