Bill C-58 is on the table and could be an early Christmas gift for some Canadian workers

BY MICHAEL THOMAS

Recently over seventy labour experts signed an open letter calling on Canada’s Lawmakers to stand with Bill C-58. What is Bill C-58 you might ask?

It is An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code and the Canada Industrial Relations Board Regulations, which is currently undergoing a Second Reading in the House of Commons. Here is a small sample of the letter in question, “We the undersigned are writing in our capacity as work and labor studies researchers, scholars, and policy experts to express our support for a federal ban on replacement workers.

By adopting Bill C-58, Parliament has a historic opportunity to advance workers’ rights and improve labor relations in federally regulated workplaces by strengthening the collective bargaining process and leveling the playing field in contract disputes; and the list continues.”

One of the most powerful and liked clauses in this Bill is the fact that it aims to ban the use of replacement workers whenever there is a strike action in effect. In simple terms, this Bill will prevent employers from replacing negotiating workers with non-unionized workers.

Labour experts say that allowing employers to replace striking workers undermines morality in the workplace, allows for strategizing over how to best undermine union members exercising their right to strike, and creates an uneven playing field.

One of the pitfalls of this Bill should it become law, is that it will take 18 months (about 1 and a half years) to come into effect. Some are saying that is too long and unnecessary. As is to be expected the Bill was met with resistance from business lobbyists. Again, the labour experts are challenging the assertions from business lobbyists that a ban on replacement workers will drive away investment and increase the likelihood of work stoppages calling these unfounded allegations.

The experts also pointed to the fact that Quebec and British Columbia have similar rules without the negative effects mentioned by the lobbyists.

The letter went on to say that calls by corporate interests to water down the bill are ill-advised. Bill C-58 is already watered down. It exempts the federal public service, and the restrictions on replacement workers apply only to those employed after the day on which notice to bargain collectively is given. Therefore, to water down this bill any further would be to make it a toothless dog.

I spoke briefly with Larry Savage, a professor of labour studies at Brock University who is optimistic about this Bill, “I think that similar Bills have not passed over the last two decades, but the reason there is optimism for the Bill to pass this time, is because it is a part of the Liberal and NDP confidence and supply agreement, and so it stands.”

I asked Savage why the pushback from business groups, and he said, “Well I think historically, business groups have opposed every major improvement to workers’ rights.”

“For the last 150 years,” he said, “the introduction of unions, they opposed the introduction of the right to strike. Every time the minimum wage increases, business groups complain. When the government wanted to introduce paid sick days, businesspeople said no! You should not do that, and so it should come as no surprise businesspeople opposed Bill C-58.”

I asked Professor Savage what it would mean to him if this Bill passed. “If this Bill passes, I think the labour movement would see that as the first step to push for similar legislation in all the provinces that don’t have it.”

He told me this would be big in provinces like Ontario, where about 90% of workers work in provincially regulated industries.

If Bill C-58 passes it would be historic. This prompted me to ask the professor my final question; would laborers be celebrating? “Some unions are happy,” he said, “But I think they are not taking anything for granted because they recognize that there is a great power and balance in Canadian politics.”

“The business lobby has a lot of power. They will be working to kill the Bill or water it down,” Savage told me.

Even though this bill is long overdue in the eyes of many, 18 months (about 1 and a half years) is a long time in politics.