Human Resources committee  The current provision in the bill specifies that employers must make information available to employees “in printed or electronic form”. Our amendment aims to replace the word “or” with the word “and”, so that prevention will be more effective. We don't want the employee to be forced to ask where the information is; he or she has to be able to find it easily.

Human Resources committee  We want workers to be better protected by business policies, and we want this to be guaranteed by the Canada Labour Code. This is in keeping with the wishes of the Workers' Health and Safety Legal Clinic, as well as those of the Fogler, Rubinoff LLP legal firm, and of the founder of the Rubin Thomlinson LLP legal firm.

Human Resources committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Personally, I find it completely absurd that as we are discussing Bill C-65, which deals with harassment and violence, we can't even include the words “harassment” and “violence” in the clause we are debating. This was requested by the vice-president of the Confédération des syndicats nationaux.

Human Resources committee  I'd like a recorded vote.

Human Resources committee  That is why I want to add it.

Human Resources committee  It is not there at all.

Human Resources committee  No, just adding it.

Human Resources committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like the public servants to explain a few points in the notes we received. Adding the term “incidents” could impact the way incidents of harassment are investigated. Is there a difference in the way investigations are conducted depending on whether it is an accident or an incident?

Human Resources committee  I would like to add that even the Liberals, in amendment LIB-2, use the term “incidents”. This amendment would amend Bill C-65 on page 2 to read “all incidents of harassment”. In Bill C-65, the word “incident” is already used 14 times. I do not understand how that could create a precedent since it is already used.

Human Resources committee  Based on the arguments made by the vice-president of the CSN, there could be a legal gap in the definitions, which could hurt victims. So a distinction must be made between the two terms and the term “incident” must be included in the purpose of the act. That would help victims.

Human Resources committee  Thank you.

Human Resources committee  Can I vote on division without opposing the amendment?

Human Resources committee  This amendment comes from the vice-president of the Confédération des syndicats nationaux, which strives to prevent accidents and illnesses in the workplace. She would like us to add the word “injuries”. This term is already used, but she would like the term “incidents” used because the “incidents” and “accidents” are not the same thing, and if only “accidents” is used, the victim might not feel protected.

Human Resources committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to the public servants who are here today. I am just trying to understand why it would be better to include that in regulations rather than in the definition, especially in the part that refers to an isolated or repeated gesture. It can indeed be something that occurs just once as opposed to repeatedly.

Human Resources committee  Yes, because I want it to refer to the types of comments, gestures or contact that are isolated or repeated.