A fierce behind-the-scenes Parliament Hill battle has been waged this summer over the shape of labor legislation reform that will surface in the new Parliament.
Will the new Liberal government follow the lead of the last one to propose labor code amendments which, among other things, protect west coast export grain shipments from being grounded by third party strikes or lockouts?
The political manoeuvring on the issue has pitted grain companies, in a rare alliance with unions, against west coast employers, other bulk commodity shippers and Canada’s big business lobby.
Read Also
First annual Ag in Motion Junior Cattle Show kicks off with a bang
Ag in Motion 2025 had its first annual junior cattle show on July 15. The show hosted more than 20…
Grain companies and the farm lobby, along with the unions, have been urging the government and new labor minister Lawrence MacAulay to maintain the special status for grain, protecting it from being held hostage by third-party west coast employers or unions which tie-up grain shipments as a way to pressure governments to legislate an end to work stoppages.
Companies and unions directly involved in grain movement still could strike or lock out.
“We think it is a reasonable compromise and that grain deserves a special status because it is a sensitive commodity,” said Alberta Wheat Pool vice-president John Pearson.
All commodities in same boat
On the other side are the British Columbia Maritime Employers’ Association, the shippers of bulk commodities such as potash, coal and lumber, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the Fraser Institute, a conservative think tank based in Vancouver.
They have been forming coalitions and flooding Ottawa with letters arguing grain is no more important than any other commodity and should not be given special status.
Last week, MacAulay was in B.C. meeting with all sides in the dispute.
“He is continuing his consultations and has not made any final decisions,” said ministerial aide Kristin BrulŽ. “I can assure you he is keeping his ears open and is listening to both sides. He realizes the grain issue is a very important and sensitive one.”
MacAulay’s predecessor as labor minister, Alfonso Gagliano, said when he introduced the legislation in the last Parliament that non-grain employers and unions have used the tie-up of grain shipments as a lever to force the government to settle their differences through legislation.
Within days of a strike or lockout that halts grain movement, farmers who are not party to the dispute begin to feel the effects and political pressure builds for a forced resolution.
He said removing grain from the equation by forcing striking or locked-out unions to continue moving it will force the two sides to bargain on the real issues.
All or none
The longshoreman’s union, often involved in these disputes, agreed. In past work stoppages, the union often volunteered to keep the grain moving but employers refused to allow one commodity to move but not the others.
Pearson, speaking for Prairie Pools Inc., said the three prairie wheat pools agree.
“We negotiate with our unions,” he said. “We would like to see an environment on the West Coast where real labor relations exist without the need to use grain disruption as a lever to increase the pressure. We think the new minister understands that argument and is sympathetic.”
The final shape of the government package reflecting the new minister’s final decision will likely not be evident until legislation is tabled late this autumn or in early winter.
