Manitoba Hansard — 1 June 1987 (Sitting 59B, 33rd Legislature, 2nd Session)

33-2-59b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, 1 June, 1987. Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - LABOUR # MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Baker: Committee, please come to order. Is there a statement by the Minister? The Honourable Minister . HON. A. MACKLING: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson . Mr. Chairperson and fellow members, I am pleased to welcome you to the review of Manitoba Labour's Spending Estimates for the 1987-88 fiscal year . I - anticipate a thorough and meaningful discussion of our , programs for the coming fiscal year. Manitoba Labour maintains six guiding principles as the basis of our role and mission . They are: 1. To provide leadership in the promotion and achievement of: (

a) A fair and equitable workplace; (

b) Cooperative relations between labour and management; (

c) Shared decision-making in the workplace in support of improving the quality of work life and efficiency of enterprises. 2. To protect the physical well-being and safety of persons and reduce property loss in respect to fires , structural, mechanical and other related hazards, to train and educate those persons entrusted with the responsibility of the enforcement of related legislation. 3. To promote, develop and administer apprenticeship and other cooperative skill training programs. 4. To promote and protect the retirement • security of workers and to encourage , . expansion of the pension systeb~- . 1 d. 5.

To educate and inform the pu lie, me u mg special clients, with respect to the department 's objectives, legislation and responsibilities . 6. To promote and practice shared decision making , affirmative action and . effective planning within the department, to work cooperatively with other departments and agencies, and to present these as examples to others . There have been some senior staff changes in the department over the past year. 1. Tom Bleasdale was appointed Assistant Deputy Minister of Labour effective Jariuary 5, 1986.

Tom's many years of experience in both small business, the public sector and organized labour will benefit not only Manitoba Labour, but also the department's client groups . 2. Carole Geller, our former executive director of the Pay Equity Bureau has recently taken long-term disability for personal reasons . We are grateful for her significant contributions to the province in pioneering pay equity and in recognition of the achievements experienced by the program to date.

Roberta Ellis-Grunfeld, Pay Equity Commissioner with the Civil Service Commission, has assumed some management responsibilities for the Bureau in the interim until a new executive director has been appointed. 3. Some other recent senior staff additions to our department include Jim McFarlane, Personnel Manager; and Janet Wile, Communications Director. 4. I would also like to extend my sincerest thanks to those other senior staff who have served Manitoba Labour over the years and who have either taken retirement, gone on to other career opportunities or left to another government department.

These include Maurice Eyolfson and Norm Pound, Conciliation and Mediation Services; Wes Peters, Pension Branch; Auguste Thorimbert and Bill Hewitt, Fire Prevention Branch; John Doyle, Communications; Brian Dagdick, Affirmative Action ; and Garry Barnes, Personnel Branch. I am happy to wish these individuals the best in their new endeavours . The departmental reporting structure has also experienced some changes since last year. All program delivery branches, including the Manitoba Labour Board and the Pay Equity Bureau, now report to the Assistant Deputy Minister of Labour.

The Assistant Deputy Minister of Labour, the Administration Division, the Research and Planning Branch and the Communications Director <:ontinue to report to the Deputy Minister. The responsibility for the Affirmative Action · Co-ordinator for the government has been transferred to the Civil Service Commission in an effort to consolidate all . central personnel services .

Our departmental Affirmative Action Program has achieved many gratifying results for target groups, including the establishment of a Career Development Training Program, a Staff Rotational Training Program and the formation of an Administrative Support Staff Training and Development Committee towards improving the mobility of target group members into non-traditional occupations . Annual staffing statistics compiled by the Civil Service Commis .sion for all government departments placed Manitoba Labour fourth overall for our progress in increasing target group representation within our department.

We are also continuing our strategic planning process in the department which improves our decision-making by focusing on long-term objectives to · assist us in obtaining the maximum benefit in the allocation of our resources . Computer technology and information systems are also being introduced throughout the department to improve our performance and cost effectiveness . 2616

,.,onday, 1 June, 1987 I am proud of our accomplishments in the area of labour-management relations . - Manitoba 's labour relations climate, work stoppage activity and unemployment continues to be favourable compared to prev ious years and to the national performance . - Improv ing services to the labour relations community has always been a high prior ity of the department .

