SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Louise Chabot

  • Member of Parliament
  • Member of the panel of chairs for the legislative committees
  • Bloc Québécois
  • Thérèse-De Blainville
  • Quebec
  • Voting Attendance: 68%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $122,743.44

  • Government Page
  • May/24/24 12:42:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question, but I hope he knows the answer. Since it began, the labour movement has not only advanced workers' rights but it has also helped society as a whole to progress, with greater social justice, greater equality and greater fairness. The unions did this not just for workers' rights but for all citizens. History shows that. In Quebec, these struggles were important. Progress was made during the Quiet Revolution, when the socio-political context was difficult and there were bitter disputes. The unions played a part in and contributed to the evolution of society and established—
105 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/24/24 12:41:01 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the short answer is that there are probably a number of reasons, but it takes political will. For both sides of the House, after this many years, the system is all right. They can live with it. In terms of labour law, there are no examples to cite here. Governments have introduced an increasing number of special laws that undermine workers' rights. There was no political will to change the rules of the game. Will this time be different? Will the rules change? Workers who are currently in a dispute, on strike or locked out under this system know full well that the legislation will not apply to them or resolve their dispute. They are already fighting for future workers. The legislation will only come into force 12 months after it receives royal assent. In the meantime, the federal government will continue to enforce the code, which does not prohibit the use of replacement workers.
157 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/24/24 12:36:31 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, every province has its own jurisdictions. Every province decides on the social progress it wants to make with respect to labour law. In Quebec, that is it. After 46 years, the federal government is now saying it is pleased with what is happening. It would have been even better if the government had the courage to include federal public servants in the bill. It would have been even better if the bill had come into force as soon as it received royal assent to eliminate the possibility of any further use of replacement workers. There is still some work to be done here.
105 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/24/24 12:34:06 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, as the member must know, a minimally effective bill would at the very least ensure that federally regulated workers have the right to free bargaining and the right to strike. This bill also seeks to prohibit the use of scabs and will help maintain industrial peace during negotiations. It should also help shorten the length of disputes. That is significant, considering what is happening at the port of Quebec, where federally regulated Quebec workers have been locked out by their employer for two years now. No one cares because the employer is using scabs, which is allowed. This will make a major change. It is important to always keep in mind that the right to strike and the right to free bargaining are fundamental charter rights. The Liberals should normally support those rights and enforce them. This will change everything, but it could have changed everything sooner.
149 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Speaker, in 1977, under René Lévesque's Parti Québécois government, the Quebec Labour Code banned the use of replacement workers. The Quebec labour minister at the time, Pierre Marc Johnson, said the following when the legislation was introduced, and I quote: “The purpose of this measure is not to automatically close factories during a lockout or legal strike, but rather to restore a healthy balance between the parties and eliminate practices that cause tension and violence during labour disputes.... Workers, not companies, are the first to suffer as a result of a work stoppage, and letting the employer carry on as though nothing is wrong during a lockout or legal strike creates a fundamental imbalance between the parties.” This was a major step forward for workers' rights in Quebec and a defining moment in the history of the labour movement and its struggle. Today, 46 years later, Bill C-58 seeks to amend the Canada Labour Code to ban replacement workers. Bravo, or should I say, “it is about time”? It is certainly a step forward for the rights of federally regulated workers, but above all, it is making up for lost time. The fate of thousands of workers and their right to bargain and to strike has been, continues to be and will continue to be undermined by this inexcusable delay, at least until the bill comes into force 12 months after receiving royal assent. The effects of this injustice are still being felt. Quebec workers live under two systems. Federally regulated workers in Quebec who are currently in a dispute are paying the price for this injustice. Think of the port of Quebec workers who have been locked out for nearly two years. The employer is using replacement workers. No one is talking about it. No one is working on fixing this because it is business as usual. This is unacceptable. Think of the Vidéotron employees in Gatineau, who are also locked