44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 27, 2023 11:00AM
- Nov/27/23 5:41:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as I said earlier, the Bloc Québécois introduced 11 anti-scab bills before the government introduced this one. To give a little background, when the member for Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel, the dean of the House, introduced his bill in 1990, the Liberals voted overwhelmingly in favour of it, but the Conservatives voted against it. There were also 133 members of the House who abstained from voting, including a few New Democrats. Had the NDP caucus been united at that time, we would have had anti-scab legislation in 1990. It is rather surprising to see that the NDP has not always sided with workers, but I am glad to see that they have changed their position today.
128 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 5:42:22 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I do not know the details of that situation, but we know that the NDP has introduced this type of bill in the past and has supported anti-scab bills introduced by other parties, including the Bloc Québécois. Our priority was to ensure that this was part of our work in collaboration with the other parties, including the Liberal Party. To us, it is obvious that we need to move as quickly as possible without waiting 18 months for this bill to become a reality because the workers need it now.
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House to speak to Bill C‑58, which is being studied thanks to the NDP. It is thanks to the efforts of the member for Burnaby South, as well as our critic and deputy leader, the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, that we are here debating another anti‑scab bill. This is the eighth time the NDP has introduced such a bill in Parliament, but we know that it will stick this time. For anyone from any party to claim the opposite would be absolutely false. The NDP has been championing this cause for years. Eight times we did not succeed. However, NDP members keep working until we do succeed. This bill is a win for all workers across the country.
I should also point out that we desperately need this NDP bill in the House of Commons. First and foremost, let us look at the gap between CEOs' annual pay and workers' annual pay across the country. Over the past 15 years or so, first under the Conservatives and then under the Liberals, the gap between what CEOs earn and what workers get has doubled. Seventeen years ago, before the Harper regime began, the ratio was 200 to 1, meaning CEOs earned $200 for every dollar a worker earned. Today, after 17 years of this corporate coalition, we see that the gap has doubled. CEOs now earn around 400 times what workers earn.
It is extremely important to have a fair and level playing field for bargaining. That is what this NDP bill does. It ensures that workers who are negotiating in good faith can now improve their situation while doing their job. For example, they can vote in favour of a strike knowing that their employer cannot use scabs to take away their power to get fairer wages, a health plan and a safer, more secure workplace. These are all things that workers are seeking.
Magali Picard, the president of the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec, said it like it is:
Finally! That is what we feel like saying. We must commend the...government for its courage in resisting the employer lobbies and recognizing all of the hard work that has been done by the NDP, not to mention the unions, including the affiliates of the FTQ, which have constantly exerted pressure over the years so that the governments in place would introduce a bill to protect workers. Too often, unscrupulous employers under federal jurisdiction have taken advantage of the lack of anti-scab legislation to continue operating during labour disputes by hiring scabs. This bill meets our expectations.
Let me repeat what Ms. Picard said: “recognizing all of the hard work that has been done by the NDP”. That is important. That is why the NDP pushed so hard and worked so tirelessly to get this bill introduced. Now, of course, we are going to see to it that the bill is improved, because there are still elements in it that need to be improved.
When we talk about Bill C-58 and the NDP's long battle, over decades, to bring anti-scab legislation, anti-replacement-worker legislation, to the floor of the House of Commons, we have to understand the why of this. I can give no better illustration than just last weekend, when I was back in my riding of New Westminster—Burnaby. There are picket lines there that, of course, the member for Burnaby South, the leader of the NDP has visited. The members for Vancouver Kingsway, Vancouver East and Port Moody—Coquitlam, and, in fact, all members of the Lower Mainland caucus of the NDP, have been on the picket lines for the Shaw workers who were locked out by Rogers.