The success of first contract legislation , expedited arbitration and grievance mediation have ail facilitated the collective bargaining process . , - Out of the · 26 applications received for first contract legislation since 1982, 10 agreements were settled voluntarily and 12 agreements were imposed by the board . - In the period January 1, 1985 to April 30, 1987, over half of the 388 referrals to the Manitoba Labour Board for expedited arbitration have been resolved through the med jation process . - In 1986, there were only 17 work stoppages involving 1,374 workers .

This accoun ted for 17, 111 lost person -days in Manitoba , which is substantially lower than the average of 82;581 -person-days lost during the 10-year period from 1976 to 1985. - lnterprovincially , Manitoba has had the second lowest number of person ~days lost per thousand non-agricultura i workers for 1985 and the ,first.half of 19(!6. - Manitoba's 1.memployment rate continues to be below that of the '1ational average ..

T he seasonally adjusted unemployment rate in April 19.87 was 7.6 percent compared to the national rate of 9.3 percerit . - Manitoba 's seasonally adjusted unemployment rate was third · Iowest amorig the provinces, behind Ontario and Saskatchewan. · Manito!)a labour wiU continue ' to· seek innova,tive methods for improving !)usine~ and labour harmon ·y. Socia l and economic equality for women continues to be an important priority for Manitoba . labo1,1r. Pay equity is proceeding accord ing to the requirements of The Pay Equity Act .

With good will and the cooperation of all, steps will be taken to advance pay equity into the broader public and private sectors. We plan to work construct ively with leaders from the women ;s commun ity, labour and business, to sustain our m9mentun:1 and build upon the progress achieved to date . The department's Estimates reql,Jest for 1987-88 is 23Q.48 staff years and $9,846,900.00 . This· request represents a slight net decrease in staffing of 3.15 staff yec1rs, or 1.4 percent, and an increase in funding of $602,400, or 6.5 perceflt .

In spite of significant financ ial restrictions placed on all government departments , through effect ive resource allocation, we have been a!)le to formulate our budget request without negative!y affecting the integrity of our program serv ices to Manitobans. The funding increases largely represent the negotiated salary adjustments for existing -staff .

Other increases represent an add ition of two clerical staff years and $60,200, including additional operating costs, for the Manitoba Labour Board to assist them in meeting their increased workload that resulted from the January 1985 changes to The Labour Relations Act . Finally, the Manitoba Labour Education . Centre is also being provided with an additional $72, 100 in non recurring funds to conduct a research projec t to assess the present and future restructuring of the workplace and its impact on Manitobans.

I am very pleased with the contribution that the Manitoba Labour Education Centre has been making to organized and. unorganized workers in Manitoba. This Centre provides training · and education, research and resource material services regarding all aspects of labour relations to interested Manito bans. · The educational programs include three levels on heal.th and safety in the work force and ·one on noise. Nineteen separate courses have been held in various locations in the province during the 1986-87 fiscal year with approx imately 400 individuals in attendance .

The popularity of these educational seminars has resulted in a steady increase in their damand . I have presented to this committee a brief overview of the major changes that have taken place over the past year and highlighted the major program initiatives that we are emphas izing in 1987~88. I am confident 1 that the members present will have many questions relat ing to the budget deta il of each branch and I would request that these questions be raised by sub appropriations as we proceed through our printed Estimates . · Mr.

Chairperson, I now refer Manitoba Labour's 1987- 88 Spending Estimates · to your committee for review and passage. MR. CHAIRMAN:" Thank you, Mr. Minister. The Member for Brandon West. MR. ,!. McCRAE: Mr. Chairman , the Minister is singing a lovely tune this evening· and it's nice to see that his cheering

section Is here .- I just wonder if they will be able to stand to stay all night to listen to the possible criticisms that might come up of the Minister 's conduct of his department. Mr. Chairman , the statement the Minister gave us is similar in many respects to the one we received last year. The Minister is awfully quick to take credit for labour statistics in this province , which have nothing f1 to do whatsoever with this Minister or with his labour \.I law. Indeed, the oppos ite would be the case in the case of Manitoba 's Labour statistics. If workers and their employers were free to bargain freely, Mr.