out. In that telecommunications sector, thousands of jobs are being outsourced to call centres overseas. They too have been locked out for several months, and replacement workers are being used. At the port of Sorel‑Tracy, the United Steelworkers went on strike for 12 months, and scabs were brought in. I could continue to list all of the injustices and shameful practices that employers have engaged in with impunity because, to date, the Canada Labour Code has not been changed to remedy this injustice. Unions have been calling for anti-scab legislation as part of the Canada Labour Code for a long time, and so has the Bloc Québécois. Over the past 33 years, there have been 11 bills, the very first of which was tabled in 1990 by the dean of the House, the member for Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel. Time after time, the Liberals and the Conservatives have blocked the Bloc Québécois's bills. I myself introduced Bill C-276 in this Parliament in May 2022. The fight was waged by unions and the Bloc Québécois, with constant prodding and the strength of our convictions. The NDP will take credit for that. It was certainly part of that struggle too and, indeed, we commend its work, just as we commend that of the Department of Labour and the leadership the minister has shown. However, there is a “but”, and it is a big “but”. Unfortunately, we have to wonder, given the way the bill has been crafted, with the proposed implementation deadline, for one, whether there is any real intention for this bill to actually see the light of day or whether it is just window dressing, meant to look good. Everyone knows as well as I do that there is a clear difference between fact and appearance, just as there is a difference between declared values and practised values. From the beginning, the Bloc Québécois has condemned the fact that the initial bill provided for an 18-month coming-into-force period following royal assent. Given this time frame and the fact that we have a minority government, it is no wonder that we are questioning the intent. We proposed an amendment in committee to repeal this delay, proposing that the bill come into force as soon as it receives royal assent. This amendment was rejected by all parties, because the NDP and the Liberals had agreed in advance to propose a 12-month delay. However, the vast majority of the unions we heard from said that there was no explanation for the delay and they too wanted the bill to take effect right after royal assent. That is what it means to protect workers, and the Bloc Québécois stepped up. When we began studying the bill, we announced that we also wanted to improve it in committee and move fast to close the loophole to ensure that the nonsense of using scabs is banned for good. We proposed carefully chosen amendments put forward by the unions. Among other things, these amendments aimed to include federal public service employees and thus correct a major omission. The government, as an employer, has excluded its own employees from the scope of the bill. We proposed a relevant amendment, but it was ruled out of order because it would amend another act. In principle, however, it is very unfortunate that the bill does not apply to federal government employees. This error needs to be corrected and I hope it will be corrected. We also made amendments to amend or repeal sections that allow exceptions to the prohibition rule. It may seem complicated. Strikebreakers are prohibited, but there are exceptions. Among the exceptions, I would particularly mention employees covered prior to the bargaining notice. The employer is permitted to use these employees as replacements for striking employees in the event of a dispute, lockout or strike. It would even be possible for an employee in a bargaining unit of the same employer—but in a different local—to be called upon to replace workers or colleagues during a strike or lockout. This makes no sense whatsoever. The unions have rightly denounced this. If the law is supposed to be consistent, how can certain categories of workers, such as subcontractors and independent contractors, be excluded from this restriction? That sort of thing is prohibited under Quebec's law. We also proposed an amendment to provide for an investigation mechanism that exists under the Quebec code. If the government wants to impose sanctions, if it wants to be tougher, it has to give the Canada Industrial Relations Board the means to do its job and investigate if the employer breaks the law. Employees cannot do that. Employees who are on strike or locked out cannot enter the factory or their employer's premises. An investigator would have to be called in. This amendment was also rejected. We had also proposed an amendment to reduce the time limits for the Canada Industrial Relations Board orders so as not to unduly interfere with the strike. All these amendments were rejected. We are disappointed that these proposed improvements were rejected. They are essential for ensuring the consistency of the bill's objective of fully recognizing the fundamental right to free collective bargaining and the right to strike. However, we can be proud that we put them forward, stood by our convictions, and listened to and supported union demands in the fight for workers' rights. If the past is any indication, an opportunity to reform the legislation is unlikely to come around again any time soon. This supposedly historic bill deserved more care and attention to achieve its objectives. I hope that history will vindicate the struggle of workers and finally rectify the injustice they have laboured under for so many years.
