OTTAWA – Prairie elevator company representatives last week warned MPs that government proposals to limit the ability of employers to use replacement workers would be a blow to the future of the grain industry and farmers.
They suggested proposed changes to the Canada Labor Code on replacement workers would create chaos, give union members too much power and cause disruptions in grain flow. They also predicted the loss of some export markets if the proposal becomes law.
“The replacement worker provision will create an imbalance in collective bargaining by giving a right to unions which has not been given to management,” Ed Guest, executive director of the Western Grain Elevators Association, told a Commons committee Nov. 28.
Read Also
U.S. soy and cotton growers might use dicamba in 2026
American farmers could be spraying dicamba on their soybean fields next year, if a proposed registration becomes reality.
“The legislation will also lead to increased litigation and uncertainty.”
The elevator company representatives were appearing before the Commons human resources committee to react to a proposed revision of the labor code.
Among changes suggested by the government is a requirement that non-grain industry disputes at the ports not be allowed to stop the flow of grain. Longshoremen and their employers would have to make arrangements to keep grain moving even if all other goods were stopped.
Guest said the grain industry appreciates that suggestion and supports it. But he spent most of his time before the committee criticizing the proposal that companies be restricted in their ability to use replacement workers during strikes or lockouts.
Unfair labor practice
The proposal is that companies be able to use such workers to keep operations going but if the union believes use of replacement workers is aimed at undermining the union, it can take the issue to the Canada Labor Relations Board as a potential unfair labor practice.
The employer lobby said this would give unions too much power.
Bonnie Dupont of Alberta Wheat Pool, chair of the human resources committee of the grain elevators association, said the companies would prefer there be no rule on replacement workers.
She said the companies have not abused their use in the past.
The arguments received a mixed and somewhat hostile reception from MPs.
Liberal Robert Nault said he could not understand the point, since Saskatchewan Wheat Pool was able to maintain service during the 1994 work stoppage involving the Grain Services Union.
Dupont said it was minimal operations. She said a limit on replacement workers would be a big issue with prairie farmers.
“If there was some kind of restriction on replacement workers, we would not be able to provide delivery services or accept deliveries from our farmer customers and farmer operators,” she said.
Bloc QuŽbecois MPs, who support a complete ban on replacement workers, challenged the elevator company position.
And Reform MPs promoted their idea that free collective bargaining should be replaced by a final offer selection system. It would replace the right to strike or lock out with a process in which an arbitrator would choose between the offers of the two sides.
Dupont said the grain companies do not support that idea.
“Our position would be that we want to bargain collectively with our employees and try to reach reasonable solutions before other third-party intervention,” she said.