Chairman, the real truth would be known. This Minister claims tha_t the labour laws, as contained to a large extent in The Manitoba Labour Relations Act, amount to a fair and level playing field for workers , employers and unions in this province , but as we in this House in the last Session , and certainly even in the ·previous one, have tried to bring forward , there are many examples in this province which would demonstrate quite the reverse , and this Minister is in many respects attempting to defend the indefensible . If labour statistics ari good in this province , Mr.

Chairman, it's because times have been difficult and Manitobans have a very great appreciation for their jobs ; and employers , traditionally, in this province to a large degree are responsible , as are union leaders in this prov ince to a large degree respons ible people . But one can't help, Mr. Chairman, when we consider the events of recent months, we can't help but wonder 2617

Monday, 1 June, 1987 if the labour law of this province has not been tailored for a small select few, labour leaders in this province pay no attention whatsoever to the workers whom they're supposed to represent. The people at Eaton's in the City of Brandon certainly have now had their say and I'll be asking the Minister more about that a little later.

But the situation at Eaton's in Brandon does give focus to one of the key problems that we have in the labour legislation in this province, brought in by this government, the first contract legislation , and we should point out that first corjtract legislation, written in a fair manner and with due regard for the rights of all concerned , may indeed in some cases have the effec ts that the Minister would like to claim are of his mak ing and his government's making . But as we will bring out later, Mr.

Chairman, I think the first contract legislation needs a revamp ing in this province and I'll be asking the Minister throughout , as I have in the past and will continue to do, to review the labour law for that reason , and also to see that j-our labour law complies with the Charter of Rights and ' Freedoms in this country - a question this Minister and , the Attorney-General have been very careful to skirt, ; to evade, to pretend to answer without really answer ing it. - We really have never had a proper review of The Manitoba Labour Relations Act in its entirety, taking into account the specif ics that we, on our side of the House, have been bringing forwa rd.

There never has been a review to discover whether or not the labour law of this province is in accord with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. For a government in Manitoba which likes to spread the myth that it has respect for human ity and respect for human beings and respect for compliance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, I maintain , Mr. Chairman, that that's the least this government cou ld do. But I will stop now, Mr. Chairman, and we can get into the detailed examination of the Minister's Estimates . MR.

CHAIRMAN: We will be beginning with Administration and Finance , and, as is customary, we will leave out the Minister's Salary and start with (b)

(1) Salaries . Are there any new members on your staff that you would like to introduce? HON. A. MACKLING: Well, I'll introduce my Deputy Minister and call upon her to introduce the staff . My Deputy Minister is Mary Eady, as most of you know. MR. CHAIRMAN: Would the deputy like to introduce the staff? MS. M. EADY: Yes, we have our Assistant Deputy Minister, Tom Bleasdale; our new Director of Personnel, Jim McFarlane ; Jim Wood , who is our Chief of Financial Services; and Bob Gorchynski who is Director of Administration . MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. The Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: Mr.

Chairman, as I recall our discussion last year, I think the communications officer 2618 of the ·Minister 's department is dealt with in this part of the Estimates , and I think at this time last year the Minister didn't have a communications officer and does now. Is that correct? HON. A. MACKLING: That's correct . MR. J. McCRAE: In his opening comments, Mr. Chairman , the Minister referred to the new commun ications officer as Janet Wile. Could I ask, Mr. Chairman, when Janet Wile was brought into the department? HON. A. MACKLING: She's just been engaged very recently . MR. J. McCRAE: Effective date? HON.

