Madam Chair, we have moved this amendment, which refers to amendment BQ-1 and gives the arbitrator full freedom to act, simply as a matter of consistency.
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2011, with 34% of the vote.
Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act June 25th, 2011
Madam Chair, we have moved this amendment, which refers to amendment BQ-1 and gives the arbitrator full freedom to act, simply as a matter of consistency.
Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act June 25th, 2011
Madam Chair, my comments are in support of the amendments proposed by my NDP and Liberal Party colleagues. I hope that this will help the Conservative government understand that there is a serious problem with this bill.
The new clause that you just read, Clause (1.1), will ensure that the arbitrator has some leeway in his role. It is as if the Conservative government wanted to hire referees, like those from the National Hockey League, for example, who would always lean a particular way, depending on whether, for example, the hockey managers want to see more violence or not, based on what the spectators want.
The problem is that when the arbitrator is appointed, he will have to follow criteria that are so specific that the scales will inevitably always be tipped in the favour of Canada Post.
Under the bill—and this is the issue that needs to be addressed—the arbitrator will be forced to choose between the employer’s final offer and the offer made by the employees. It will not be possible for the arbitrator to engage in any mediation, or to single out specific terms, which would have obviously result in a superior agreement.
As I remarked in my speech, all of this will undoubtedly create a very toxic work environment when the employees return to work; that is, if the arbitrator is forced, based on the terms of the bill, to chose the employer’s offer.
The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the arbitrator is not obligated to choose one offer over the other, but rather to reconcile them. It is a question of compromise. I hope that the amendment is adopted.
Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act June 25th, 2011
Madam Chair, the Bloc Québécois votes no.
Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act June 25th, 2011
Madam Chair, the Bloc Québécois votes yes.
Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act June 25th, 2011
Madam Chair, the Bloc Québécois votes no.
Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act June 25th, 2011
Madam Chair, the Bloc Québécois votes no.
Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act June 25th, 2011
Madam Chair, the Bloc Québécois votes no.
Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act June 25th, 2011
Madam Chair, the Bloc Québécois votes no.
Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act June 25th, 2011
Madam Chair, the members of the Bloc Québécois vote no.
Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act June 25th, 2011
Madam Chair, to begin with, I will say that the Bloc Québécois has also presented amendments. However, we knew from the outset of this debate that it was tainted for the simple good reason that the government is acting prematurely by introducing this special bill, which is obviously intended to muzzle the union and tie its hands.
The employees had in fact started to use pressure tactics. It must be understood that the pressure tactics were rotating strikes. Never, but never, was the public as a whole penalized, whether in Quebec or in Canada, for the short time the pressure tactics lasted before the lockout.
That is why, in my opinion and the opinion of everyone we have talked to, whether or not they support unions is of no importance. The customers as well, the people who, it seems, were sending a steady stream of email to the Conservatives, told us they had not been affected by the rotating strikes, except when the strike was at their location. But it was no worse than when there is a holiday. We had one recently, and unfortunately we were not able to participate in the festivities for the national holiday. But it is a holiday, which means there is no mail or postal services. The same thing happens when there are rotating strikes. So they could have continued the pressure tactics and, most importantly, the negotiations, without the apprehended disaster happening, the one the Conservatives have told us about throughout this long debate, involving another economic crisis. These were one-day, narrowly targeted strikes, in very different areas, from one day to the next, that lasted only 24 hours
The public as a whole, and the people I have spoken with specifically about this, never blamed the workers for what happened. Obviously it is never pleasant not to receive the cheque you are waiting for, and everyone is aware of that. That is why the government should immediately have taken a mediation approach, not picked up a bazooka to kill a fly. That is the big difference between the Conservatives' approach and the approach adopted by the various opposition parties who have spoken in this House.
From the outset, we knew the outcome that is unfortunately going to come about in a few minutes, after everything that has happened. As was the case for Air Canada, the government is once again acting prematurely. I do not think this was unplanned. It was entirely out of self-interest. What the government wanted is the outcome it is going to have: to come down squarely on the side of Canada Post. The shot has been fired across the bow of virtually everyone who works in the public service: watch out; unfortunately, the Conservatives have a majority.