HUMA Committee briefing binder: Appearance by the Minister Labour and Seniors - March 21, 2024

Subclause 6.1. - Subsections 87.4(2) to (5) of the Act are replaced by the following

This subclause amends certain parts of the maintenance of activities process.

Subclause 6.2. - The portion of subsection 87.4(6) of the Code before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following

Subsection 87.4(6) of the Code provides that the Board may make an order if it is determining an application from either of the parties or a referral from the Minister of Labour.

This subclause amends subsection 87.4(6) to make a minor wording change before paragraph (a). The changes do not affect the substance of the provision.

Subclause 6.3. - Section 87.4 of the Code is amended by adding the following after subsection (6)

This subclause adds 4 subsections after subsection 87.4(6).

Subclause 9.1. - Subsection 94(2.1) of the Code is repealed

This subclause repeals the current, limited replacement workers prohibition provided for in subsection 94(2.1).

Subclause 9.2. - Section 94 of the Code is amended by adding the following after subsection (3)

This subclause amends section 94 of the Code to include new subsections which introduce a new prohibition on using certain types of replacement workers during a work stoppage.

11.1. Time limit

This clause adds a new subsection 99.01(1). It provides that the Board shall exercise its powers and perform its duties and functions under sections 98 and 99 to deal with complaints related to the replacement workers prohibition or the bargaining unit member prohibition, within the time limit set out in regulations, or if no time limit is prescribed, as soon as feasible.

11.2. Copy of decision and order

This clause adds a new subsection 99.01(2) which requires the Board to send a copy of its decision and of any order relating to the replacement workers prohibition and the bargaining unit member prohibition to the parties and the Minister of Labour within the time period set out in regulations, or if no time limit is prescribed, as soon as feasible.

14.1. Administrative monetary penalties

The clause adds a new subsection 111.01(1) to provide the authority for the Governor in Council to make regulations that establish an administrative monetary penalties (AMPs) regime for promoting compliance with the new replacement workers prohibition and the bargaining unit member prohibition. It allows the Governor in Council to make regulations.

14.2. Violation or offence

This clause also adds subsection 111.01(2) to provide that an employer can only be subject to an AMP or a fine following prosecution, not both.

Subclause 17.1. - Words and expressions

This subclause provides clarity for the meaning of words and expressions used in subclause 17(2) and 17(3).

Subclause 17.2. - Maintenance of activities

This subclause is a transitional provision that provides that the new maintenance of activities process will only apply to collective bargaining processes where the notice to bargain is given on or after the day the amendments come into force.

Subclause 17.3. - Prohibitions - uses of services during strikes and lockouts

This subclause is a transitional provision that provides that the new prohibitions will apply to any work stoppage that is ongoing on the day the prohibition comes into force.

Q1: What does Bill C-58 do?

A1:

Bill C-58 would do 2 things.

First, it would ban replacement workers. Specifically, it would ban employers from using new hires or contractors to do the work of unionized employees who are on strike or locked out. The bill would also ban employers from using the services of striking or locked-out employees to work.

• There is an exception where threats to health, safety or serious property and environmental damage could not be managed by the employer's existing workforce

Second, it would amend the existing maintenance of activities process. Specifically, it would require employers and unions to come to an agreement on what activities must be maintained during a strike or lockout to prevent serious harm to the public. The parties would be required to enter into an agreement within 15 days of starting to bargain, before they could issue 72 hours' notice of their intention to strike or lockout.

• Failing to do so would require the parties to take the matter to the Canada Industrial Relations Board - the Board, who would then rule within 90 days. To meet that timeline, the Board would have new powers to expedite proceedings and prevent abuse of the process
• The Minister of Labour would continue to have the authority to refer a question to the Board if there were concerns about whether an existing agreement was sufficient to protect the health and safety of the public

Q2: Why is the Government banning the use of replacement workers?

A2:

The Government of Canada recognizes that the ability to form a union, bargain collectively and strike are essential to a healthy workforce. These rights allow workers to act together and maintain the balance of power between individual workers and their employer. In 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada affirmed that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms includes the right to strike.

When unionized workers exercise their right to strike, they sacrifice their pay and benefits to try to improve their working conditions by putting pressure on their employer. However, the Government has heard that this right is undermined when an employer brings in replacement workers to keep the business going while workers are on strike or locked out.

To ensure that all workers in federally regulated sectors continue to benefit from a meaningful right to strike, the Government introduced Bill C-58 on November 9, 2023, to ban the use of replacement workers when a union employer in a federally regulated industry has locked out employees or is in a strike.

Q3: What is Part I of the Canada Labour Code and to whom does it apply?

A3:

Part I of the Canada Labour Code - the Code - sets out the legal framework for unionization, collective bargaining, dispute resolution, and legal strikes and lockouts in federally regulated sectors.

Part I of the Code applies to a broad range of federally regulated industries, including interprovincial and international air, rail, road and marine transportation, banks, telecommunications, as well as postal and courier services.

In total, about 22,350 employers and about 1,030,000 employees are covered by Part I of the Code. Of these, about 34% of employees are unionized.

Q4: Who do the proposed amendments apply to?

A4:

The prohibition on replacement workers would apply to about 22,350 employers and about 1,030,000 employees in the sectors of the economy regulated by the federal government covered by Part I of the Canada Labour Code.

This includes interprovincial and international air, rail, road and marine transportation, banks, telecommunications, as well as postal and courier services.

The prohibition on replacement workers would not apply to the federal public service. And it would not apply to employers and employees working in sectors that are regulated by provincial governments.

If pressed on the federally regulated private sector:

• Some of the key industries in the federally regulated private sector include:
  • banking
  • telecommunications and broadcasting
  • air, rail, and maritime transportation
  • road transportation services
  • postal and courier services
  • most Crown corporations (for example, Canada Post)
  • certain activities of First Nations band councils and Indigenous self-governments (for example, governance and administration), and
  • all private sector businesses and municipal governments in the Northwest Territories, Nunavut and Yukon

Q5: Does this apply to the public service?

A5:

No. The proposed amendments only apply to employers and workers subject to Part I of the Canada Labour Code - the Code.

