Heather McPherson, Edmonton Strathcona
“I want the House to pass this bill. It stops companies from controlling unions, lets workers challenge fake unions, and punishes employers who try to run them.”
“moved that Bill C-259, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (fair representation), be read the second time and referred to a committee. She said: Madam Speaker, it is a great honour to stand today to debate this piece of legislation I have brought forward. I want to start by thanking my colleague, the member for Courtenay—Alberni, for seconding this bill. As a new Democrat, I can say I am so proud of our caucus and the work we have done in this Parliament to support and strengthen workers’ rights. I think about the repealing of clause 107. I think about the work we have done to close loopholes in the anti-scab legislation to ensure workers are paid for the work that they do. I am so proud to be a New Democrat and to stand with members like the member for Courtenay—Alberni as the party representing workers in the House. I am also proud to speak to this legislation, Bill C-259, the fair representation bill, or as I like to call it, the wolf in sheep’s clothing bill. Today, Parliament will debate a simple idea that workers deserve real representation. The fact is that real unions represent workers and fake unions do not. I want to thank the Canadian Labour Congress, the United Steelworkers, the Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, LiUNA Local 1611, the Building Trades, the International Union of Operating Engineers, IBEW, UA and other workers who stood with me today to talk about why this legislation is so important. I also want to thank the many unions and workers across this country who have pushed for this legislation and who have supported me along the way. I think about Scott Crichton, a member of IBEW Local 424 in my riding of Edmonton Strathcona, or Tyler Bedford from the Operating Engineers who have worked so closely to make sure this legislation comes to fruition. Unions support this legislation because unions in this country, the vast majority of them, do what unions are supposed to do. They fight for workers, raise wages, improve safety and strengthen communities. This bill is not about them. They are unions that do the work they are supposed to do. This bill is about fake unions. It is about unions that represent companies, not the workers. It is about unions that do not fight for their workers. It is a danger, because those are the unions that drive down wages, make workplaces less safe and undermine workers’ rights. That happens within those unions, but it also happens across sectors, because what impacts one worker impacts us all. I want to be very clear that workers have asked for this legislation. This came from workers. It came from the concerns that have been raised by labour over many years. When we wanted to bring this legislation forward, we worked with workers, labour leaders, members of the building trades and others across the labour movement. I want to acknowledge the incredible work that Terry Parker and my friends at the Building Trades of Alberta did to help move this legislation forward. We have strong support from organized labour because real unions have nothing to fear from worker accountability. Real unions support this bill because it protects the rights they have fought for generations to win. Right now, there is a gap in the legislation. Federal law does recognize that employer-dominated unions are a problem. Subsection 25(1) of the Canada Labour Code says that employer-dominated unions cannot be certified. However, here is where my legislation is so necessary and so important: There is no way for workers to remedy that after certification. There is no worker-driven review process. There is no dedicated mechanism. There are no specific remedies. There are provinces in this country that have much stronger regulations against company unions, and federal workers deserve that same protection. What would this bill do? This bill would give workers a practical way to fight back. It would create a process for workers to raise concerns. It would allow workers to seek a review where there are allegations of employer domination or influence. It would require organizations to demonstrate their independence when concerns are raised. It would provide remedies where employer domination is found. It would reinforce a very simple principle that unions must answer to workers, not employers. This matters. It matters because when employer-dominated unions put employers first, we know that wages suffer. We know that working conditions suffer. We know that safety on the job for Canadian workers suffers. We know that bargaining power, a fundamental right of every worker in this country, the ability to bargain effectively, is taken away, and that right suffers. Workers deserve the confidence that the organization speaking for them is actually on their side. I want to tell the House a story as to why this matters. Today I had some folks from British Columbia join me. They told a story about Sam Fitzpatrick. This story illustrates for me why this issue is not theoretical. This is not just about what happens on paper. It impacts workers in our country. Sam Fitzpatrick was a 24‑year‑old who was working in Squamish, B.C. He was killed on the job in 2009. There were serious safety failures that were documented. Previous incidents were documented. His employer had promised it would do better, that it would not endanger the workers’ safety. Concerns were raised. Risks remained. There was a WCAT review. In fact, the employer was described as “heedless”, “wanton”, “extreme”, “gross” and “highly irresponsible”. This is the employer. The union representing Sam Fitzpatrick was the CLAC, the Christian Labour Association of Canada. It wrote in and said, “a presidential penalty was not appropriate given the employer’s prior demonstrated commitment to safety.” The CLAC literally argued that the corporation should be fined less for its incompetence and its failure to protect the life of a worker. It is unbelievable. A worker was killed, the family was seeking accountability, and the union representing that worker argued against the harshest penalty. That is not what a real union does. That is the opposite of what a real union does. Workers expect more from a union. Workers deserve more from a union. That is not the only example. Today I stood in the foyer with a photo of Sam Fitzpatrick, a 24‑year‑old