Rogers, with the rubber stamp of the federal Liberal government, took over Shaw cable, a company that worked for a long time with unionized workers. It locked them out immediately because the workers wanted to continue to have their jobs; to continue, in good faith, to negotiate adequate salaries; and to make sure that work was not contracted out and, in that sense, hurting the entire community. The workers expected to see a negotiation in good faith. That is not what Rogers did. Rogers locked them out and immediately hired replacement workers. I have been on the lockout lines, as have my colleagues from the Lower Mainland NDP caucus. We have not seen Liberals there. We have not seen Conservatives there. It has been New Democrats standing up for the workers, the hundreds who have been locked out.
The reality is, in an example like that, in federal jurisdiction, that the use of replacement workers is a benefit to the corporate executives who have decided to take the step. It is not in the interests of the community, of the public, nor even of the company. The executives took the decision out of pure greed.
Eighteen months would be ridiculously long. The NDP is going to change that. However, the reality is that once Bill C-58 is implemented, companies like Rogers would have to act responsibly. They would have to sit down. They would have to negotiate in good faith. They would have to ensure that what they are doing is negotiating an agreement with their workers in good faith and above board.
The bill is something that would level the playing field for workers. We have seen a massive concentration under the Harper regime and under the current government, where corporate executives have basically had all of the power. They have been able to take massive amounts of money overseas, as the Parliamentary Budgetary Officer tells us, $30 billion of taxpayers' money every year. That is money that could be going to seniors, students and families. It is $30 billion every year, as a result of the Harper tax haven treaties, that is taken offshore. Many of the corporate executives are the same ones who want to negotiate in bad faith with their workers and to lock out their workers, as we have seen in the Rogers-Shaw case, where the Shaw workers were locked out and are now seeing replacement workers stealing their jobs.
The reality, and the important thing to note, is that levelling the playing field is in the interests of the entire community, because strikes and lockouts last a much shorter period of time. There are not the prolonged lockouts and strikes, because the use of replacement workers means that corporate executive do have to sit down and negotiate in good faith. They do have to negotiate in the interests of their business. They do need to negotiate in the interests of their community. It changes everything when the playing field is levelled. That is certainly what we have seen in British Columbia and in Quebec. The anti-scab legislation has actually led to fewer labour disputes, because management is finally compelled to actually negotiate in good faith with the workers in their jurisdiction.
I come from the shop floor. I worked in plastic factories. I worked in the Annacis Business Park. I worked in a unionized situation at the Shelburn oil refinery, which is now closed. My life was a working life, and I saw the difference between non-union and union work. The reality is that working people do better when unions are present and laws provide for a level playing field for negotiation. The middle class counts because of organized labour and people working together.
I am hoping the Liberals have finally been convinced to vote for the legislation. I salute that. I understand that the Bloc will be voting for it. That is important too.
Above all, if Conservative members really believe in the middle class, working families and working Canadians, they need to get off the fence and vote for this legislation. I know the member for Carleton is obsessed with the price on carbon. There is nothing about the price on carbon in this bill, so Conservatives can vote “yes” on Bill C-58.
1364 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 5:53:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am sure the Conservatives will find some rare excuse to link it to the price on pollution, as we have seen with other pieces of legislation.
An hon. member: Oh, oh!
34 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 5:53:48 p.m.
- Watch
I will acknowledge the hon. member who just spoke out of turn. I would ask him to wait, because there is more time to ask questions and make comments.
The hon. deputy House leader.
34 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 5:54:04 p.m.
- Watch
To be fair, Madam Speaker, I did not even notice it; I am used to a lot of yelling on that side.
The Liberals ran on this idea, as did the NDP. I genuinely believe that, because of the partnership we have with the NDP, we have a better piece of legislation now that Canadians can feel very proud of. Could the member for New Westminster—Burnaby inform the House of what it is like to be an adult in the room?
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 5:54:42 p.m.
- Watch
Order. Other members seem to want to answer that question, but it is not their time to answer. If they want to ask questions, they should stand when it is time.
The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.
39 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 5:55:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would remind my colleague and friend that the Liberals ran for 25 years on pharmacare and 20 years on dental care. They never did it. They ran for a decade on anti-scab legislation, but they voted against it when the NDP brought it forward. The difference is that, this time, because of a minority Parliament, New Democrats are forcing the Liberals to do what they said they would do and never do when they hold a majority government.
