It’s Critical to get Canada’s Labour Policy Right

  • National Newswatch

Last November, the Federal Minister of Labour, Seamus O’Regan, tabled Bill C-58, an act that would ban federally regulated employers from using replacement workers when unionized employees are on strike.

The bill was presented as a solution to a problem – but a problem that doesn’t really exist. How can one tell that this bill is mostly a political stage show? Because the large majority of Liberal MPs voted against this idea in the past, in many cases more than once.

Federally regulated employers are generally large enterprises – banks, telecommunications companies, railways, airlines and shippers that keep critical parts of our economy and infrastructure moving. Their workers are generally well compensated and enjoy good job security, as well as industry-leading pensions and benefits.

These employers don’t want to use replacement workers as a way of gaining leverage at the bargaining table. This would undermine the spirit of collective bargaining, create friction and harm important relationships. It is a bad idea, but here’s the thing - it is also already against the law.

So, it’s an unnecessary Bill, and seriously flawed – it fails to consider that there are certain limited situations where companies must continue to provide critical services to Canadians.

Here are a few examples:

  • If telecommunications shut down, everyday services, on which Canadians rely, will stop, including everything from emergency calls to millions of financial transactions.
  • If airport refueling can’t happen at airports across the country, flights will grind to a halt, with cascading impacts across the sector affecting travelers and shipments.
  • If supply chains break (rail, ports, shippers), life-saving medicines and medical equipment will not arrive at hospitals and pharmacies.

In all of these cases, as well as many more, a limited number of replacement workers are sometimes needed to avoid potentially catastrophic results for Canadians from coast-to-coast-to-coast. This is not the widespread permanent replacement of workers – as some would have you believe – these are targeted and temporary, used to ensure a continuity of service until the work stoppage ends.

As it is drafted today, this bill will lead to broken supply chains, risks to connectivity, service disruptions and more economic uncertainty for Canada. We don’t want to widen the use of replacement workers – we believe replacement workers should only be used in critical situations, to maintain vital functions and keep Canada from shutting down. The current system is working, as the Minister of Labour himself has often said.

During the Covid–19 pandemic, we all learned just how crucial it is to our economy and to our everyday lives that supply chains are as reliable as possible. This legislation puts that at risk. A recent spark*insights national survey found that 83% of Canadians believe that the country can’t afford to have services such as railways, banks, and internet shut down, and 80% think the cost of living is already so high we shouldn’t contemplate policies that would make things worse.

This Bill has more to do with politics than common sense. Legislative proposals to ban replacement workers have come up at least a dozen times in the past 15 years and every time, a clear majority of Liberal and Conservative MPs, including at least 100 members of the current Liberal Party caucus, have voted it down, knowing the damage it would bring to our economy. The Labour Minister himself voted against it twice before in 2016 and 2019.

Canada needs more sensible policy around critical work, and less political posturing.

Derrick Hynes, President & CEO of FETCO (Federally Regulated Employers – Transportation and Communications)