A MACKLING: Actually , she sat in on a brief ing session today, her first day. Her backgroud is that she worked with Saskatchewan Government Insurance Corporation and then the Women 's Directory in Saskatchewan . MR. J. McCRAE: What would the salary be? That would fall under professional/technical , according to the footnote of page 23 of the Supplementary Information . I'd just like to ask the Minister what the salary of the communications officer will be. HON. A. MACKLING: 39.9. MR. J. McCRAE: It's been over a year since the Minister 's had a communications officer, is that correct? HON. A.

MACKLING: Since October 1986. MR. J. McCRAE: Previously it was John Doyle? HON. A. MACKLING: John Doyle , yes. MR. J. McCRAE: And in October of '86 John Doyle moved to the Executive Council Office? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, that's correct. MR.. J. McC~E: So since October and now the Minister has not had a communications officer and , as he described it last year, when he hasn 't had a communications officer, he's managed to find help from other departments or some such answer as that . Is that correct? HON. A. MACKLING: Correct . MR. J.

McCRAE: The Minister in his opening statment made the point that things were going along pretty well for he and his department, and I just wonder why it is that the Minister now, all of a sudden, needs a communications officer. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, like any other department, it is vital that we communicate effectively in respect to the programs and issues that confront the department . And while we have managed to cope by

Monday, 1 June, 1987 making greater demands on persons in the department, including my special assistant, Gari Whelan, and my Deputy Minister, to come up with assistance for . me, it's much more desirable to have someone that has this responsibility and can do an effective job for the department. MR. J. McCRAE: Just by that answer the Minister seems to be saying that he wasn't doing an effective job previously, and that's why I asked the question in the first place. The argument can go round and round, but it seems to me that the Minister managed before, as he says, quite nicely.

Was he drawing unfairly · on other resources? What was the score? HON. A. MACKLING: Well, I'm not going to play on words. Whenever there is a vacant position , wherever it be in a department , and there , is work to be done, the work has to be done by others . I have to ask others to fill the breach, fill the gap, and take on additional work and additional responsibility, beyond what the ir normal duties require .

To the extent that the work is done, sure it's done, maybe with difficulty, to my satisfaction, but it's much preferable if you have someone who's in a position to provide the continuous service that is necessary to a department to provide for the communication needs . MR. J.

McCRAE: Well, I can sympathize with the Minister 's staff who were carrying the load which was left because of a vacancy, as my own experience , certainly, as a member of the MGEA for nine years of my life and working for the government and working in Ottawa in a fairly stressful type of occupation , I think I can tell you what it's like when there's a shortage of staff. So I can certainly sympathize with those who are left to carry out those duties .

But it just seemed like a very, very long time before that vacancy was filled and I'm surprised there wasn 't more pressure placed on the Minister to fill that vacancy sooner if the position is as important and as needed as the Minister says it is. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, there was a recruitment in there . Obviously , the recruitment was nationat<in scope . We thought we had a person selected and that person wasn 't able to take the position , and then we had another competition , so it took a little longer than what it normally should have. MR. J. McCRAE: I think we can move on a little bit, Mr. Chairman. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Okay. Other Expenditures then , is that what you want to discuss or to the next item? MR. J. McCRAE: I don 't know if it's covered in the Supplementary Information ; but a reduction in Other Expenditures, it is covered on page 23. HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, there's a slight decrease in expenditures there of $13,900 .00. The cutback, and this . is part of the vigorous Estimates process which , not only with this department, all departments were subjected to look for any area where what could be concerned a bit of fat might exist to get us down to the bare requirements .

If you like, I could review with you the major areas: $8,000 was trimmed from transportation , that's travel ; $9,400 from professional services, tightening up there; minor reduction of a couple thousand dollars on hotels , and there some that were increased, again very marginally . So it all balanced out with a net reduction of 13.9. MR. J. McCRAE: I just wonder - the Adjusted Vote figures are given to us and then the figures projected for this year; but how do these figures compare with actual expenditures for last year? For instance , t ransportation , what would have been the actual expenses last fiscal year?