worker. My children are that age. That man had parents. He had friends. He had people who loved him. There are other examples. In 2025, at the Executive Hotel Le Soleil, the B.C. Labour Relations Board found unlawful employer interference in the employees’ choice of union. Management steered workers toward the CLAC and away from Unite Here Local 40. The board later voted that the employer’s voluntary recognition agreement with the CLAC needed to be voided. It happened again with the EXchange Hotel in 2026, where there were findings of employer interference. There was pressure. There were inducements. There was employer support. Decisions were issued in 2025 and 2026. This is still happening in this country. This is not history. This is happening right now. I want to talk a bit about the international context. Union independence is recognized internationally as a core principle. In 2011, the ITUC suspended CLAC and said that workers deserve representation independent from employer influence. This is all happening right now. Millions of dollars in federal funding flowed to CLAC last year. The same year that the B.C. Labour Relations Board brought a finding against it for not properly representing its members, the federal government was spending millions of dollars and diverting that money there. In my home province of Alberta, the UCP government just announced a new $4-million training initiative being delivered in partnership with the CLAC. Workers are raising concerns, yet governments are continuing to write cheques. Workers deserve confidence, before public money is spent and before public money is handed over, that it is going to unions that represent workers. I will tell members some good news. Just months ago, more than 800 workers at an Edmonton manufacturing facility voted to leave CLAC and join the operating engineers, because they were dissatisfied with the representation they were receiving. It was one of the largest departures from CLAC in Canadian history, and it happened not decades ago, but last year. When I talk about federally regulated workplaces, I am talking about everyone who is working in those workspaces, which is roughly one million workers. These are workers in transportation, telecommunications, broadcasting, banking, grain handling, longshoring and federally regulated construction. These workers deserve protection. They deserve to be represented by a union that will represent them and only them. That is what this legislation would do. In this country, workers are worried. They are worried about affordability. They are worried about wages. They are worried about job security. The economic war we are having with the United States, the tariffs and the economic impacts are causing uncertainty. The moves that the Liberal government is making to strip workers of their rights, such as the use of section 107, a backdoor method to force workers back to work, continue to undermine the rights of workers in this country. This legislation would give workers their rights back, because workers need stronger protections, not weaker protections. The Liberals and the Conservatives say they support workers. This is their opportunity to prove it. Real unions answer to workers. Employer-dominated unions do not. Fake unions do not. Let us put power back where it belongs. Let us put power back with workers.”
moved that Bill C-259, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (fair representation), be read the second time and referred to a committee. She said: Madam Speaker, it is a great honour to stand today to debate this piece of legislation I have brought forward. I want to start by thanking my colleague, the member for Courtenay—Alberni, for seconding this bill. As a new Democrat, I can say I am so proud of our caucus and the work we have done in this Parliament to support and strengthen workers’ rights. I think about the repealing of clause 107. I think about the work we have done to close loopholes in the anti-scab legislation to ensure workers are paid for the work that they do. I am so proud to be a New Democrat and to stand with members like the member for Courtenay—Alberni as the party representing workers in the House. I am also proud to speak to this legislation, Bill C-259, the fair representation bill, or as I like to call it, the wolf in sheep’s clothing bill. Today, Parliament will debate a simple idea that workers deserve real representation. The fact is that real unions represent workers and fake unions do not. I want to thank the Canadian Labour Congress, the United Steelworkers, the Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, LiUNA Local 1611, the Building Trades, the International Union of Operating Engineers, IBEW, UA and other workers who stood with me today to talk about why this legislation is so important. I also want to thank the many unions and workers across this country who have pushed for this legislation and who have supported me along the way. I think about Scott Crichton, a member of IBEW Local 424 in my riding of Edmonton Strathcona, or Tyler Bedford from the Operating Engineers who have worked so closely to make sure this legislation comes to fruition. Unions support this legislation because unions in this country, the vast majority of them, do what unions are supposed to do. They fight for workers, raise wages, improve safety and strengthen communities. This bill is not about them. They are unions that do the work they are supposed to do. This bill is about fake unions. It is about unions that represent companies, not the workers. It is about unions that do not fight for their workers. It is a danger, because those are the unions that drive down wages, make workplaces less safe and undermine workers’ rights. That happens within those unions, but it also happens across sectors, because what impacts one worker impacts us all. I want to be very clear that workers have asked for this legislation. This came from workers. It came from the concerns that have been raised by labour over many years. When we wanted to bring this legislation forward, we worked with workers, labour leaders, members of the building trades and others across the labour movement. I want to acknowledge the incredible work that Terry Parker and my friends at the Building Trades of Alberta did to help move this legislation forward. We have strong support from organized labour because real unions have nothing to fear from worker accountability. Real unions support this bill because it protects the