While Part I of the Code does apply to many crown corporations, it does not apply to the federal public service, which consists of the core public administration and separate agencies. These organizations are covered by the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act, which would not be amended under Bill C-58.

Q6: What other provinces or territories prohibit replacement workers?

A6:

All provinces and territories ban the use of permanent replacement workers. Which means that in Canada, employers cannot permanently replace workers just because they went on strike or were locked out.

Quebec and British Columbia are the only 2 provinces that ban employers from temporarily using replacement workers during strikes and lockouts. Quebec's prohibition was introduced in 1977 and BC's prohibition was introduced in 1993. There are minor differences between these provinces' prohibitions.

A similar ban was enacted in Ontario in 1993 but was repealed in 1995.

Q7: How does C-58 compare to BC and Quebec?

A7:

Bill C-58 is similar to what is currently in place in BC and Quebec.

The 3 frameworks ban employers from using employees hired after the negotiating stage has started to do the work of striking or locked out employees. And in all instances, contractors are covered by the ban.

In addition, Bill C-58 is aligned with the Quebec legislation by:

• not allowing employers to use employees in the bargaining unit during a strike or lockout, and
• permitting replacement workers to be used in exceptional circumstances to avoid serious damage to the employer's property

One key difference is that the ban in Quebec centers on the location where the strike or lockout is happening. That is, in Quebec if there's a strike at one location, the employer can't bring in employees, managers or contractors to work at the location while the strike or lockout is ongoing.

This location-based approach can create loopholes. We live in a digital world now, and many people can work remotely.

• In 2023, the Superior Court of Quebec found that employers can use remote workers to replace people who are on strike or locked out without violating Quebec's ban, as long as they don't work at the location where the strike or lockout is declared.

Bill C-58 would apply to various work situations, including remote work. So, whether the employees work on a train, in a plane, in an office, or remotely, the bill would apply to them.

Q8: What international jurisdictions ban replacement workers?

A8:

Each country has a unique labour relations history. This means they also have unique labour relations systems for unionization and collective bargaining. This makes it hard to make apples-to-apples comparisons between countries' labour relations laws.

In terms of banning replacement workers, countries such as Portugal, New Zealand, and Spain have bans similar to those in British Columbia and Quebec - and the ban proposed in Bill C-58.

Q9: The NDP's Bill C-302 was introduced on October 27, 2022. What are the similarities and differences?

A9:

Bills C-58 and C-302 would implement a broad prohibition on replacement workers. They have several similarities, but also some important differences.

First, both bills would prohibit employers from using employees hired after the negotiating stage has started, and contractors, to do the work of those who are on strike or locked out.

Second, both bills would allow replacement workers to be used in exceptional circumstances. That is, to avoid serious damage to the employer's property and to prevent threats to people's life, health or safety.

The last similarity is on enforcement. Both bills would allow for fines of up to $100,000 per day, if an employer were prosecuted and convicted of violating the ban.

But there are also key differences between the bills:

• the most important difference is that Bill C-58 includes amendments to improve the maintenance of activities process. Bill C-302 does not
• the other difference is that Bill C-302 does not include a coming into force timeline. This means it would come into force on Royal Assent. Bill C-58 represents the biggest change to federal industrial relations law since the 1990s, so. it is proposed that it come into force 18 months after Royal Assent

Q10: The Bloc's Bill C-276 was introduced on May 20, 2022. What are the similarities and differences?

A10:

Bills C-58 and C-276 would implement a broad prohibition on replacement workers. They have several similarities, but also some important differences.

First, both bills prohibit employers from using employees hired after the negotiating stage has started, and contractors, to do the work of those who are on strike or locked out.

Second, both bills would allow replacement workers to be used in exceptional circumstances. That is, to avoid serious damage to the employer's property.

There are a few key differences between the bills:

• the most important difference is that Bill C-58 includes amendments to improve the maintenance of activities process. Bill C-276 does not
• in terms of enforcement, Bill C-58 includes fines of up to $100,000 per day if an employer is prosecuted and convicted of violating the ban on replacement workers. Under Bill C-276, the penalty would only be up to $10,000 per day
• finally, Bill C-276 does not include a coming into force timeline. This means it would come into force on Royal Assent. Bill C-58 represents the biggest change to federal industrial relations law since the 1990s, so it is proposed that it come into force 18 months after Royal Assent

Q11: What is the approximate timeline to implement this measure?

A11:

The Bill will come into force 18 months after it receives Royal Assent.

Bill C-58 represents one of the most significant changes to federal collective bargaining rules since the 1990s.

These changes would impose significant new responsibilities on the Canada Industrial Relations Board. There will be more issues for the Board and less time to resolve them.

As Minister of Labour, I need to make sure the Board has the resources it needs to prepare itself in dealing effectively with all these new demands and expectations and deliver timely results for Canadian workers.

Q12: Why would Bill C-58 come into force 18 months after Royal Assent?

A12:

Bill C-58 represents one of the most significant changes to federal collective bargaining rules since the 1990s.

These changes would impose significant new responsibilities on the Canada Industrial Relations Board. There will be more issues for the Board and less time to resolve them.

As Minister of Labour, I need to make sure the Board has the resources it needs to prepare itself in dealing effectively with all these new demands and expectations and deliver timely results for Canadian workers.

We need to identify and appoint the right people to the Board who understand the industries, the unions, and the issues. It takes time to identify the right people with the right skills and experience. You can't rush this.

Accessing the funds to support staffing and other preparations also takes time. People generally don't like to talk about administrative issues; but they are part of the process, and they matter.

We need Parliament to approve the new funding going to the Board and the team supporting the Board.

Ensuring we are doing this right is important. It means workers, unions and employers will get decisions on time. It means they can focus on the negotiating table.

That's what every part of this bill is focused on: getting deals at the table.

Q13: Did the Government do consultations before introducing Bill C-58? What stakeholders did you consult?

A13:

We consulted a variety of stakeholders. We held 5 roundtables during the consultation period. A total of 55 stakeholder organizations participated in these roundtables.

Major unions and labour groups like the Canadian Labour Congress, Unifor, Teamsters, the Canadian Union of Public Employees and others were present.