Yes, we are the adults in the room and the NDP is forcing the Liberals to do the right thing, from which all Canadians will benefit.
An hon. member: Oh, oh!
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 5:55:41 p.m.
- Watch
I will remind the member that he had an opportunity to ask a question. If he wishes to continue to participate, he can stand at the appropriate time.
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Calgary Centre.
37 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 5:55:54 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his impassioned speech. I am used to that from him in the House.
I am going to ask the member a very serious question. He knows as well that the Liberal government previously voted against this same legislation before it was in partnership, as my colleague across the way calls it, with his party, the NDP. They are exposed now as being off to see the wizard together.
Will the member comment on how the Liberals have completely flip-flopped on this in order to buy the support of his party for who knows how long in the House of Commons?
An hon. member: Oh, oh!
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 5:56:31 p.m.
- Watch
I want to remind the member that it was not his turn to answer that either.
I would ask members, in order for the House to continue to function smoothly, that they wait until it is the appropriate time to ask a question, make comments or respond to a question.
The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.
58 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 5:56:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thought my colleague was going to congratulate the NDP for yet again forcing government to do the right thing. We saw under the dismal Harper regime how worker rights suffered. The Liberals came into power and did nothing for workers until the time the NDP started forcing them to do things such as dental care, which will help 11,000 of his constituents, anti-scab legislation and the grocery rebate that, again, helped thousands of his constituents. These are all things New Democrats did, not only for our own constituents but for all Canadians.
The Conservatives are welcome for New Democrats doing the work that they refuse to do in the House of Commons, so that thousands of constituents of Conservative MPs can benefit from the NDP working hard on their behalf and on behalf of all Canadians.
141 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 5:58:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we have heard the Conservatives talk a lot about more powerful paycheques. Could the member expand a bit on how workers got more powerful paycheques and the role of trade unions in getting health and safety requirements in the workplace, better leave requirements and a living wage for workers? How would the bill help them advance that work?
60 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 5:58:27 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member for Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke has been standing up for working people since he first came here to the House of Commons. He has done a remarkable job and made a real difference, and so have unions.
We can remember that, before the labour movement came along, there was nothing like a day off. There was not a weekend, there were no health and safety regulations and there was no overtime. We saw children working in mines and factories. All these things were because corporate overlords had decided to simply use working people, with no checks and balances.
The labour movement delivered the weekend, health and safety regulations, adequate salaries and a minimum wage. It ensured overtime and benefits, such as life insurance, dental benefits and a whole range of other things. All those things came because working people, together, working through their labour organizations, pushed the government.
Of course, the NDP and its predecessor party, the CCF, have fought hard in the House of Commons to make sure that those benefits were realized by all Canadians. This is another step, and it is an important one, but we know the labour movement is always watching Canadians' backs and fighting hard for working families and all working people.
213 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise on Bill C-56, and I congratulate my colleague for his wonderful intervention. As well, I would like to recognize our labour critics, the members for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie and Hamilton Centre, who have worked actively on this for a number of generations as private citizens and now as members of Parliament. In fact, one member comes from a union background, and the other comes from a union town that has seen its share of scabs get in the way of good collective bargaining agreements and actually undermine workers.
When we talk about workers, these are the families in Canada that have traditionally bonded together in many ways. We can look at the reasons for co-operative movements that have taken place across this country. They were a way for individual collective families to get together to push back on greed, corporate malfeasance and some of the scandals and corruption in the private sector, the business sector and even in the political sector of the day, to ensure that they have the best opportunities to raise their families with dignity. They were also a way to show that there will be an opportunity for everyone to get ahead in this country.
As New Democrats, our predecessor is the CCF, and we have seen this many times in this chamber and looked towards trying to get anti-scab legislation passed.
The definition of a scab worker is a person who is hired after notice to bargain, including managers, employees or another employer, a contractor who is not already employed by the company; those already working can continue with any change to their responsibilities and are bargaining unit employees. They would be the people who would be a real problem with regard to the economic empowerment of citizens, and this is the working class.