While the Minister is looking for that, it's quite an achievement to bring about savings in these Other Expenditures when you 're bringing in another staff member for this fiscal year. That person's going to need an office, a typewriter I assume, or maybe a computer . HON. A. MACKLING: It's my understanding that we haven 't got the actuals from Finance at this date. It takes a period of time before they're broken down . But I thank the member for those complimentary words . It is a tough exercise . MR. J.

McCRAE: It's quite an achievement if you're budgeting another $40,000 for another person and that person has to be somewhere . I just wonder if you've got everything right , as a matter of fact . HON. A. MACKLING: Well, the salaries for the department , of course, reflect an increase , but the Other Expenditures which we're talking about , the reduction of 13.9 is there . There's a reduction in the other expenses, but in the salaries for Executive Support, there is an increase. MR. J. McCRAE: Okay. Mr. Chairman , we can go to Financial and Adm inistrative Services. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1.(c)

(1) Research and Planning ... MR. J. McCRAE: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, my colleague has a question, perhaps, on Research and Planning . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Norbert . MR. G. MERCIER: Research and Planning publishes the Quarterly Labour Relations Information Bulletin . Could the Minister advise as to the exact drop in the number of manufacturing drops from 1981 to the present? HON. A. MACKLING . I'll just check.

It's my understanding that the bulk of the statistics that we publish in the Informat ion Bulletin is compiled by Stats Canada and we don 't have the detail that the honourable member is requesting . MR. G. MERCIER: Well, who has the statistics on the manufacturing drops? Those were recently referred to. HON. A. MACKLING: It's my understanding that Employment Services would likely have the sectoral breakdown . j .j l ·~

- I Monday, 1 June, 1987 MR. G. MERCIER: Are we duplicat ing statistics here between the Labour and Employment Services Departments? HON. A. MACKLING : There may be some minor duplication when it comes to levels of employment , but other than that area I wouldn 't think that there was duplication, no. MR. CHAIRMAN : Okay. So we move on to 1.(c)

(1) Research and Planning :11 Salar ies - the Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE : Pass . MR. CHAIRMAN: 1.(c)(1)- pass; 1.(c)(2)-pass . Okay, we move to 1.(d)

(1) Financial and Administrative Services : Salaries - the Member for Brando n West. MR. J. McCRAE: Mr. Chairman , I note that there 's a reduct ion of one staff year reflecting the elimination of a training and development coordinator position . Why has that position been eliminated? HON. A. MACKLING: In the budget review and the task of meeting goals of budget reduction, striving to find ways to do more with less - if I can be so bold as to use that - we looked and there was this one position which we believed that Personnel Services could fulfill and therefore eliminated this position . MR. J. McCRAE : You can pass that , Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: 1.(d)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass . Okay, we now move into Labour , 2.(a)

(1) Division Adm inistration : Salaries - the Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: Mr. Chairman , why is it the Minister and his colleague, the Attorney-General, have consistently refused to subject The Manitoba Labour Relations Act to Charter of Rights scrutiny? If the Minister is going to say because it's good law and because we know it would meet the test , that's not good enough . If he knows that , why doesn't the Minister try to satisfy the thousands of Manitoba working men and women who'd like to see that act put to that test? HON. A.

MACKLING: Well, let me say, to begin with, that the changes to legislation, including labour legislation , has rece ived an overview by the Attorney General's Department for Charter compliance, has been brought forward by the Attorney-General. There is not, in the evaluation of Legislative Counsel within the Attorney-General 's Department , an obvious Charter violation in The Labour Relations Act or in the legislation for which we are respons ible other than those things that have been identified by the Attorney-General in the current Charter Compliance Bill that he has introduced .

The member says , well , even though Legislative Counsel has not identified something, shouldn't we go looking for something because there are thousands of people who may be concerned? I don 't think that's the basis upon which Charter compliance is being dea lt with by the Attorney -General 's Department in this province or any province . I think that we have to look , and where there is an obvious discriminatory

section within

an act, then it's the duty of the Attorney-General , and our Attorney General has carried out those duties exceptionally well , not at great public expense , but as a reasonable

schedule will allow , looking at large amounts of legislation to determine Charter compliance . He's done that and they are conti nuing to do that with all our legislation . I'm satisfied that unless there is a specific complaint that is being brought to us in respect to a particula r

section of our act, we shouldn 't be merely look ing for the sake of looking. As the honourable member knows, in addition to what the Attorney -General has been doing in the general overview , there is currently before the Superior Court in this province challenges in respect to provisions of The Labour Relations Act, some of the challenges based on sections of the Charter, and until those specific court proceedings have been dealt with, we will not be in a position to know whether or not there is any merit to those challenges .