On the employer side, we had associations like Federally Regulated Employers - Transportation and Communications - or FETCO, Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses, Conseil du Patronat du Québec and others.

We also had good sectoral representation, with major employers from key sectors such as telecommunications, air, marine and rail transportation, and courier and postal services.

In addition to the roundtables, we also received 71 written submissions as well as 45 personal stories and individual comments.

Q14: How does the existing replacement workers prohibition work? Where does it come from?

A14:

Currently, employers can use replacement workers to mitigate the impacts of a strike while they work to reach a deal.

There is a very limited prohibition on replacement workers: employers cannot use replacement workers as a way to continue operations and refuse to bargain with the union.

This limited prohibition came into force in 1999. It was based on a recommendation made in the Sims Task Force's 1995 report "Seeking a Balance." This report and its recommendations were based on extensive consultations with employers and unions at the time and attempted to balance the interests of all parties.

Unions have since told us that the existing provision is not working because, fundamentally, the bar is too high. For the ban to apply, the union has to prove that the employer's intent was to use replacement workers specifically to undermine a union's ability to represent its members. Since unions can't always know what an employer is thinking, they argue that this is almost impossible to do.

The evidence backs that up - since its establishment in 1999, the Canada Industrial Relations Board has never found a violation of the prohibition, despite dozens of complaints.

Q15: How are replacement workers being defined in Bill C-58?

A15:

Bill C-58 defines replacement workers as employees who are hired or brought in after bargaining begins - specifically to replace workers on strike or locked out. This also includes contractors, regardless of when they were hired.

The prohibition also applies to union members who decide to cross the picket line and continue working.

Q16: Are employers currently allowed to use replacement workers during a work stoppage under the Code?

A16:

Prior to 1999, employers were not prohibited in any way from using replacement workers during a strike or lockout. In 1999, Part I of the Code was amended to provide a limited prohibition on the use of replacement workers during a work stoppage. Specifically, it prohibits employers from using replacement workers if they are using them to undermine a union's ability to represent its members.

This limited prohibition was the result of recommendations made in the Sims Task Force's 1995 report "Seeking a Balance". This report and these recommendations were based on extensive consultations with employers and unions at the time and attempted to balance the interests of all parties.

From 2012 to 2023, the Labour Program estimates that federally regulated employers used replacement workers to do the work of striking or locked out employees in approximately 42% of work stoppages.

Q17: Are there any workers the employer can use to do the work of striking or locked out workers?

A17:

Yes. The employer could use employees and managers who were hired before notice to bargain. So long as they are not members of a bargaining unit that is in a full strike or lockout.

This would provide some flexibility to employers to help them mitigate the impacts of a work stoppage.

Also, in situations where threats to health, safety or serious property and environmental damage could not be managed by the employer's existing workforce, the use of replacement workers would be permitted.

Q18: How is the current ban on replacement workers enforced?

A18:

Unions or employees can file a complaint with the Canada Industrial Relations Board if they feel that the employer has hired replacement workers to undermine a union's ability to represent its members.

Since its establishment in 1999, the Canada Industrial Relations Board has never found a violation of the prohibition.

Q19: How would the new prohibition be enforced?

A19:

Under Bill C-58, violating the replacement worker ban would be an unfair labour practice under the Canada Labour Code.

A union could file a complaint with the Canada Industrial Relations Board if they believed an employer was illegally using replacement workers. The Board would then investigate the complaint and, if necessary, would order the employer to stop.

The Bill also allows for prosecutions. If an employer was prosecuted and convicted, they could be subject to a fine of up to $100,000 for every day they illegally used replacement workers.

Q20: Are there any exceptions to the prohibition?

A20:

Yes. Bill C-58 includes exceptions to allow employers to use replacement workers in situations where health and safety are threatened or serious environmental or property damage is imminent.

Also, a bargaining unit member can perform work during a strike or lockout to maintain activities necessary to protect the public from an immediate and serious danger to their health and safety. Bargaining unit members performing this work are not considered replacement workers.

Q21: Would the public be at risk if employers were no longer permitted to use replacement workers?

A21:

Canadians would continue to be protected if there's a strike or lockout because the Canada Labour Code requires employers and unions to maintain all activities that are necessary to protect the public from an immediate and serious danger to their health and safety.

In fact, Bill C-58 would build on this by requiring employers and unions to reach an agreement on what activities need to be maintained during a strike or lockout very early during the negotiations process.

Bill C-58 would also allow employers to use replacement workers if it were absolutely necessary to prevent a threat to the life, health or safety of a person, or to protect against damage to property.

Q22: How often are replacement workers used in federally regulated sectors?

A22:

The Labour Program does not collect statistics on the use of replacement workers in federally regulated industries. However, research suggests that the use of replacement workers is relatively common. From January 2012 to June 2023, the Labour Program estimates that federally regulated employers used replacement workers to do the work of striking or locked out employees in approximately 42% of work stoppages.

This does not mean that the employer was able to maintain full operations during a work stoppage. It just means that there was evidence that 1 or more people did the work of striking or locked out workers at some point during the work stoppage.

Q23: What is the maintenance of activities process under the Canada Labour Code?

A23:

Part I of the Canada Labour Code - the Code - requires employers and unions to continue services during a work stoppage to protect the health and safety of the public.

The Code relies on the employer and the union to know their business and know if any activities need to be maintained. If they can't agree, they can go to the Canada Industrial Relations Board - the Board - for a decision on what these activities should be.

The Board has set a high bar for what activities need to be maintained to make sure the right to strike is protected. To qualify, the threat has to be immediate and serious and there have to be no real substitutes.

Q24: How does the current maintenance of activities process work?

A24:

Fundamentally, employers and unions are responsible for identifying what activities must be maintained during a strike or lockout to protect the health and safety of the public. Or they may decide that no activities need to be maintained.

This is a requirement under section 87.4 of the Canada Labour Code

If the parties agree, they enter into an agreement stating which activities they will maintain and how. If they do not agree, either the employer or the union can apply to the Canada Industrial Relations Board - the Board - to decide which activities, if any, need to continue.

