TranslatePolitics.ca

Recent debates

8 latest topics

06-18 Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 57 statements 06-18 Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 19 statements 06-18 Arab Heritage Month Act 5 statements 06-18 The Economy 15 statements 06-18 Government Priorities 2 statements 06-18 Government Priorities 2 statements 06-18 Housing 12 statements 06-18 The Environment 2 statements

Private Members' Business

Fair Representation Act

2026-06-04 Sitting 129 Showing 1–3 of 3

A bill to amend labour law to clarify what counts as unfairly influencing a union - and to penalize employers who do it. Members mostly debated specific legal definitions, enforcement thresholds like '25% of a bargaining unit,' and principles of worker rights. Some also gave thanks, anecdotes, or thoughts on the government's overall labour record.

Official Hansard ↗

Hon. Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal 6:00 p.m.

“You didn't define 'employer influence' in your bill. I want to know what exactly counts before I consider supporting this. A clear definition would help.”

Hon. Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal 6:05 p.m.

“I want to talk about how our government supports unions. I'm proud of our anti-scab legislation. Unions have done a lot of good things for society. We need to protect workers' rights. I think this bill could help with that. I want to make sure unions are not being manipulated by employers. I will keep advocating for union rights.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise and to speak to Bill C‑259. I have had the opportunity in the past to do this, but I would like to use this time not only to reinforce my personal beliefs and thoughts in regard to unions but also to talk about the manner in which the government of today, and under Justin Trudeau, has been there to have people's back and support unions. I think there are a number of examples of that. I can still remember MaryAnn Mihychuk, who was our labour minister at one time, bringing in legislation in order to repeal a private member's bill that was brought in by the Conservative Party under Stephen Harper. More recently, there was the anti-scab legislation, which was a significant achievement. I have always argued that the national government can play a leadership role in dealing with workers' rights and advocating for the benefits of unions. I like to think that the whole idea behind the anti-scab legislation is that it is something that not only regulates federal employees but also demonstrates strong leadership for other jurisdictions. Even though the bulk of the unionized workforce is under provincial and territorial jurisdiction, we can actually set an example, because not every province has anti-scab legislation. In fact, I believe that B.C. and Quebec are the two provinces that have anti-scab legislation. I know that in my home province of Manitoba, in the late 1980s, I advocated for anti-scab legislation or, failing that, to support final offer selection as an alternative to anti-scab legislation. We could not get support beyond our caucus at the time. I think that within each political entity we will often find that there are some very strong advocates for unions. I represent the north end of Winnipeg. A lot of people reflect on the 1919 general strike in Winnipeg, which was a historic moment not only for the union movement in the city of Winnipeg but also from a national perspective. We will still find people, including me, who will advocate that it had an impact around the world. I think we all have a responsibility to promote and encourage the union movement here in Canada. Some programs and other things we have today have been spearheaded by unions. I can think of many different social programs, as well as ways in which budgets and laws have been influenced by the union movement here in Canada. I think that when we talk about unions, we need to highlight how we as a society have benefited by them. However, we also have a job to do. That is something that has been pointed out today, and we will take a look at it. That is why I posed the question I did for the member opposite. I was genuinely wanting to get a better understanding of what is within the legislation. Protecting workers' rights has always been a priority for me personally, and it will continue to be. I recognize that, at times, what we have witnessed is the domination of a union that does not have the support of the workers. It is the workers who make the decision to have a union and who put it into place, and the union is there to represent the workers. I think, if we take a look at it from a historical point of view, that has been the case, but unfortunately there are examples where that has not been the case. If we can deal with this issue in a tangible way, I suspect we will find an openness of the government to do so. If we take a look within the Labour Code itself, the issue of protecting the integrity of collective bargaining is there. The issue of protecting the integrity of the worker, through not having employer interference in union membership, is also there. I think these are the types of things we should be reinforcing in their importance. I like the manner in which the member had put it, that unions are there to answer to the workers. I appreciate that particular comment because I truly believe that is the case. I think that we can collectively continue to demonstrate leadership in the manner in which we approach those issues. I also believe it is important that we try to depoliticize, where we can. I had the opportunity recently to talk with the union membership of the Winnipeg transit union to hear some of the concerns they have in areas where Ottawa has some influence. I would indicate to James and company at the Winnipeg transit union that I understood what they had to say, and I will be sharing those concerns with the government in an attempt to deal with them. I appreciate the phenomenal work that our firefighter associations and unions have done across the country. In particular, in my home province of Manitoba, we had Alex Forrest, a champion for our firefighters in how the membership, the workers, can actually benefit from strong advocacy. I am really encouraged with Canada Post's recent decision to ratify an agreement. I believe the vote was over 85% in favour. That agreement has been a long time coming. It is very gratifying to see that there is, at least, an agreement ratified by the employees, but I understand that the employees still have many concerns. Some of those are concerns that I plan to continue to advocate for, because I genuinely want Canada Post to be there for future generations. These are the types of issues, whether it is advocating for union membership or supporting good union jobs through programs such as the Red Seal program, where we are promoting a significant amount of allocated money that is going to assist, literally, 80,000 to 100,000 new highly skilled workers. That anti-scab legislation is something that I take great pride in. Hopefully, other provincial jurisdictions will take it up and move on that particular file as well. I believe in the importance of ensuring that workers have confidence in their union executives. A big part of that is to ensure that it is not being influenced by employers. That is really an important aspect of the role unions have to play. The manipulation of unions is something that I believe, in principle, we have to look out for and protect them from. That is why I am very much interested in how the Canada Labour Code could potentially be improved or if there are other things we can do to protect our unions.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Alana Hirtle

