Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Social Affairs, Science and Technology

Issue 27 - Fourteenth, Sixteenth and Seventeenth Reports of the Committee

Tuesday, April 22, 1997

The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology has the honour to present its

FOURTEENTH REPORT

Your committee, to which was referred the Bill C-300, An Act respecting the establishment and award of a Canadian Peacekeeping Service Medal for Canadians who have served with an international peacekeeping mission, has, in obedience to the Order of Reference of Tuesday, April 8, 1997, examined the said Bill and now reports the same without amendment but with the following recommendations:

The Committee affirms the recommendations of the National Council of Veteran Associations (as contained in the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs' report "Keeping the Faith: Into the Future", and briefs submitted to the subcommittee on January 20, 1997 and April 21, 1997, respectively) regarding the creation of new awards and medals, with the intention that these recommendations be given effect in such manner as to ensure a timely completion of awards and medals commemorating the end of the Second World War; and

The committee recommends that the Government of Canada include, in its Honours and Awards Committee, representatives of the major veterans associations in Canada and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Respectfully submitted,

Wednesday, April 23, 1997

The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology has the honour to present its

SIXTEENTH REPORT

Your committee, to which was referred the Bill C-84, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act and the Immigration Act, has, in obedience to its Order of Reference of Monday, April 21, 1997, examined the said bill and now reports the same without amendment, but with the following recommendation:

That the Government of Canada establish, under the legislation, regulations to ensure that any review conducted by a retired judge of a superior court acting in place of the Security Intelligence Review Committee is completed within a period of time agreed upon in advance by the judge and the Minister requesting the review.

Respectfully submitted,

Thursday, April 24, 1997

The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology has the honour to present its

SEVENTEENTH REPORT

Your committee, to which was referred the Bill C-66, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (Part I) and the Corporations and Labour Unions Returns Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, has, in obedience to its Order of Reference of Tuesday, April 15, 1997, examined the said bill and now reports the same without amendment, but with the following observations and recommendations:

CLAUSE 42(2) -- REPLACEMENT WORKERS

The use of replacement workers is one of the most difficult issues in the collective bargaining process and the proposal in clause 42(2) to circumscribe their use is worthy of particular attention.

As noted by a number of witnesses, Clause 42(2) does not include the complete wording used by the majority of the Task Force for the Review of Part I of the Canada Labour Code (Sims Task Force) with respect to the use of replacement workers. This has raised concerns that the provision could be interpreted as to prohibit the use of replacement workers in circumstances other than those contemplated by the majority of Task Force members. Your committee is sensitive to these concerns.

We have taken full notice of assurances from the Minister of Labour that the provision has been drafted with the objective of capturing the narrative of the majority recommendation of the Task Force with an unequivocal burden of proof resting with the complainant. There is a fundamental difference between using replacement workers to ensure that the employer may carry on its normal business during a strike, and using them for the purpose of undermining a union's representational capacity. The mere use of replacement workers does not, in and of itself, raise the presumption of unfair bargaining practices.

We strongly recommend, therefore, that the Canada Industrial Relations Board, in applying and interpreting Section 94(2.1) take cognizance of the full text of the majority recommendation of the Task Force, and recognize that employers may use replacement workers to pursue legitimate bargaining objectives.

CLAUSE 46 -- CERTIFICATION AS A REMEDY

Your committee has heard concerns that the provision in Clause 46 which would allow the Canada Industrial Relations Board to certify a trade union as a remedy for employer unfair labour practices, runs counter to the principle that certification should be based solely on the majority support of the employees in the bargaining unit. We strongly endorse the principle of majority support as a basis for certification and note that Bill C-66 retains the Board's authority to verify support by holding a representation vote in any case. We strongly recommend that the Board exercise the jurisdiction it has under section 29(1) of the Canada Labour Code and order a representation vote as a matter of course.

We believe that the concerns that have been expressed to the committee on this clause are serious and urge the utmost caution in applying this exceptional provision. Though a number of provincial labour statutes include similar provisions, they are used by provincial labour boards in rare cases, where an employer commits a serious unfair labour practice and where a representation vote is unlikely to provide a true measure of the employees' wishes.

We recommend, therefore, that in interpreting and applying Section 99.1, the Canada Industrial Regulations Board should respect the findings of the Sims Task Force, namely, that this is an unusual remedy which should be reserved for "truly intolerable conduct" by an employer. Your commitee has concerns about whether the recent use of a similar clause by the Ontario Labor Relations Board in the Wal-Mart case is in fact an appropriate use of such a measure.

We also urge the Minister to monitor carefully the future application of this provision to ensure that it is used only in the most exceptional cases. It should not be seen as an alternative to the normal certification process. But if it evolves into such an alternative, we strongly recommend that the Minister consider deleting this provision.

CLAUSE 50 -- OFF-SITE WORKERS

In its review of Part I of the Canada Labour Code, the Sims Task Force found that "Off-site workers will never have the opportunity to consider, let alone acquire, the benefits of collective bargaining while they remain inaccessible to each other and interested unions. But, as individuals, they do deserve privacy and personal security."

While your committee accepts the Task Force's recommendations that off-site workers should have the opportunity to express their views in support for, or against, the unionization of their workplace, we share the privacy concerns expressed by a number of witnesses, including the Privacy Commissioner of Canada.

We have noted assurances from the Minister of Labour that the provision contained in clause 50 balances the rights of off-site workers to be informed of and participate in work place decisions, with the rights of these workers to protection of their privacy and safety. We have also taken full account of his further assurances that the bill equips the Canada Industrial Relations Board with appropriate authority to ensure such protection.

We strongly recommend, therefore, that the Canada Industrial Relations Board, in developing and applying its procedures with respect to an application under Section 109.1, ensure that prior to issuing any order, all reasonable steps are taken to make affected employees aware of the application and provide them with an opportunity to raise concerns as to their privacy and safety. At the very least, the Board should treat very seriously evidence of a direct request made by an employee, requesting that certain information not be provided.

Your commitee also believe that the Canada Industrial Board must comply with the Privacy Act.

Your committee recommends that it be given the opportunity to monitor the implementation of the Bill.

Respectfully submitted,

MABEL M. DeWARE

Chair