WestJet flight attendants hold a 'Day of Action' in Calgary on July 14.Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press
The Carney government’s proposed labour law reforms target a serious problem: the increase in disruptions to critical industries such as airlines, ports and railways. Ottawa is taking heat from labour advocates, but the changes are a sensible measure to rebalance the interests of federally regulated employers, employees, and the public.
In recent years, Canada has seen an upsurge in labour disruptions, with 4.3 million person days lost last year, the highest level since 1990. Inflationary pressures have been a factor, but many employers also point to reforms from former prime minister Justin Trudeau that tipped the scales in organized labour’s favour and boosted tensions. The Liberals’ alliance with the NDP under Mr. Trudeau, as well as the Conservatives’ move toward labour-friendly positions, contributed to the shifting winds.
The Trudeau government rolled back a requirement for unions to increase financial disclosures and to require secret-ballot votes to certify unions. More recently, a ban on replacement workers in federally regulated companies, dubbed “the anti-scab law” by labour advocates, went into effect. Labour groups had lobbied for that change for 20 years, but both Liberal and Conservative governments had refused to act earlier, given concerns from employers.
Editorial: Lessons from the birth of Labour Day
The provisions in the Building Canada Strong Act, introduced in the House of Commons last Monday, create a more robust offramp to avoid strikes and lockouts. The minister of labour already has the power to intervene in disputes under the Labour Code’s Section 107, but Bill C-39 would clarify the process.
The minister would only be able to intervene after a special mediator had attempted to resolve the dispute. If the parties are still at an impasse, the mediator would provide the minister with an assessment report. Then, if the minister believed the strike or lockout would have a significant negative national impact, the workers could be ordered back to their jobs. The existing collective agreement could be extended or the parties would enter into a binding dispute-resolution process, such as arbitration.
Unions, which were hoping to see a repeal of Section 107, are complaining the ministerial powers will reduce their ability to strike. They aren’t wrong. Reducing labour disruptions, in part through early engagement, is indeed the goal.
However, the impact is narrower than unions would admit. Only around 10 per cent of workers are in federally regulated industries, which include banks, transportation and broadcasting. Amongst this group, the new framework would only apply for disruptions with significant national impact.
When a port, railway or airline goes on strike, the pain emanates far beyond the employer. Air travellers are stranded, and farmers and small businesses struggle to get products to market. When Canada Post shuts down, businesses and individuals can’t get important packages and documents.
Prime Minister Mark Carney recognizes that in order to boost resource development, investors must feel confident their products can get to market. The new legislation gives Ottawa another tool to get parties back to the table so the economy can’t be held ransom, says Dan Kelly, president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business.
Unions argue the new framework would discourage employers from bargaining in good faith, knowing the government would intervene. However, many employers don’t want to roll the dice with binding arbitration, as arbitrators are often perceived as being friendly to labour. The revised process would include many opportunities for both parties to make a deal directly with each other.
Labour advocates shouldn’t count strikes as a measure of success, but instead measure the outcomes for workers. In the U.S., transportation regulations support the right of workers to bargain collectively, yet the process pushes the parties towards mandatory dispute resolutions rather than labour disruptions. As a result, airline and railway strikes are extremely rare, and U.S. airline pilots enjoy the highest wages in the world.
Collective bargaining is important, and unions make significant positive contributions to life in Canada. However, the proliferation of strikes and lockouts is bad for both employees and employers, and the government is right to seek ways to avoid them. After the Trudeau years, a careful rebalancing of the relationship between both sides was needed.
Editor’s note: A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that the 4.3 million person days lost last year due to labour disruptions represented an all-time high. It was the highest level since 1990.