The House of Commons is poised to pass a significant labor bill Monday that will ban the use of replacement workers by federally regulated employers during strikes or lockouts. Following its expected approval in the Commons, the bill will advance to the Senate for consideration, says Blacklock's Reporter.“It sends a powerful message and other provinces should take note of it,” stated Liberal MP Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), who serves as the parliamentary secretary to the Government House Leader. Currently, BC and Québec are the only provinces with similar bans in place.Bill C-58, An Act To Amend The Canada Labour Code, aims to prohibit federally regulated employers — such as airlines, banks, and telecommunications companies — from employing replacement workers during strikes or lockouts. Violations could result in fines of up to $100,000 per day. However, a provision in the bill postpones enforcement for one year after its final passage in Parliament.“The federal legislation has limitations in terms of who it impacts,” noted Lamoureux. “The ideal solution would be to have provinces throughout the country recognize that.”No Conservative MP has spoken against the bill or opposed it during its Second or Third Reading. “Conservatives have been supporting this legislation all along the way and continue to,” said MP Tracy Gray (Kelowna-Lake Country, B.C.).However, New Democrat MP Laurel Collins (Victoria) questioned the sincerity of the Conservative support. “Conservatives pretend they support workers but we will not see them on a picket line,” Collins remarked. “New Democrats will keep fighting for workers.”Employer representatives have expressed concerns about the potential impact of the bill. During an April 11 testimony before the Commons human resources committee, Derrick Hynes, CEO of Federally Regulated Employers Transportation and Communications, warned that the bill could grant small union locals undue influence over the national economy. “A replacement worker ban gives very small bargaining units in large organizations an ability to shut down the entire organization,” testified Hynes. “This can happen at an airline, an airport, a railway, a marine port, or in telecom.”Hynes further noted, “Federal elected officials have known for decades this is a bad idea. Though it has come up at least a dozen times in the past 15 years, it has always been rejected by parliamentarians.”On the other hand, union leaders have advocated for the swift passage of the bill, introduced last November 9. “Legislation to ban replacement workers is needed because the use and the threat of the use of scab labour during disputes undermines workers’ constitutionally protected rights to collectively bargain,” testified Lana Payne, national Unifor president, during the March 21 committee hearings. “It undermines our constitutional right to strike. It prolongs labor disputes.”A 2023 memo from the federal labor department indicated that replacement workers were utilized in 40% of strikes and lockouts within the federally regulated sector.
The House of Commons is poised to pass a significant labor bill Monday that will ban the use of replacement workers by federally regulated employers during strikes or lockouts. Following its expected approval in the Commons, the bill will advance to the Senate for consideration, says Blacklock's Reporter.“It sends a powerful message and other provinces should take note of it,” stated Liberal MP Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), who serves as the parliamentary secretary to the Government House Leader. Currently, BC and Québec are the only provinces with similar bans in place.Bill C-58, An Act To Amend The Canada Labour Code, aims to prohibit federally regulated employers — such as airlines, banks, and telecommunications companies — from employing replacement workers during strikes or lockouts. Violations could result in fines of up to $100,000 per day. However, a provision in the bill postpones enforcement for one year after its final passage in Parliament.“The federal legislation has limitations in terms of who it impacts,” noted Lamoureux. “The ideal solution would be to have provinces throughout the country recognize that.”No Conservative MP has spoken against the bill or opposed it during its Second or Third Reading. “Conservatives have been supporting this legislation all along the way and continue to,” said MP Tracy Gray (Kelowna-Lake Country, B.C.).However, New Democrat MP Laurel Collins (Victoria) questioned the sincerity of the Conservative support. “Conservatives pretend they support workers but we will not see them on a picket line,” Collins remarked. “New Democrats will keep fighting for workers.”Employer representatives have expressed concerns about the potential impact of the bill. During an April 11 testimony before the Commons human resources committee, Derrick Hynes, CEO of Federally Regulated Employers Transportation and Communications, warned that the bill could grant small union locals undue influence over the national economy. “A replacement worker ban gives very small bargaining units in large organizations an ability to shut down the entire organization,” testified Hynes. “This can happen at an airline, an airport, a railway, a marine port, or in telecom.”Hynes further noted, “Federal elected officials have known for decades this is a bad idea. Though it has come up at least a dozen times in the past 15 years, it has always been rejected by parliamentarians.”On the other hand, union leaders have advocated for the swift passage of the bill, introduced last November 9. “Legislation to ban replacement workers is needed because the use and the threat of the use of scab labour during disputes undermines workers’ constitutionally protected rights to collectively bargain,” testified Lana Payne, national Unifor president, during the March 21 committee hearings. “It undermines our constitutional right to strike. It prolongs labor disputes.”A 2023 memo from the federal labor department indicated that replacement workers were utilized in 40% of strikes and lockouts within the federally regulated sector.