The Minister of Labour can also intervene and make a referral to the Board if there is a question about whether the parties are respecting their obligations to protect the health and safety of the public.

If the Board gets involved before there's a strike or lockout, the parties cannot start a work stoppage until after the Board makes its decision. This suspends the right to strike or lockout until a decision is made.

Q25: What is wrong with the current maintenance of activities process?

A25:

Stakeholders have raised 3 main issues with the current maintenance of activities process.

The first issue is long decision-making times by the Canada Industrial Relations Board - the Board. In 2020 to 2021, 6 maintenance of activities cases had an average processing time of 212 days, and an average decision time of 17 days.

The second issue is that the Board's process suspends the right to strike, and unions allege that some employers purposefully use tactics to put off workers' ability to strike. These delays can build tensions between the parties, especially as negotiations generally stall while parties wait for the Board's decision.

Finally, the current process does not incentivize parties to resolve maintenance of activities issues early in negotiations. As a result, some parties only consider maintenance of activities once they are approaching a work stoppage. If there is a dispute regarding what activities need to be maintained at that stage, the only option available to either party is to request that the Minister of Labour to refer the matter to the Board.

Q26: Why is the Government making changes to the maintenance of activities process?

A26:

Part I (Industrial Relations) of the Canada Labour Code - the Code - has rules that require employers and unions to continue activities necessary to protect the public from immediate and serious danger, even though there is a strike or lockout. The Code also lays out a process for how to decide which activities need to continue. Unfortunately, the Government has heard that this process is not working smoothly, and may need to be updated.

To make sure that the Code continues to protect the public in the most efficient way possible, the Government has proposed changes to the Code in Bill C-58 to improve this process. These amendments would require employers and unions to come to a maintenance of activities agreement within 15 days of starting to bargain.

Q27: What changes are being proposed to the maintenance of activities process?

A27:

Bill C-58 proposes to amend Part I of the Code to require employers and unions to enter into a maintenance of activities agreement. This would need to be done no later than 15 days after the start of bargaining.

The parties would need to do this even if they agreed that no activities needed to be maintained.

If the parties do not come to an agreement within 15 days, they would then apply to the Board, who would decide which activities need to be maintained during a work stoppage, if any.

The Board would be required to issue a decision within 90 days and would be empowered to expedite proceedings.

The parties could not issue a 72 hours' notice for a strike or lockout without an agreement or decision from the Board.

Q28: What is a maintenance of activities agreement?

A28:

A maintenance of activities agreement is determined by an employer and union.

It sets out what activities they agree to continue during a strike or lockout, and how they will continue them. An employer and union may agree that they do not need to maintain any activities during a work stoppage.

Q29: Why would Bill C-58 require all parties to have an agreement?

A29:

Right now, under the Code, it is not mandatory to have a maintenance of activities agreement, or a decision from the Board, before a work stoppage.

As a result, some parties don't discuss their obligations, which can contribute to anxiety and uncertainty as to the impacts of a work stoppage.

Others don't discuss it until late in negotiations - once they've been through conciliation and they are approaching a work stoppage. If there is a dispute at this stage, the only option is to request that the Minister of Labour refer the dispute to the Board. If a referral is made this late in the process, it can delay the right to strike for months.

Bill C-58 would address this problem and reduce delays by requiring the parties to have a maintenance of activities agreement within 15 days of starting to bargain. If they can't agree, they go to the Board directly. Only once they have their agreement or a decision of the Board can they give 72 hours' notice and launch a strike or lockout.

This change would help employers and unions deal with the maintenance of activities issue quickly so they can focus on the bargaining table. It's a predictable process that helps bring certainty to parties and stakeholders.

Q30: What is a Ministerial referral?

A30:

A Ministerial referral is when the Minister of Labour asks the Canada Industrial Relations Board - the Board - to intervene and decide what activities need to continue during a strike or lockout. A matter can be referred even if the parties already have a maintenance of activities agreement. The Minister of Labour can do this at any point after the employer or union gives notice of dispute, even after a strike or lockout begins.

If the Minister goes to the Board before there is a strike or lockout, the parties are banned from beginning a strike or lockout until the Board makes a decision. If the Minister goes to the Board after a strike or lockout has started, it can continue while the Board investigates.

Q31: What happens if the parties cannot agree on a maintenance of activities agreement?

A31:

If the parties cannot come to an agreement within 15 days of filing notice of dispute, they would take the matter to the Canada Industrial Relations Board - the Board - who would then rule within 90 days. To meet that timeline, C-58 gives the Board powers to expedite proceedings and prevent abuse of the process.

The parties would be required to enter into an agreement, before they could issue 72 hours' notice of their intention to strike or lockout.

Q32: How do other jurisdictions protect the health and safety of the public during strikes and lockouts?

A32:

Generally, provinces and territories are responsible for things that are critical to public welfare like health care services, law enforcement, and emergency response personnel. To ensure that these services are available during work stoppages, the provinces and territories have essential service laws that dictate who can and who cannot strike.

These types of industries do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Canada Labour Code. Instead, the Code covers federally regulated workplaces and includes maintenance of activities provisions which aim to protect the health and safety of the public.

Q33: How long does it take right now for decisions from the Canada Industrial Relations Board on maintenance of activities matters?

A33:

The Canada Industrial Relations Board - the Board - publishes its performance statistics online. This includes its average processing time, and the average decision-making time by type of matter.

The Board's performance statistics indicate that in 2020 to 2021, the Board took an average of 212 days to process maintenance of activities matters, and an average of 17 days to make decisions regarding maintenance of activities matters.

In the previous fiscal year, the Board took an average of 126 days to process maintenance of activities matters, and an average of 1 day to make decisions regarding maintenance of activities matters.

If pressed on the 2020 to 2021 statistics:

• while newer CIRB performance statistics for 2021 to 2022 are available online, we chose not to reference this year because there is an average decision-making time of 0 days for maintenance of activities matters. This is because all the maintenance of activities matters before the Board in 2021 to 2022 were withdrawn
• instead, we reference the CIRB's performance statistics for 2020 to 2021 and 2019 to 2020 as they reflect periods where the Board made maintenance of activities decisions

Q34: What are some examples of activities that need to be maintained?

