Article from The Hill Times:

Labour Minister claims Conservatives buried ‘significant’ union report in last Parliament, releases it

By RACHEL AIELLO

Published March 29, 2016

As part of her testimony at the Human Resources Committee about Bill C-4, MaryAnn Mihychuk released the report commissioned by her department under the previous government, which she argues it proves Conservative changes to union laws were unfounded.

Employment, Workforce Development and Labour Minister MaryAnn Mihychuk is alleging the previous Conservative government buried its own government report in the last Parliament about union certification regimes because it went against the anti-union private member’s bill it pushed through into law.

The report found that mandatory voting systems had a negative effect on union certification rates, which was central to a private member’s bill the Conservatives passed in the last Parliament.

“We found that the use of an MV regime has been an important factor in the decline in union density in the Canadian business sector. It was estimated that had all Canadian jurisdictions not used an MV regime for union certification starting in 1997, business-sector union density would have been substantially higher by 2012,” stated the report.

But at the time Bill C-525 was moving through Parliament, the Conservatives claimed their legislation would not affect union membership, despite this report having been at their disposal and showing otherwise.

Ms. Mihychuk (Kildonan-St. Paul, Man.) brought forward the report before the House Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities Committee as part of the committee’s first day of study on Bill C-4 last week.

“I think the significance is it’s another example of the previous government burying data and a report that didn’t meet the needs of their political agenda,” Ms. Mihychuk told The Hill Times.

The bill is formally called An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code, the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act, the Public Service Labour Relations Act and the Income Tax Act. It repeals Bill C-377 an Act to Amend the Income Tax Act (requirements for labour organizations), and Bill C-525 the Employees’ Voting Rights Act. Both are Conservative private members’ bills that passed in the last Parliament.

Ms. Mihychuk said the report was commissioned by Conservative MP Lisa Raitt (Milton, Ont.) during her time as labour minister, and by the time it was completed and provided to the department, Conservative MP Kellie Leitch (Simcoe-Grey, Ont.) was the minister overseeing the department and would have been the one to make the decision to “shelf” it.

Ms. Mihychuk said she learned of the report’s existence from a long-term MP staffer who had heard of the study being commissioned and she asked the department for it. Once she saw what, she argues, is a validation that the Conservative measures passed were unnecessary, she said she felt the right thing was to make it part of the public record, through the committee’s study.

“We found something in the back room in the filing cabinet that they were hoping would never see the light of day, and I’m glad we did. And we’ll continue to check those back closets,” she said in an interview.

The report is dated November 2013 and its findings relate directly to the measures in Bill C-525.

Bill C-525 amended the Canada Labour Code, the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act and the Public Service Labour Relations Act to require a secret ballot vote-based majority needed to certify federally regulated workers to join a union and to decertify unions, a departure from the commonplace card-check initiative. It was sponsored by Conservative MP Blaine Calkins (Red Deer-Lacombe, Alta.) and passed in December 2014.

Bill C-377 was sponsored by former Conservative MP Russ Hiebert and passed late last June by the Senate. The bill would have required unions and employee organizations to publicly disclose spending details through the Canada Revenue Agency and to disclose spending details for public expenses over $5,000 and salaries of employees earning more than $100,000. It also would require spending on political activities like lobbying to be reported and posted publicly. At the end of last year, the new Liberal government announced it would be waiving the reporting requirements under Bill C-377 as a stopgap measure in the meantime.

The report examined the links between the adoption of a mandatory-vote regime for founding unions and the decline in Canadian business-sector union density between 1997 and 2012. The report found a decrease in unionization over the last few decades and the use of a mandatory-vote regime has been an important factor in the decline in union density in the sector. It went on to say that had the sector not used the mandatory-vote system, union density could have been substantially higher.

As stated in the report, a card-check system allows for union certification when a certain minimum proportion of the proposed bargaining unit signs a card in favour of forming a union instead of forcing a vote.

It is not clear if this report was ever discussed outside of the ministry or with Mr. Calkins, or if the decision to not release it was attached to Bill C-525 at all.

Ms. Leitch did not respond to The Hill Times request for comment before deadline and Mr. Calkins was not available.

“Clearly, it’s related to the topic, the information was available, they were sitting around the same boardroom, so that’s all I know. Other than that it’s speculation,” said Ms. Mihychuk, adding that it would be “unlikely that they are unrelated,” because the timing was sequential.

This was all spawned by a question from Liberal committee member MP Filomena Tassi (Hamilton West-Ancaster-Dundas, Ont.) to Ms. Mihychuk whether the department had done any research on the card-check system versus the mandatory vote.

“I’m just wondering why the report was dated November 2013 and the bill [C-525] was passed 2014, whether the department research was made publicly available to people?” Ms. Tassi asked, followed up by a question about why an “evidence-based report” would be kept hidden or silent from the public when this was the very issue being discussed.

To this, during committee Ms. Mihychuk replied that it was a purely political attack on organized labour.

“This is a bit of speculation and I’d like to say I wasn’t in the Conservative caucus. … The overall trend, as the report shows, that Canadians were choosing not to become unionized, this isn’t a serious threat to businesses, and in fact the report indicates that it wasn’t warranted, so one would have to conclude that it was a political agenda,” she told the committee.

Ms. Mihychuk said she doesn’t expect the passing of the newer Liberal bill to automatically create union harmony, or will it spur rapid unionization.

The Conservatives on the committee didn’t have much to say in direct response to the report brought forward, instead focusing their questioning of the minister around transparency and accountability.

Conservative MP and member of the committee Mark Warawa (Langley-Aldergrove, B.C.) highlighted the “hard work” of the Conservative MPs to get their private members’ bills passed, and the time it took to consult and debate them, and questioned how much time the Liberals have spent doing so before bringing this bill in.

“This has all happened? Russ Hiebert spent four years [on Bill C-377]. This has been one of the pilot pieces of legislation, C-4, from the Liberal government. … What did the consultations look like? Did you consult with more than unions?” he asked the minister.

The NDP supports the bill and are on side with seeing it passed quickly. NDP MP Niki Ashton (Churchill-Keewatinook Aski, Man.), and critic for jobs, employment and workforce development, described what she was seeing from her Conservative colleagues as “generals fighting the last war.”

She said that, during the election, Canadians spoke up against these measures and that the Conservative criticism that this bill was disrespectful to private members’ bills is “absurd.”

“I was here and I saw the way in which the government touted this,” she said, adding that despite the bills coming from backbench MPs, they were “core to their governing agenda.”

The committee has planned to study Bill C-4 for a total of four meetings, with three remaining now that the minister has appeared. The next two will be comprised of two panels with three witnesses each, and the final day will be dedicated to clause-by-clause. MPs on the committee had until last Friday to submit witness lists. It’s anticipated the committee will resume its study shortly after Parliament resumes the week of April 11.

Ms. Mihychuk said she feels the four meetings are sufficient because the content has already been through the legislative process twice, once for each private member’s bill, and many Parliamentarians are familiar with the measures.

She said she’s heard from several people in the Senate that “see this as an opportunity,” and she is optimistic it’ll pass. She said having it be one of the government’s first bills “sends a strong message.”

Once the laws are set back to how they were before these private members’ bills passed, she has plans to study the Labour Code and is considering “major changes” to it in the future.

raiello@hilltimes.com

The Hill Times