We have to look back in history to see why the working class got together through the industrialization of not only Canada but also the globe. The fact is that they were taken advantage of in many ways. Workers are taken advantage of to this day. Over 1,000 Canadian workers per year die going to work.
The issues over labour have always been put on the back burner. I come from Windsor, Ontario, where we have had the Ford strike and a number of important issues that have taken place, such as the creation of the Rand formula. As well, other labour ingenuities that involve the environment came about because of the exploitation of workers. My own family has paid a high price by getting a number of industrial diseases, because it was okay for the workers to be exposed to asbestos, other chemicals or oil. There was no proper WHIMIS training or ventilation, and dangerous materials were not disposed of in the proper way. To this day, we still have some places that do not follow best practices.
We are asking for the disrespect for workers, which I have seen, sadly, in this chamber, to stop. I am not surprised that the Conservatives are not going to support this initiative, because it really comes from a grassroots base to understand that families collectively want to get together to push back against those who are in power and speak truth to power.
I have been in this chamber many times when the Liberals have actually even voted workers back to work, whether it be the postal workers or at the port of Montreal. These are all debates we have had where, basically, negotiations were actually active and going on, but members of the Liberal government brought in recommendations and closure to those strikes while the free market was trying to figure out what was going to happen next. However, it is good to see that they are going to come around on this.
We see in Quebec and British Columbia that there are models of this initiative, as well as in other countries across the globe. It is going to empower and strengthen collective bargaining for a real resolution.
This is important, because it also affects the public purse. The interesting aspect of this that the Conservatives still do not understand is that collective bargaining actually brings wealth to the working class, the business class and the small business class across this country. When they collectively work together to bring in those corporate responsibilities for a cleaner, safer workplace, as well as better pensions and wages, small businesses boom with that type of response. These are the workers with the least amount of disposable income, but they spend it in their neighbourhoods and communities. They spend to send their kids to school or to invest in their pension later on, which takes pressure off the public purse, because the proper financing is done at that time. This is what the Conservatives do not understand, which is hard to believe. However, it is a simple element that is so consistent with the values of being Canadian, and it would make sure that our lives would get better day by day if we could get this done.
Getting that done means supporting workers who have decided to take a stand against poor conditions in the workplace or a stand when their wages have been out of sync with the profits of the companies.
Most recently, we have seen this collective bargaining bring enhancements to the country as a whole. I congratulate them. We have Unifor most recently and Dave Cassidy and Emile Nabbout. Also, a series of negotiations have taken place that actually bring stability to the workplace because they have been able to get better pensions, benefits and wages at a time when the companies that they represent are making record profits. It has not been easy for them at all, and that is one of the things that is important: that the workers collectively go and negotiate and elect their representatives who have to prove themselves time and time again.
I think of one of my mentors, Brian Hogan, a former Windsor and District Labour Council president and good friend; and Gary Parent, Ken Lewenza and others. There are so many of these people in Windsor whom we could stand on the shoulders of in terms of labour. Most recently we had the Charles Brooks Award representing labour and progressions. Tony Sisti was recommended this year. In the past, it has been people like Rolly Marentette, who fought for workers' health and safety. It goes on and on because their strength in being able to collectively bargain for these benefits is critical; not only for themselves in the private sector unions but also in the public sector unions.
On top of that, it also empowers and lifts up other workers who do not have a collective agreement. That is one of the things that gets missed, and why having scabs undermine those negotiations not only creates conflict, but it pits neighbours against neighbours. People can even be shipped in, which I have seen in the past. I have seen horrible things take place on the picket line, where people have been hit or run over and others have been forced, beaten up or abused. All those things have taken place and that is a bad way to run a community and a bad way to create social strife. When the benefit of the actual agreement takes place, it is often passed on to other workplaces.