It would be foolhardy, concurrently , with litigation , where an individual party is claiming a Charter violation , to initiate the same on our own account . The courts would wonder what we were doing in that kind of a process . I don 't know when these current matters before the court will be dealt with . It is likely that they will , most of them , proceed to the Supreme Court and that it may take some time.

As the honourable member knows , at one stage the Court of Appeal had indicated that our first contract legislation prohibited the Labour Board from imposing a further first contract legislation on appeal of the Supreme Court . The Supreme Court has lifted that injunction that was imposed by the Court of Queen 's Bench and reaffirmed by the Court of Appeal in the province . So there are matters that are before the court in respect to Charter application . When they have been dealt with , they may confirm or repudiate the concerns the honourable member has. MR. J. McCRAE: Mr.

Chairman, the Minister is a lawyer, the Attorney-General is a lawyer, and he tells me that large amounts of legislation are being looked at by the Attorney-General's Department. It doesn't make much sense to me, Mr. Chairman . It seems to me they 're skimming through it and not reading it, or someth ing, because if they're reading through large amounts of their own legislation , which they've been defending for seve ral years , I'm not surprised that they 're going to repo rt that there's nothing wrong with them .

All we've been ask ing is that the Minister have a review made and a legal opinion given, and that that opinion be shared - an opinion given by a lawyer who 's a professional as opposed to a politician lawyer. So I don 't accept the Minister 's answer about Charter compliance. He has basically said the same thing that we've been hearing all along, and I wish he would take the bull by the horns in this case. We could maybe put an end to a lot of the difficulties , unfairnesses , that we've been seeing to employees in this province . 2620

Monday; 1 June, 1987 The Minister and his colleagues would like to prolong the myth that they are the ones to stand up for ordinary workihg Manitobans, but it's exactly that, Mr. Chairman - it's a myth - because we've seen several instances where these honourable members have refused to stand up on behalf of the working men and women of this province . And from someone who is often the brunt of their criticism, as one who stands up for other interests in this economy, I resent that very much coming, as I do, from my background, I resent those types of accusations from the Ministers .

I'd like to discuss the first contract legislation. This is the second year, perhaps the third or fourth year, in a row that the Minister has singled out in his opening remarks praise for the first contract legislation of this province . In his remarks he says that there have been 26 applications received for first contract legislation since 1982 - 10 of them were settled voluntarily and 12 imposed by the board. Well, of those 26, we now, since the Eaton's vote the other day in Brandon, we now have seven unions decertified as a result of first contract legislation in this province .

I suggest, knowing the Minister 's loyalties as I do, that he have another look at that; and instead of just reading statistics that someone 's giving to him with the slant that those people want him to read into those statistics, that he look and he will see that seven workplaces have decertified their unions which , in the first instance, were the subject of first contract applications . The Minister crows loudly that, oh, we finally got an employer Who applied for a first contract . Well, out of 26, we have one employer who has applied; so that it tells 'you right away, Mr.

Chairman, where the bias is in the law, who the law was written for - 1 out of 26; 25 others were made by unions. But let's not forget in all of this, Mr. Chairman, that somewhere out there is the worker . I wish the Minister would remember this; I've been asking him to do that . Would he like to comment on the fact that seven unions have been decertified as a result of the first contract legislation? HON. A.

MACKLING: Before I do that, let me say that ttie honourable member and I Will have to agree to disagree in respect to his views in respect to labour legislation in this province, and what I think is fair and reasonable in respect to the defence of workers' rights. I will not use the Legislative Assembly as a forum for questioning the integrity or the adjudication of matters brought before the Manitoba Labour Board or its role in dealing with those cases . In respect to Charter compliance, it is not a haphazard or an indiscriminate review of legislation that the Attorney-General conducts.