A34:

The requirement to maintain activities under section 87.4 of the Canada Labour Code applies to a wide variety of employers and unions' work.

For example, the Canada Industrial Relations Board has previously determined maintenance of activities matters where air traffic control services, ferry services between areas in Atlantic Canada and fire fighting services at Canadian airports must continue in the event of a strike or lockout.

Q35: Why aren't we talking about amending the maintenance of activities criteria?

A35:

The Government has been clear about the scope of the changes to maintenance of activities. Before consultations began, we made the decision to look at the maintenance of activities process. The scope was made clear during consultations and was reflected in our discussion paper.

So when we talk about maintenance of activities improvements, what we're talking about is improvements to the process. Not changes to the criteria.

Looking at the criteria would require extensive consultations and analysis on the potential impacts to make sure that we do it right.

If pressed on the maintenance of activities criteria:

• subsection 87.4(1) of the Canada Labour Code specifies that:
  • during a strike or lockout not prohibited by this Part, the employer, the trade union and the employees in the bargaining unit must continue the supply of services, operation of facilities or production of goods to the extent necessary to prevent an immediate and serious danger to the safety or health of the public

Q36: Is the Government considering designating certain industries as "essential"?

A36:

No. Part I (Industrial Relations) of the Code does not include a mechanism to make certain industries ‘essential'.

However, it does require regulated employers and unions to continue any activities necessary to protect the public from immediate and serious danger, even though there is a strike or lockout. The Government is not considering changes to this fundamental requirement.

If pressed on the movement of grain (subsection 87.7(1))

• Subsection 87.7(1) of the Canada Labour Code specifies that services to grain vessels must continue during a strike or lockout. The objective of subsection 87.7(1) is to establish the shipping of grain as an essential service in certain circumstances
• Specifically, in the long-shoring industry, the employer, its employees, and their bargaining agent must continue to provide the services they normally provide to ensure the tie-up, let-go and loading of grain vessels at licensed terminal and transfer elevators, and the movement of the grain vessels in and out of a port

Bill C-58

Employees and managers who were hired before the parties began bargaining.

Private Members Bill - Bill C-302 (New Democratic Party)

• Managers who were hired before parties began bargaining
• Senior managers, directors and officers of corporations
• Bargaining unit members who are willing to defy their union and continue to perform work during a strike

Private Members Bill - Bill C-276 (Bloc Québécois)

Managers.

Bill C-58

• Employees and managers who were hired after the parties began bargaining
• Contractors (or any employee of another employer), regardless of when they were hired

Private Members Bill - Bill C-302 (New Democratic Party)

• Persons hired after the parties began bargaining
• Contractors (or any employee of another employer), regardless of when they were hired
• Another employee of the employer, regardless of when they were hired

Private Members Bill - Bill C-276 (Bloc Québécois)

• Persons hired after the parties began bargaining
• Contractors (or any employee of another employer), regardless of when they were hired
• Another employee of the employer, regardless of when they were hired

Bill C-58

No. An employer cannot use employees in the bargaining unit if the strike or lockout is intended to involve a cessation of work by all employees in the bargaining unit.

Private Members Bill - Bill C-302 (New Democratic Party)

Yes.

Private Members Bill - Bill C-276 (Bloc Québécois)

No. An employer cannot use employees in the bargaining unit.

Bill C-58

• Employers can use replacement workers to prevent:
  • threat to the life, health or safety of any person
  • threat of the destruction, or serious damage to, the employer's property or premises; or
  • threat of serious environmental damage affecting the employer's property or premises
• This can only be for conservation purposes, not the production of goods and services
• Employers can use replacement workers only if persons not covered by the prohibition cannot perform the work

Private Members Bill - Bill C-302 (New Democratic Party)

• Employers can use replacement workers, to the extent necessary to prevent:
  • a threat to the life, health or safety of any person
  • the destruction, or serious damage to, the employer's machinery, equipment or premises; or
  • serious environmental damage affecting the premises
• This can only be for conservation purposes, not the production of goods and services

Private Members Bill - Bill C-276 (Bloc Québécois)

Employers can use replacement workers to avoid the destruction of, or serious damage to, the employer's property.

Bill C-58

Violating either prohibition is an unfair labour practice under Part I of the Code. Unions would submit a complaint to the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) and the CIRB would resolve the matter using its expedited process.

Private Members Bill - Bill C-302 (New Democratic Party)

• Violations are an unfair labour practice under Part I of the Code. Unions would submit a complaint to the CIRB and the CIRB would resolve the matter using its expedited process
• They can also apply to the Minister of Labour, who may designate an investigator who investigates and issues a report

Private Members Bill - Bill C-276 (Bloc Québécois)

Violations are an unfair labour practice under Part I of the Code. Unions would submit a complaint to the CIRB and the CIRB would resolve the matter using its expedited process.

Bill C-58

• The CIRB can issue an order requiring the employer to stop using replacement workers for the duration of the dispute
• Fine of up to $100,000 per day on conviction

Private Members Bill - Bill C-302 (New Democratic Party)

• The CIRB can issue an order requiring the employer to stop using replacement workers for the duration of the dispute
• Fine of up to $100,000 per day on conviction

Private Members Bill - Bill C-276 (Bloc Québécois)

• The CIRB can issue an order requiring the employer to stop using replacement workers for the duration of the dispute
• Fine of up to $10,000 per day on conviction

Bill C-58

18 months after Royal Assent.

Private Members Bill - Bill C-302 (New Democratic Party)

On Royal Assent.

Private Members Bill - Bill C-276 (Bloc Québécois)

On Royal Assent.

Bill C-58

S. 87.6 of the Code will continue to apply, which requires employers to reinstate employees after a lawful work stoppage, in preference to any person who acted as a replacement worker during that work stoppage.

Private Members Bill - Bill C-302 (New Democratic Party)

Employees who participate in lawful strike or lockout are to be reinstated in preference to any other person.

Private Members Bill - Bill C-276 (Bloc Québécois)

Employees who participate in lawful strike or lockout are to be reinstated in preference to any other person, unless the employer has a valid reason not to reinstate those employees.

