Finance committee  No, it's part of the maternity, so it would apply to the maternity benefits.

Finance committee  I would add bereavement leave. They would be able to access bereavement leave, if the child passes away after the 17-week point. They would be eligible for bereavement leave and that would be eligibility for both parents as well, if they are both employees.

Finance committee  Yes, it would. What's proposed in the part III is that if an individual is working.... Let's say they're a forklift operator. They're driving the forklift one day and that contract changes. It's gone to a different employer. There's no break in employment. That same person is still driving the same forklift.

Finance committee  The part III changes that I described won't affect the remuneration. The remuneration piece is a part I aspect, and in fact, in our recent news release, there was a commitment from the Minister of Employment and Workforce Development to look at doing a regulation that would extend the protection of remuneration levels to workers covered by collective agreements at airports and airlines.

Finance committee  For the 96-hour advance notice provision, there is also a provision in the legislation that says, if the issue of scheduling is covered by a collective agreement, the collective agreement would supersede this, so it addresses just the sorts of cases you described.

Finance committee  I am.

Finance committee  Thank you. I was going to briefly outline clauses 441 to 534, modernizing labour standards. Just briefly, federal labour standards were established in the 1960s when most jobs provided decent wages and benefits. They were full-time, generally permanent. Those labour standards have really remained relatively unchanged until recently.

Finance committee  Thank you. I'm going to briefly discuss the proposed amendments, clauses 310 to 313, which are amendments to part III of the Canada Labour Code. Part III of the code establishes minimum working conditions in the federally regulated private sector, such as hours of work, annual vacations and various types of unpaid leave.

Human Resources committee  From a practical operational point of view, I don't see an issue, no.

Human Resources committee  No, I don't—

Human Resources committee  Not that I'm aware of, no. I'm not a lawyer.

Human Resources committee  Not that we're aware of.

Human Resources committee  I'm not a drafter of legislation. I don't have that background, so I wouldn't be able to recommend specific language to make the amendment you've brought forward apply to all of part II. In response to your question, is there a material difference for the labour—

Human Resources committee  Is there a problem with how it would operate practically? Not particularly. Under part II, currently, for example, the department is delegated those responsibilities. In practice, this legislative change would not make much of a difference for my colleagues in operations. It's a change in who ultimately has the power, but, in reality, it's all delegated down to the department.

Human Resources committee  Again, I'm not a drafter. I don't know that you'd want to include those qualifiers, “harassment and violence” and so on.