1339 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/14/23 12:29:16 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-58 
Madam Speaker, this is the third time that my Conservative colleagues have mentioned the use of replacement workers, or foreign workers, in factories in Windsor or in battery factories. Bill C‑58 deals with something else entirely. That is crystal clear. Although the bill refers to “replacement workers”, I think that the Conservatives know that it is intended to prevent the hiring of scabs in the event of a labour dispute. Its aim is to finally prevent employers from using scabs during a strike or lockout and allowing the dispute to go on forever. That is unfair. We have had anti-scab legislation in Quebec since 1977. The question is clear. We are talking about scabs. Will my colleague vote for or against Bill C‑58?
130 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/14/23 11:12:29 a.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-58 
Mr. Speaker, it was wonderful to hear all the arguments that were in no way connected to Bill C-58. It was a thing of beauty. I am going to ask the member a clear question. Bill C-58 is intended to prevent the use of scabs in the workplace so that proper negotiations can take place in the event of strikes and lockouts. We must prevent the use of scabs. This still happens. At the Port of Québec, longshore workers have been locked out for over a year, and there are scabs coming in to do their work. That is unacceptable. We have failed to correct that situation here for over 50 years. I would like my colleague to tell me whether the Conservative Party is for or against Bill C-58.
138 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/13/23 3:00:21 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, there are workers who are missing out on weeks of work because of the wildfires. For some, returning to work in the short term is not in the cards. They include seasonal workers employed in forestry, tourism, outfitting, parks and many other sectors. The federal government says it will fast-track their EI claims. For some, that is good. For all the workers who do not qualify for EI because of the excessively high 700-hour threshold, it is useless. Is the minister going to ease the requirements to ensure that no worker affected by the wildfires is left behind?
102 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/13/23 2:59:36 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, there are workers who are missing out on weeks of work because of the wildfires. For some, returning to work in the short term is not in the cards. They include seasonal workers employed in forestry, tourism, outfitting, parks and many other sectors. The federal government says it will—
52 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Jun/9/23 11:40:22 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it should do so immediately, then. That is why the Bloc Québécois introduced a bill to prohibit strikebreakers. Quebec prohibited the use of strikebreakers in the 1970s. What is good for all workers in Quebec should be good for federally regulated workers. This government claims to defend the middle class. If that is the case, then when will it bring back our bill and prohibit the use of strikebreakers, a practice that undermines labour rights?
81 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/27/23 2:16:06 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, May 1 is International Workers' Day, a day that will be marked in Quebec by rallies that will focus on inflation. Too many workers cannot make ends meet because inflation is driving up expenses but not wages. May 1 is the time to remember the struggles of the working class and the many gains painfully earned through lengthy struggles. These victories should not be taken for granted. We should keep in mind that federal workers who are on strike or locked out can still be replaced by scabs, as we are currently seeing at the Port of Quebec. We should keep in mind that, because of the federal government, 60% of those who lose their jobs cannot rely on employment insurance. We should keep in mind that 150,000 people are on strike right now and the the Prime Minister is ducking the issue. On May 1, let us keep in mind that the struggle continues and that solidarity remains the key to victory. I wish everyone a happy May 1.
177 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/25/23 11:00:17 a.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-47 
Madam Speaker, even though I do not entirely agree with my colleague's analysis, there is something I will agree with. I agree that workers are struggling at work and I also agree that in other regions of Canada and Quebec there are workers in situations where they lose their job and the EI program does not cover them or just leaves them behind. EI is being referred to as a payroll tax. Does she not think that, as part of government spending, it would have been important to increase the minimum wage, enhance the employment insurance program and come up with good anti-scab legislation, which does not exist in Canada and denies workers' rights? Is that part of the programs your party is in favour of?
