Canada’s proposed Building Canada Strong Act is drawing scrutiny from labour experts who say changes to the federal Labour Code could significantly expand Ottawa’s ability to intervene in strikes and raise new questions about workers’ constitutional right to strike.
The Liberal government tabled Bill C-39 on September 21 as part of a broader package aimed at accelerating major infrastructure and resource projects while making changes to federally regulated labour relations.
One of the most contentious elements involves Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code, a provision that gives the labour minister broad powers to direct the Canada Industrial Relations Board to take measures to resolve labour disputes.
In recent years, Ottawa has relied on Section 107 during major disputes involving sectors such as railways, ports, airlines and postal services. The proposed legislation would clarify that the minister can order federally regulated businesses to resume operations or require disputes to proceed to binding arbitration.
The bill would also establish conditions for using the power. Before intervening, the minister would have to consider a special mediator’s report and determine that the work stoppage is adversely affecting the “national interest.”
The federal government says the changes are intended to create clearer rules and guardrails around an existing power rather than introduce a completely new authority.
Labour experts, however, have challenged that interpretation. Adam King, an assistant professor in the labour program at the University of Manitoba, told The Canadian Press that the proposed changes could substantially strengthen the minister’s authority.
Legal experts also say the legislation could face Charter challenges because the Supreme Court of Canada recognized the right to strike as protected by freedom of association in a 2015 ruling. Any government limits on that right would need to satisfy constitutional requirements.
The meaning of “national interest” could become particularly important. The proposed legislation allows the minister to consider economic effects and social disruption, along with other relevant factors, when deciding whether intervention is justified.
Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu has argued that the goal is to reduce the frequency of government intervention by encouraging employers and unions to reach agreements through negotiation and mediation.
Critics, meanwhile, say giving Ottawa broader authority to end strikes could weaken workers’ bargaining power and lead to further disputes over the proper limits of government intervention.
As Parliament considers Bill C-39, the debate is likely to focus on finding a balance between protecting the right to strike and preventing prolonged disruptions in sectors considered important to Canada’s economy.
Swifteradio.com