rights they have fought for generations to win. Right now, there is a gap in the legislation. Federal law does recognize that employer-dominated unions are a problem. Subsection 25(1) of the Canada Labour Code says that employer-dominated unions cannot be certified. However, here is where my legislation is so necessary and so important: There is no way for workers to remedy that after certification. There is no worker-driven review process. There is no dedicated mechanism. There are no specific remedies. There are provinces in this country that have much stronger regulations against company unions, and federal workers deserve that same protection. What would this bill do? This bill would give workers a practical way to fight back. It would create a process for workers to raise concerns. It would allow workers to seek a review where there are allegations of employer domination or influence. It would require organizations to demonstrate their independence when concerns are raised. It would provide remedies where employer domination is found. It would reinforce a very simple principle that unions must answer to workers, not employers. This matters. It matters because when employer-dominated unions put employers first, we know that wages suffer. We know that working conditions suffer. We know that safety on the job for Canadian workers suffers. We know that bargaining power, a fundamental right of every worker in this country, the ability to bargain effectively, is taken away, and that right suffers. Workers deserve the confidence that the organization speaking for them is actually on their side. I want to tell the House a story as to why this matters. Today I had some folks from British Columbia join me. They told a story about Sam Fitzpatrick. This story illustrates for me why this issue is not theoretical. This is not just about what happens on paper. It impacts workers in our country. Sam Fitzpatrick was a 24‑year‑old who was working in Squamish, B.C. He was killed on the job in 2009. There were serious safety failures that were documented. Previous incidents were documented. His employer had promised it would do better, that it would not endanger the workers’ safety. Concerns were raised. Risks remained. There was a WCAT review. In fact, the employer was described as “heedless”, “wanton”, “extreme”, “gross” and “highly irresponsible”. This is the employer. The union representing Sam Fitzpatrick was the CLAC, the Christian Labour Association of Canada. It wrote in and said, “a presidential penalty was not appropriate given the employer’s prior demonstrated commitment to safety.” The CLAC literally argued that the corporation should be fined less for its incompetence and its failure to protect the life of a worker. It is unbelievable. A worker was killed, the family was seeking accountability, and the union representing that worker argued against the harshest penalty. That is not what a real union does. That is the opposite of what a real union does. Workers expect more from a union. Workers deserve more from a union. That is not the only example. Today I stood in the foyer with a photo of Sam Fitzpatrick, a 24‑year‑old worker. My children are that age. That man had parents. He had friends. He had people who loved him. There are other examples. In 2025, at the Executive Hotel Le Soleil, the B.C. Labour Relations Board found unlawful employer interference in the employees’ choice of union. Management steered workers toward the CLAC and away from Unite Here Local 40. The board later voted that the employer’s voluntary recognition agreement with the CLAC needed to be voided. It happened again with the EXchange Hotel in 2026, where there were findings of employer interference. There was pressure. There were inducements. There was employer support. Decisions were issued in 2025 and 2026. This is still happening in this country. This is not history. This is happening right now. I want to talk a bit about the international context. Union independence is recognized internationally as a core principle. In 2011, the ITUC suspended CLAC and said that workers deserve representation independent from employer influence. This is all happening right now. Millions of dollars in federal funding flowed to CLAC last year. The same year that the B.C. Labour Relations Board brought a finding against it for not properly representing its members, the federal government was spending millions of dollars and diverting that money there. In my home province of Alberta, the UCP government just announced a new $4-million training initiative being delivered in partnership with the CLAC. Workers are raising concerns, yet governments are continuing to write cheques. Workers deserve confidence, before public money is spent and before public money is handed over, that it is going to unions that represent workers. I will tell members some good news. Just months ago, more than 800 workers at an Edmonton manufacturing facility voted to leave CLAC and join the operating engineers, because they were dissatisfied with the representation they were receiving. It was one of the largest departures from CLAC in Canadian history, and it happened not decades ago, but last year. When I talk about federally regulated workplaces, I am talking about everyone who is working in those workspaces, which is roughly one million workers. These are workers in transportation, telecommunications, broadcasting, banking, grain handling, longshoring and federally regulated construction. These workers deserve protection. They deserve to be represented by a union that will represent them and only them. That is what this legislation would do. In this country, workers are worried. They are worried about affordability. They are worried about wages. They are worried about job security. The economic war we are having with the United States, the tariffs and the economic impacts are causing uncertainty. The moves that the Liberal government is making to strip workers of their rights, such as the use of section 107, a backdoor method to force workers back to work, continue to undermine the rights of workers in this country. This legislation would give workers their rights back, because workers need stronger protections, not weaker protections. The Liberals and the Conservatives say they support workers. This is their opportunity to prove it. Real unions answer to workers. Employer-dominated unions do not. Fake unions do not. Let us put power back where it belongs. Let us put power back with workers.