More important, for that direct workplace, I can say it had an impact on the families of management because management often got the reflective package of the workers, especially when it came to pensions and benefits. That is one thing that is not really discussed a lot: the white-collar part of a workforce that is not unionized can often benefit when it comes to the collective agreement and the improvements on it.
I look at the Ford-Nemak situation when, thank goodness, John D'Agnolo and the crew at local 200 fought like heck and were on the streets. All of us were, because Nemak at that time received money by Navdeep Bains, the former industry minister, in the province of Ontario, and they got money for a transmission innovation to research. Then, as soon as Nemak, a Mexican company, did that research and built the product, it shipped out to Mexico. Therefore, the workers with their collective agreement were able to sue. Despite the government turning its back on them for so many months and leaving it to the courts and leaving the workers out to dry, we had a number of pickets on line and rallies. On top of that, they went to court and John and the rest of the local 200 people were heroes. Those workers, because of our weak, lax labour standards, had already taken pay cuts just to hang onto their jobs. How insulting it was that taxpayers funded the innovation that went to Mexico and the workers could not follow with their jobs. They did not want to go, they were not invited and it should not have been necessary. That plant is idle today because of that.
As I wrap up, there are so many people we could actually acknowledge with regard to this fight. We have to get it through committee rather quickly because time is of the essence.
I will conclude with this again: This legislation is supportive not only for those men and women who are actually on the line; it benefits every other person in the workforce for public safety, security for themselves, health for their families and wages that need to be reflected in the free market economy that obviously needs correction from time to time by the workers who actually make the money.
1635 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 6:09:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I wonder how the hon. member for Windsor West squares the rhetoric we keep hearing from the Conservatives about powerful paycheques with the fact that they oppose legislation like this and they have twice before voted against a federal minimum wage.
43 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 6:10:11 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is hard to understand, because the vast majority of disposable income goes to investment in our local communities. It is not the workers who take their paycheques and invest outside this country for other things.
In fact, when we look at the United States, they tax on worldwide profits. When we give corporate subsidies or reductions without any terms and conditions, we actually lose taxpayers' money for that. The more we empower workers, the better for small business, the better for white-collar workers and the better for non-unionized workers. All those things are lifted up by the fact that we have strong collective agreements that are negotiated in a free market system that does not allow bullies to enter the free market system and undermine it.
I have been on the picket line many times where security companies had been hired. If we look at the Windsor Salt situation, some of the members were investigated and private investigators were hired. They have money for all that nonsense, but they do not have money for wages and benefits. It is nonsense, especially when these are Canadian natural resources. People deserve a good paycheque for that.
199 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 6:11:18 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will ask my colleague, after his impassioned speech, the same question I asked his colleague, for which I did not receive an adequate answer. How does he feel about this legislation being put forward in this House of Commons by the Liberal government after it voted against this same legislation in a prior Parliament? The exact people who used to oppose it are now saying they are actually in favour of this now. How does he feel about this flip-flop on the part of the Liberal Party of Canada?
93 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 6:11:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I really do not mind. I hope they will flip-flop too, make this unanimous, move it fast through committee and move it fast and furious through the Senate to make sure this becomes law. It is good for small business and it is good for the rest of the economy. It is good for everybody. I have been here before and I have seen hypocrisy and people changing positions. I have been here for a while, and I welcome change. There is history that we need to deal with, but if we could get everybody on side we could get this done, move on and be stronger as a country. I really encourage the Conservatives to give this a second thought because it is good for the economy, for non-union members and for small business.
139 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/27/23 6:12:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will ask my colleague another question, because it is an important matter we are discussing here today. We talked about how the other side of the House has flip-flopped and gone forward with legislation it previously opposed, which shows there is very little principle in what it is doing. However, in addition to that, this legislation would apply to a small sliver of employees in Canada. It would apply only to federally regulated industries, not to Canadian federal workers or industry, including the employees my hon. colleague is speaking about having been on strike with. It does not apply to those workers at all.
How does he square the fact that this applies to a very small sliver of the people in Canada who might go on strike and yet does not apply to the very people the federal government oversees?
145 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
