Mr. Speaker, in knowing the source of this bill I was quite astonished to find that there are a couple of minor points in it that actually represent good legislation and that I approve of.
One is that there is provision in there for 72 hours notice of strike or lockout. This would allow shippers of perishable goods to get their materials out of harm's way and it would also allow ships to leave port rather than being trapped there in the event of a harbour strike. I like that in the legislation.
I also liked the provision that provides for maintenance of service in vital industries where public health and safety are at risk. However, over and beyond that I have not found much in the bill to like. There are some things in it that make me almost apoplectic because this bill, no matter how you cut it, tramples on the rights of Canadian workers.
Right at the top of my list is the privacy issue. During a certification drive under this bill, employers will be required to give union organizers lists of their employees complete with addresses and telephone numbers, without workers' consent.
The Canadian privacy commissioner, Mr. Phillips, has described this procedure as totally unacceptable. But that has not encouraged this government to back off. Anyone who thinks that having his or her name on a little list is not a threat to a worker should look back a few weeks to the attempt in British Columbia at recall where everyone who signed a recall petition had to provide his name and address. There are documented cases in northwestern British Columbia of workers being afraid to sign on to these recall petitions because their names and addresses would go directly to the union hall. We know where you live. This is not the way things are supposed to operate in Canada.
Another anti-democratic feature of this bill is that secret ballots are not going to be a requirement for certification. Quite the contrary. Filling out cards will be regarded as ample. They get enough cards signed, they are certified. No vote, no problem. If someone does not sign the card, maybe they know where that person lives. This is not the way unions are supposed to be run. This sounds like the way the Teamsters operated in the bad old days before the ordinary workers regained control of their union.
It gets worse. This legislation opens the door for certification by the Canada Industrial Relations Board of a union on a work site without majority support. I do not suppose this should be a big surprise when we consider that this bill was drafted by the same political party that brought Hal Banks into Canada to whip our Canadian seamen into line a few years ago. Democracy forever.
As the member for York—South Weston has previously stated, this bill preserves the adversarial nature of labour negotiations. In fact, it entrenches it even more deeply than it is now. The government should have had a bill to bring labour relations into the 21st century, not back into the 19th.
It could have had provision in this bill for final offer selection arbitration. I am sure Mr. Speaker will know more about final offer selection arbitration before this day is done than virtually anyone else in Canada. Very few of us have failed to mention it because it is important. This is a tool to keep labour and management honest. It is a took to smooth the negotiating process. Do away with this us or them idea, let's hit the bricks, fellows, let's give it to them.
Ordinary, sensible, reasonable people can sit down and sharpen their pencils. If they reach an impasse, each one puts down their final offer. This is the best they can do; that is the best they can live with. They hand it to the arbitrator who then selects. That ends the dispute at least until the next negotiations come up. It is the civilized way of doing business. It does not detract one iota from the rights of either workers or management, but it benefits the general public and, from an economic point of view, benefits workers.
They do not have to hit the bricks. They do not have to live on strike pay for weeks on end and possibly in the end get nothing for their efforts. It is settled. It is done. Everybody ends up a little unhappy but everybody ends up with something they can live with.
This is the wave of the future in labour relations. I think it is coming. It is an idea that in due course will take over labour-management relations. I can only hope it will be reasonably soon. I deeply regret that no provision was built into the bill for federally regulated workers.