128 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/7/23 2:59:14 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, hundreds of Canadian Labour Congress workers are on Parliament Hill today. Among them are the United Steelworkers members employed by Océan Remorquage in Sorel‑Tracy. They are here because the federal government supports the use of scabs in their labour dispute. Even today, Quebec workers are still being replaced by scabs who are paid three times their wages because the federal government is 50 years behind the times. The minister has held his consultations. There are no more excuses for failing to take action. Will he immediately introduce an anti-scab bill?
98 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/8/22 2:03:39 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend the striking United Steelworkers employees from Océan Remorquage of Sorel-Tracy. That company is a federally regulated business that provides port services. Workers demonstrated yesterday in Quebec City to demand decent working conditions and wages, as well as anti-scab legislation. These workers have been on strike for more than five months and are dealing with a bad faith employer who chose to take advantage of the weakness inherent in the Canada Labour Code to hire scabs, thus allowing the dispute to drag on. I would remind the House that the Minister of Labour has been mandated to introduce a bill to ban this practice, which greatly affects workers' bargaining power. He will not do so until December 2023. There is no justification for this delay. He must act now. The Bloc Québécois has introduced 11 bills to correct this injustice, and today we reiterate the importance of this issue by showing our support for these striking workers.
170 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/22/22 4:36:24 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-20 
Madam Speaker, I listened to the member's speech, in which she mentioned all the work our border officers do. We can all agree that the complaint or oversight mechanism is a good thing for those whose rights were violated. Does the member think it is also important to consider the people who work at the border to safeguard our rights? They have been mistreated and are under a lot of pressure because their numbers have declined. How is the government planning to consult these workers and listen to their perspective to make sure they do not have to bear a greater burden or be put under even more pressure?
110 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/3/22 2:40:51 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, if the tourism industry is sounding the alarm it is because it is also at risk. It is afraid of losing its workers, as are all of Quebec's seasonal industries. If the federal government takes away their employees' EI this winter, how many will be able to return next summer? If the employees do not return, where will their replacements come from in the middle of a labour shortage? When will the minister finally understand that by making workers suffer she is also making seasonal industries suffer?
90 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Sep/22/22 2:41:07 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, by ending the temporary EI benefits before there is any reform, the government is leaving workers with a 1970s-era program. It is a program that abandons mothers who lose their jobs during parental leave because it does not account for women being in the workplace; a program that abandons the sickest workers; a program that completely ignores self-employed workers; and a program that considers the workers to be seasonal, instead of the industries they work in. Is that really the social safety net that the Prime Minister has to offer Quebeckers?
95 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/22 5:02:14 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-19 
Madam Speaker, I may not be able to say that I had time to study all 500 pages of Bill C-19, but I have a few comments. There is a lot of talk about work, workers and the importance of employment. I wanted to know what the government had put forward for workers, whether it had an ambitious agenda and vision, and whether it was able to do something tangible to support workers and improve their conditions. After all, at the end of the day, labour is an important part of the economy. Based on my analysis, I find that the sights are set too low when it comes to workers. I will provide a few examples. In the last budget and in the Minister of Labour’s mandate letter, the government promised legislation to prohibit the use of replacement workers under the fundamental right to associate and to bargain. There is nothing in this bill to indicate any intention or action in this area. What happened with that? Another issue is fair employment. I do not know if anyone knows this, but the Employment Equity Act was passed in 2018. Currently, in federally regulated businesses, there is differential treatment based on employment status using “orphan clauses”. The Act was passed in 2018, but there is still no plan or vision to move forward with this. What is going on there? Recently, we passed Bill C-3 here in the House to give workers 10 days of paid sick leave. That legislation will come into effect at a later date fixed by order-in-council, but we still have not found anything yet. Climate change is one of the reasons we opposed the budget. We want to see an end to fossil fuel production and a just and fair transition to green or clean energy. What is there for workers? Last week, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development said that Natural Resources Canada and Employment and Social Development Canada were not prepared to support a just transition to a low‑carbon economy for workers and communities. It is serious: There are more than 200,000 workers, and there