Bill C-58

Employees and managers who were hired before the parties began bargaining.

British Columbia

• Employees and managers who were hired before notice to bargain was given or bargaining actually begins, (whichever is earlier) and who work in the same location where the strike or lockout is taking place
• Bargaining unit members who are willing to defy their union and continue to perform work during a strike

Quebec

Managers who were hired before the negotiating stage begins and who work in the same location where the strike or lockout is taking place.

Bill C-58

• Any employee or manager hired after notice to bargain has been given
• Contractors (or any employee of another employer), regardless of when they are hired

British Columbia

• Persons hired after the union and employer start bargaining
• An employee or manager who normally works in a different work location
• An employee who is transferred to the work location where the strike or lockout is happening after the union and employer start bargaining
• Contractors (or any employee of another employer), regardless of when they were hired

Quebec

• Persons hired after the union and employer start bargaining
• An employee or manager who normally works in a different work location
• An employee who normally works at the work location where the strike or lockout is occurring
• Contractors (or any employee of another employer), regardless of when they were hired

Bill C-58

No. An employer cannot use employees in the bargaining unit if the strike or lockout is intended to involve a cessation of work by all employees in the bargaining unit.

British Columbia

Yes.

Quebec

No. An employer cannot use employees in the bargaining unit.

Bill C-58

• Employers can use replacement workers to prevent:
  • threat to the life, health or safety of any person
  • threat of the destruction, or serious damage to, the employer's property or premises; or
  • threat of serious environmental damage affecting the employer's property or premises
• This can only be for conservation purposes, not the production of goods and services
• Employers can use replacement workers only if persons not covered by the prohibition cannot perform the work

British Columbia

None.

Quebec

• Employers can use replacement workers if the purpose is to avoid the destruction or serious deterioration of the employer's property
• This can only be for conservation purposes, not the production of goods and services

Bill C-58

Violating the prohibition is an unfair labour practice under Part I of the Code. Unions would submit a complaint to the CIRB and the CIRB would resolve the matter using its expedited process.

British Columbia

Violating the prohibition is an unfair labour practice. The union would apply to the British Columbia Labour Relations Board.

Quebec

• Unions can apply to the Tribunal Administratif du Travail for an urgent order if they believe there is an illegal use of replacement workers
• They can also apply to the Minister of Labour, who may dispatch an investigator who investigates and issues a report

Bill C-58

Fine of up to $100,000 per day if prosecuted and convicted.

British Columbia

N/A - there is no fine associated with the prohibition but a person who refuses or neglects to observe or carry out an order of the Labour Relations Board is liable to a fine on conviction. An individual's fine will not exceed $5,000, and a corporation, trade union or employers' organization's fine will not exceed $50,000.

Quebec

Fine of up to $1,000 per day if prosecuted and convicted.

Chad Collins, Liberal Party, Hamilton East, Stoney Creek, Ontario

Brief biography

Chad Collins was first elected to the House of Commons for Hamilton East - Stoney Creek on September 20, 2021. A lifelong resident of Hamilton East - Stoney Creek, Chad resides in the Davis Creek area with his wife Mary and 2 children, Chase and Reese. He attended Glendale Secondary School, the University of Western Ontario, and McMaster University. Chad was first elected to City Council in 1995, at the age of 24, making him one of the youngest elected representatives in the City's history.

Chad is passionate about engaging local residents and community stakeholders, focusing on revitalization of infrastructure, development of social housing and stream-lining municipal programs.

As President of City Housing Hamilton, Chad has been committed to addressing the City's aging affordable housing stock by pressuring all levels of government to invest in the much needed repair of over 7,000 publicly owned units. He continues to work on nearly a dozen new projects across the City and in the riding that will provide new affordable housing units to those in need.

From the creation and development of new community parks and trails to the opening of a new food bank, Chad knows community consultation is an integral part of improving quality of life for everyone in Hamilton East - Stoney Creek.

Of note

Key issue of interest: affordable housing.

Michael Coteau, Liberal Party, Don Valley East, Ontario

Brief Biography

Michael Coteau was first elected to the House of Commons for Don Valley East on September 20, 2021. He has served as the Member of Provincial Parliament for Don Valley East since 2011. During his time in the Ontario government, his ministerial roles include: Minister of Children and Youth Services; Minister Responsible for Anti-Racism; Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport; Minister Responsible for the 2015 Pan/Parapan American Games; and Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

Prior to entering the provincial government, Michael was elected as a school board trustee for the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) in 2003, 2006 and 2010. As a trustee, Michael advocated for student nutrition, community use of space and the use of educational technology. He initiated the 'Community Use of Schools' motion that drastically cut user fees and made schools more accessible to groups that offer programs for children. He helped introduce nutritional changes in schools that supported healthy food programs and increased awareness of student hunger.

Michael worked as an ESL instructor and curriculum developer before becoming a community organizer for a United Way agency in Scarborough. He was also the Marketing Manager for ABC Life Literacy, where he was responsible for the organizing of the Family Literacy Day across Canada, and was Executive Director of Alpha Plus, a national literacy organization mandated to support adult education through the use of technology. Michael grew up in Don Valley East and attended Don Mills Middle School and Victoria Park Collegiate Institute. He holds a degree from Carleton University in Political Science and Canadian History. He and his wife Lori live in Toronto with their 2 daughters, Maren and Myla.

Of note:

• spent 10 years in the Ontario legislature
• key issues of interest: low-income families

Wayne Long, Liberal Party, Saint John, Rothesay, New Brunswick

Brief biography

Wayne Long was first elected to the House of Commons for Saint John — Rothesay in 2015 and was re-elected in 2019 and 2021. He is a member of the Saint John community with national and international business experience. Wayne currently serves as President of the Saint John Sea Dogs, and his efforts have helped turn the team into one of Canada's most successful CHL hockey franchises winning the cherished Memorial Cup in 2011. That same year, Wayne was recognized with the John Horman Trophy, awarded to the Top Executive in the QMJHL.

Prior to his work with the Sea Dogs, Wayne was President of Scotiaview Seafood Inc. He was also a successful large-scale product manager with Stolt Sea Farm Inc. Wayne's work has seen him travel across North America, negotiating contracts with national restaurant distributors, restaurant chains, and retail chains. He earned the North American Excellence in Sales and Marketing award twice. Wayne is a former Board Member for Destination Marketing and Salmon Marketing.