Liberal 6:35 p.m.

“We already have laws for this. I'm filling time by talking about how great we are at making those laws work well.”

Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I would first like to thank the member of Parliament for Edmonton Strathcona for bringing Bill C-259 forward and for her advocacy on behalf of workers. The Government of Canada recognizes the spirit and intent of Bill C-259, because fairness for all Canadian workers is our top priority. Given the economic headwinds we are facing, worker fairness is needed now more than ever. Canada's economy is at a turning point. The global labour landscape has shifted dramatically, causing economic shockwaves felt at home and abroad. Tariffs have dealt a significant blow to workers and employers. This has caused real stress for families and communities across Canada. During uncertain economic times like these, Canadians expect the government to have their backs, and we do. We are working closely with employers and unions to shore up Canada's workplaces and ensure they remain fair and productive. Our marching orders are clear. We must protect Canadian workers while strengthening our country's economic resilience. We cannot build a strong economy without respecting the workers who keep it running every day. That is why we are fully committed to ensuring that workers and their employers have the tools they need to weather this current labour storm. At the heart of Canada's labour framework is the Canada Labour Code. It is more than a law that governs federally regulated workplaces in Canada. It is a promise to protect and support more than one million workers in 22,000 federally regulated industries. It is a promise we will continue to keep, because fair workplaces and a strong economy go hand in hand. Our federal labour framework already works well, but we are always on the lookout for ways to build greater trust, strengthen our labour relations approach and make our policies more flexible and proactive. Today, I would like to highlight our ongoing approach to supporting federally regulated workplaces and the collective bargaining process that is protected by law. The structural integrity of the collective bargaining process is held together by trust and independence. Without those two key ingredients, the process would fail. For agreements to work, workers must trust their union, and employers must trust the system. Any perception of outside influence weakens the system. Workers should also be able to choose their representatives freely and trust that those representatives act in their best interest. They deserve unions that answer to them without being influenced by external pressures. That is why Canada's labour relations system is built on a structured process that balances workers' rights and employers' responsibilities. I can assure members that the Government of Canada firmly believes in the right to strike. It is protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and it is a key element of free, balanced and respectful labour relations. We believe in open and unfettered dialogue between the parties and that workers must have real bargaining power to reach those agreements. We know that the best agreements are those negotiated at the bargaining table. We also know that collective bargaining is not easy, but it produces the strongest deals that represent the needs of the parties involved and that help stabilize the economy. That is why we have taken concrete measures to strengthen that right while maintaining balance across the system. I am referring to Bill C-58, a historic act to ban replacement workers in federally regulated workplaces during strikes or lockouts. It also improved the maintenance of activities process so that parties determine early in the process what work needs to continue to ensure public safety during a work stoppage. It received unanimous support in Parliament and was written into law one year ago this month, on June 20, 2025. Banning the use of replacement workers protects workers' right to strike, removes distractions from collective bargaining and brings greater stability to our economy. We cannot have a strong economy without stable labour relations. Reforms like Bill C-58 help establish