are no plans or measures to support this just and necessary transition. I would also say that the government is abandoning health care workers by firmly refusing to increase Canada health transfers, as Quebec and the other provinces are calling for. If we want quality health care, we must rely on these workers. To do this, Quebec needs the necessary subsidies to match the expenses so it can better support the health sector. I looked everywhere in the budget and found only one paragraph on employment insurance. This is where workers are being totally abandoned, even though comprehensive EI reform had been promised. Once again, the government missed an opportunity to act. In one paragraph of the budget and in Bill C-19, the government announced the extension of pilot projects that provide up to five additional weeks of EI benefits to seasonal workers. That is it, nothing more. The Minister of Employment's mandate letter clearly states that she is to work on modernizing employment insurance by the summer of 2022. The Prime Minister himself said that he asked the minister to focus her energy on building a more equitable system by June 2022. On January 1, she indicated that this was likely to happen. Right now, workers everywhere, in all regions of Quebec and Canada, are struggling to qualify for fair and accessible benefits. There are serious shortcomings that need to be addressed. We know what the issues are, we know what it will take to fix them, yet there is still a delay in implementing the changes that are needed. Surely we do not need to be reminded that the EI system is a social safety net that protects workers who lose their jobs. It also protects them in the aftermath of life events, as the minister said. For example, sickness benefits are still capped at 15 weeks when they promised to extend them to 26 weeks. We are being told that this may not happen in July, as first thought, because the computer system will not be ready. They are abandoning people. I am quite surprised and disappointed that the orange team did not leave its mark in the budget when it comes to workers; it clearly lacks teeth. All unemployed workers' groups and labour groups support employment insurance reform. More consultations are on the books. Consultations have been going on for years. When will the government get on with it? This is a broken promise at present. EI reform is important for workers. I meet with workers, unemployed workers' groups, community groups and civil society groups to look at the economic and social realities in some regions. In regions where the seasonal industry holds a predominant place in the economy, five extra weeks in the event of job loss is not enough. There is the issue of the spring gap, which is when a worker does not have enough weeks of benefits to cover the period between the end of the job and when the job resumes. We could tell workers to go work somewhere else, but that is not the answer; rather, we have to support the seasonal industry when it comes to tourism, the fishery. We know that major sectors are affected. A region's economy depends on that. It is not by once again carrying forward a five- to 10-week pilot project that we are going to to give the regions the capacity to support their economy and give workers the capacity to maintain good jobs and experience. We need to protect the vitality of the regions. The inequities in the EI system for women and young people are another example of needed reforms. The current rules are outdated and significantly discriminate against them. All kinds of criteria regarding hours of eligibility need to be changed. I think the government needs to send a clear message that EI reform is a priority. It is a priority for workers and for the economy. This program is a social safety net that is very much needed, but what the government is doing is very disappointing. I want to mention the little note about reviewing the Social Security Tribunal and creating a multi-stakeholder tribunal. All the better, since workers have been calling for this for 10 years. Since I have just 30 seconds left, I want to conclude by saying that workers are in dire need of support. The Liberal government must send a very clear message in its budgets and financial policies that we are counting on them. If we are counting on them, then they need support and they need it now.
1141 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/2/22 2:42:20 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, Ottawa must also give Quebec the power to manage temporary foreign workers. Each year, the federal government creates delays by forcing every business to produce labour market studies that already exist. Quebec already produces them for all of its economic sectors. Quebec could simply apply them to temporary foreign workers by integrating them into its labour strategy. It is as easy as that. When will the federal government stop burdening our businesses and transfer the management of temporary foreign workers to Quebec?
84 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/2/22 2:03:36 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, May 1 is International Workers' Day. It is an opportunity to recognize the many battles workers have waged to improve working and living conditions in our societies. The reason we have eight-hour work days and labour standards today is because there were workers who made a lot of sacrifices and stood up for their rights and those of future generations. When faced with repression and injustice, they chose to stand in solidarity and push the limits of what is possible. The theme yesterday was about ensuring health and safety as we come out of the crisis, and thousands of workers from Quebec marched in the streets to remind us of that. I salute all those men and women who fought and are still fighting. Happy May 1.
132 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border