Wayne was born in the riding, and currently calls the area home alongside his wife, Denise, and their 2 children, Khristian and Konnor.

Of note:

• has been a member of HUMA since the beginning of the 42^nd Parliament (2015).
• key issues of interest:
  • poverty
  • mental health
  • outspoken support of the Energy East oil pipeline project
  • previously broken ranks with party (Energy East, tax policy, SNC-Lavalin) which resulted in being kicked off House committees as punishment
  • frequently makes sports parallel (hockey)
  • government programs and support that benefit his constituents

Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal Party P.S. to the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities - London North Center, Ontario

Brief biography

Peter Fragiskatos was first elected as the Member of Parliament for London North Centre in 2015.Mr. Fragiskatos previously served as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue. Additionally, he has served as a member of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, the Standing Committee on Finance, and the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations. He was also a member of various other committees, parliamentary associations, and interparliamentary groups. Prior to entering federal politics, Mr. Fragiskatos was a political scientist at King's University College at Western University and a media commentator. His works have been published by major Canadian and international news organizations, including Maclean's, The Globe and Mail, The Toronto Star, BBC News, and CNN. Born in London, Ontario, Mr. Fragiskatos has combined his passion for politics with a desire to give back to his community. He has served on the boards of Anago (Non) Residential Resources Inc. and the Heritage London Foundation. An active volunteer, he ran a youth mentorship program and has worked with many local not-for-profit groups, such as the London Food Bank, the London Cross-Cultural Learner Centre, and Literacy London, a charity dedicated to helping adults improve their literacy skills. Mr. Fragiskatos holds a political science degree from Western University, a Master's degree in International Relations from Queen's University, and a PhD in International Relations from Cambridge University. He lives in London with his wife, Katy, and their daughter, Ava.

Of note:

• Parliamentary Secretary – PS to the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities
• key issues of interest:
  • non Parliamentary Committee Member: National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (2021)
  • Canada-China relations

Robert (Bobby) J. Morrissey Liberal Party Egmont Prince Edward Island

Brief biography

In 2015, Bobby was elected to the House of Commons and was re-elected in 2019 and 2021. He served as a Member on the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, as well as the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. Previously, he was elected to the Prince Edward Island Legislative Assembly in 1982 and has dedicated his career and volunteer life to serving the residents of PEI. Having served as MLA for nearly 20 years, Bobby has a deep understanding of his communities' needs. He has held a number of high-profile roles within the Assembly, such as Minister of Transportation and Public Works, Minister of Economic Development and Tourism, and Opposition House Leader. He was also responsible for the redevelopment of the Canadian Forces Base Summerside and the surrounding community following its closure by the federal government in 1989. Bobby left politics in 2000 to join the private sector as a consultant specializing in government relations, fisheries, and the labour market. Bobby has been a member of the Board of Directors for the Heart & Stroke Foundation of PEI. He was the founding member and former president of the Tignish Seniors Home Care Co-op, and Vice-Chair of Tignish Special Needs Housing.

Of note:

• chair of HUMA
• former member of HUMA in 2019 (briefly before the general election)

Tony Van Bynen, Liberal Party, Newmarket - Aurora, Ontario

Brief biography

Tony Van Bynen was first elected to the House of Commons for Newmarket-Aurora in 2019 and re-elected 2021. A resident of Newmarket for over 40 years, Tony and his wife Roxanne raised their 2 daughters there.Community service, volunteerism, and helping those who need it most is what drives Tony every day. He and Roxanne have volunteered at the Southlake Hospital, and the Inn from the Cold, for over 10 years. They also deliver food for the Newmarket Food Bank, and Tony was instrumental in creating Belinda's Place, which is a multi-purpose facility for homeless and at-risk women.He also had the privilege of serving as the Mayor of Newmarket for 12 years. During that time, community building is what guided Tony on his mission to revitalize Main Street, renew the historic Old Town Hall, and build the Riverwalk Commons so families and friends can enjoy great public places.Through his previous role as the President of the Chamber of Commerce, and his 30-year career in banking, Tony understands what local businesses need to thrive and grow. He's delivered innovative solutions to help local business owners find success, including creating the Envi broadband network, so businesses in the community have ultra-high-speed connectivity, which has been particularly crucial during the pandemic.

Of note

Key issues of interest: focused studies to help Canadians, especially getting through the pandemic.

Rosemarie Falk, Conservative Party, Associate Labour Critic, Battlefords-Lloydminster, Saskatchewan

Brief biography

Rosemarie Falk is the Conservative candidate for Battlefords-Lloydminster. Rosemarie was born and raised in Lloydminster, Saskatchewan. Along with her husband Adam, she is now raising her children there. She has always been actively engaged in her community. Throughout her social work career and extensive volunteer work she has worked with some of the most vulnerable members of the community. Rosemarie was first elected to the House of Commons in a by-election on December 11, 2017. Prior to this, Rosemarie worked as a registered Social Worker in Saskatchewan and has a Bachelor of Social Work from the University of Calgary. She also has experience as a legal assistant specializing in family law and as a legislative assistant in federal politics.

In October 2022, under the new Conservative Party leader, she was named to the new Official Opposition's Shadow Cabinet as the Associate Shadow Minister for Labour and Associate Labour Critic.