a better balance in negotiations and protect the integrity of the collective bargaining process. Collective bargaining can lead to tension at the table, but it remains the ideal mechanism for finding lasting, balanced solutions. That is why the federal labour regime relies on established rules and fair, transparent, independent decision-makers to help parties come to solid agreements. I am referring to the Canada Industrial Relations Board and the federal mediation and conciliation service. They both play an invaluable role in Canada's labour relations system. While news headlines may paint a different picture, the truth is most labour disputes are resolved without a work stoppage. In fact, in the last fiscal year, the vast majority of disputes in federally regulated workplaces were resolved without a work stoppage when the parties worked with the federal mediation and conciliation service. This tells us the system works well, when parties bargain in good faith and when they have access to the right support. Labour relations affect wages, productivity and economic stability. Success at the bargaining table contributes to a stronger economy, but we also know the opposite is true. When labour disputes collapse, this can have rapid and significant repercussions for millions of Canadians, businesses, exporters and the economy writ large. When an economy slows down significantly, it is often workers who bear the brunt of the impact. The collective bargaining space must remain uncluttered by external distractions, so parties can focus on solutions that can stand the test of time. It is here that I would like to turn back to the task at hand and talk about Bill C-259. Bill C-259 proposes a handful of specific amendments. It proposes to further define and codify employer influence and to bar certification of employer-dominated unions. It also adds procedural and governance requirements for certification and creates new penalties, such as summary conviction, up to $100,000. These preventative and clarifying measures are consistent with the code's foundational values. In fact, part I of the code already prohibits employer interference, and CIRB has previously applied these rules broadly through past decisions. We have also found limited evidence of widespread employer-dominated unions in federally regulated sectors. We are aware that the absence of widespread problems is not an argument against clear rules. We know that clear rules set clear expectations, often preventing problems before they arise. I am sure we can all agree that a proactive approach is always the best approach, especially when it comes to labour relations. The Government of Canada will always protect the rights of Canadian workers, including the right to strike. We are always looking for ways to help strengthen labour stability and bolster Canada's competitiveness while supporting workers' rights. One way to ensure workers are supported and policies reflect the distinct challenges of today's workplaces is through consultations. That is why this government held consultations in the spring with unions, employers and indigenous partners to discuss potential ways to improve worker support and the federal labour relations framework. These talks provided invaluable perspectives on the collective bargaining process in federally regulated industries, for example. We have explored various important topics in these consultations, and we are all ears for new and innovative improvements. Discussions like these are essential to help inform practical and long-lasting ways to support workers and workplaces, and ensure they have the tools they trust and that help them succeed. I would like to close by once again thanking the member for Edmonton Strathcona for bringing this bill forward and for her advocacy on behalf of workers. I would like to reaffirm the Government of Canada's unwavering commitment to the integrity of collective bargaining and fair worker representation. We will continue working closely with all stakeholders to ensure that our federally regulated institutions can rely on fairness at the bargaining table, now and in the future.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

What they said. What they meant.

Recent debates