Of note:

• she has served as a member of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration.
• sponsor: Bill C-318, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Canada Labour Code (adoptive and intended parents)
• Rosemarie is committed to being a strong voice for seniors, families, taxpayers and rural communities.
• associate Critic- Labour in the Official Opposition's shadow cabinet

Michelle Ferreri, Conservative Party for Families, Children and Social Development Critic, Peterborough-Kawatha, Ontario

Brief biography

Michelle is the Member of Parliament for Peterborough-Kawartha and was elected in the 2021 federal election. Michelle was appointed as Shadow Minister for Tourism as part of the Conservative Shadow Cabinet for the 44th Parliament. In October 2022, under the new Conservative Party leader, she was named to the new Official Opposition's Shadow Cabinet as the Minister for Families, Children and Social Development. Prior to being elected, Michelle was a well-known community advocate, an award-winning entrepreneur, a committed volunteer, and a highly sought-after public speaker and social media marketer. Michelle has over 20 years' experience in media, marketing and public speaking. During her time as a reporter, one of Michelle's most memorable experiences was when she had the opportunity to visit the Canadian Forces Base, Alert and fly to the station on a C-17 Globemaster. Michelle is a graduate of Trent University (Biology/Anthropology) and Loyalist College (Biotechnology). Her education in science has led her to be a passionate advocate for physical and mental health. She is a proud mother of 3 children, between the ages of 12 and 17, and shares her life with her supportive partner, Ryan, and his 3 daughters.

Of note:

• she is a member of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women since December 9, 2021
• Michelle is interested in physical and mental health, housing, the economy and food security
• Critic- Families, Children and Social Development in the Official Opposition's shadow cabinet

Tracy Gray, Conservative Party, Employment, Future Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion Critic, Calgary-Midnapore-Kelowna-Lake Country, British Columbia

Brief biography

Tracy was elected to serve as Member of Parliament for the riding of Kelowna-Lake Country in October 2019. In October 2022, under the new Conservative Party leader, she was named to the new Official Opposition's Shadow Cabinet as the Shadow Minister for Employment, Future Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion. She previously served as Shadow Minister for Interprovincial Trade and as the Shadow Minister for Export Promotion and International Trade. Tracy has extensive business experience and worked most of her career in the BC beverage industry. She founded and owned Discover Wines VQA Wine Stores, which included the number 1 wine store in BC for 13 years. She is has been involved in small businesses in different sectors including financing, importing, oil and gas service and a technology start-up. The daughter of a firefighter and Catholic School teacher, Tracy grew up around service and a strong work ethic. She has 1 son and been married for 27 years. Tracy has received many accolades including RBC Canadian Woman Entrepreneur of the year, Kelowna Chamber of Commerce Business Excellence Award and 100 New Woman Pioneers in BC. Tracy served with many organisations over the years. She was appointed to serve by BC Cabinet to the Passenger Transportation Board and elected to the Board of Prospera Credit Union for 10 years. In addition, she served on the Okanagan Film Commission, Clubhouse Childcare Society, Okanagan Regional Library Trustee and Chair of the Okanagan Basin Water Board.

Of note:

• Critic – Employment, Future Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion in the Official Opposition's shadow cabinet
• sponsor: Bill C-283, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (addiction treatment in penitentiaries) and M-46 National Adoption Awareness Month (outside order of precedence)

Scott Aitchison, Conservative Party, Housing and Diversity and Inclusion Critic, Parry Sound-Muskoka, Ontario 

Brief biography

Scott Aitchison was born and raised in Huntsville, Ontario. After leaving home at 15, Scott was raised by the character of his hometown. In October 2022, under the new Conservative Party leader, he was named to the new Official Opposition's Shadow Cabinet as the Shadow Minister for Housing and Diversity and Inclusion. Scott was first elected at the age of 21 to Huntsville Town Council. After serving as Town Councillor, District Councillor and Deputy Mayor, he was elected as Mayor of Huntsville in 2014 on a promise of fiscal discipline, responsible governance and excellent customer service. As Mayor, he built a reputation as a consensus-builder relentlessly focused on breaking down barriers and finding solutions.

Of note: critic – Housing and Diversity and Inclusion in the Official Opposition's shadow cabinet.

Bonita Zarrillo, New Democratic Party, Disability Inclusion Critic, Port Moody-Coquitlam British Columbia

Brief biography

Bonita Zarrillo was first elected as Member of Parliament for Port Moody-Coquitlam in 2021. She is known to be a voice for equality and drives systemic change that puts people first. She entered public service so she could advocate for working people and to support the needs of the most vulnerable in the community. She championed buy-local as a tool for small businesses to thrive and to enable them to hire locally, challenged pipeline corporations to pay their fair share, and completed a successful housing affordability strategy that generated the most rental housing starts in her region. On Coquitlam Council, Bonita served on the following: Fraser Health Municipal Government Advisory Council, Multiculturism Advisory Committee, Metro Vancouver Indigenous Relations Committee, Universal Access Ability Advisory Committee, and past Board Member for the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. She sat on the board of two local Not-For-Profits that advocate for gender equality and speaks regularly at The Commission on the Status of Women at the United Nations. Before being elected to municipal government, Bonita worked in consumer products as a Business Analyst for companies across North America and Europe. She has a B.A. in Sociology from the University of Manitoba, a Human Resource Management Certificate from the University of Calgary and has a Computer Science Degree from CDI Montreal.

Of note:

• Critic – Disability Inclusion
• pledged to help Canadians through collaborative committee work
• key issues of interest:
  • mental health and suicide prevention
  • women's issues and gender equality
  • workers' conditions
  • care economy

Louise Chabot, Bloc Québecois, Employment, Workforce Development and Labour Critic, Thérèse-De Blainville, Quebec 

Brief biography

Louise Chabot was first elected as Member of Parliament in 2019 and was re-elected in 2021. She was born in 1955 in Saint-Charles-de-Bellechasse, Quebec, is a Quebec trade unionist and politician. She was president of the Centrale des Syndicates du Québec (CSQ) from 2012 to 2018. The organization initially represented nearly 200,000 members, including 130,000 in the education and early childhood sector. She coordinated a major unionization project that resulted in the consolidation of more than 15,000 family day care managers, a first in the union world in Canada.

Of note:

• Critic – Employment, Workforce Development & Labour Critic
• sponsored the Committee's study on the Review of the EI Program in 2021; critical of the Employment Insurance program in general and very outspoken about seasonal workers' trou noir and inadequate sickness benefits
• interested in seniors' financial security and their purchasing power
• seek to enact federal anti-scab legislation
• supporter of labour unions - Former president of Centrale des syndicats du Québec (CSQ)
• member of the consultative committee for Quebec's Pay Equity Commission
• advocate for increase in health transfers
• respect for provincial jurisdictions
• labour shortages
• nurse by profession