It is a very reasonable and pragmatic review of legislation. We, as well as being reasonable , are also -prudent, and I think that's a good conservative attitude from time to time not to do a wholesale revision where only a little touch-up is necessary. Certainly , the Attorney -General is not doing an incomplete, but he's not doing a wasteful job of reviewing all of the statutes, which are enormous in number, to look through all of the provisions of all of the legislation that we have. But he is looking, or the 2621 department is looking, at all legislation , which includes labour legislation .

I'm satisfied that review will flag or - that's a bad word , I don't use flag all that often, the Member for Emerson or someone may remind me of that - but will highlight any obvious concern in respect to discriminatory practice . I won't repeat what I'd said about matters before the courts .

In respect to first contract , I think that the record of - the honourable member says six; perhaps it's seven, as he says - decertifications is not a bad average when you consider out of 26, because these are cases where the parties , while there had been certificatron of the union, had failed to come to a collective agreement. Let me read further detail into the record, because I think the further detail enhances the argument that the legislation has done very well .

I might say that we won't know how many times agreement was reached without the application for first contract legislation simply because the legislation was there , simply because it was there. So there are many instances where agreement was reached, knowing that if agreement was not reached, a first contract application would have been imposed by the board.

Now, the detail I referred to, of the 26 applications, 7 cases have first agreements in effect; 3 cases are negotiating a second agreement ; 6 cases have successfully concluded a second agreement; 2 cases are negotiating third agreements; 1 case is negotiating a fifth agreement. Now 6 cases had their certification revoked ; 1 case has stayed from proceeding; and 1 case had been granted a 30-day extension to settle .

I think that's an excellent record for a program that was put in place to avoid the kind of bitter confrontations that existed between management and workers where at long last, in many instances , certification had been obtained without the .enthusiasm of an employer, and the employer was hostile to the whole concept of having to collective bargain, and that is why no first contract was achieved . I think this is an exceptionally fine record considering the degree of hostility that often can be there in respect to first contract negotiation between a newly certified bargaining unit and an employer. MR. J.

McCRA~ The Minister helped a little while ago, Mr. Chairman, in making my case about the first contract legislation when he said that he couldn 't tell us how many contracts were entered into because of the existence of first contract legislation . I have to agree with him; and that's more or less like having a gun to your head . It certainly has nothing to do with freeing up collective bargaining . It allows union leaders or union negotiators to become lazy, knowing that the legislation is there to bail them out should they fail in doing what they want to do. And, on the e~ ployer side , Mr.

Chairman, the feeling is that there 's a gun to your head because they can rely on that. And certainly in the case of Eaton 's, there's no telling what an employer is going to end up getting. As I recall it, the Eaton 's employer was ordered by that first contract, in that case, to pay the employees in Brandon some 20 percent or 21 percent more than previously when it had the opposite effect to that which was intended . In that case, Eaton's response was to threaten

- I Monday, 1 June, 1987 to shut down the large part of its operation, to lay 43 people off. Well, only then, Mr. Chairman - and the Minister knows this story very well - did we begin to see some real negotiation after the first contract , which was clearly unacceptable and unrealistic . After that first contract was imposed, we then had the spectre of the workers at Eaton's threatening to sue their own union for $10 million, sort of shades of Jennifer Campbell, only in reverse .

It was Bernie Christophe in that case who was the subject of the unfair labour practice charge , this time threatened to be laid by the employees, and then the election was near. I can only assume the Minister or the Premier spoke to Mr. Christophe and that put an end to the impasse, because Mr.

Christophe then backed off his demands and the jobs of the workers were saved and my community downtown were saved by virtue of the fact that those workers forced their union boss not to abide by the terms of a first contract imposed by a third party which didn't seem to understand very clearly the implications to Eaton's of not being competitive in a competitive community in Brandon . So, I agree with the Minister . There 's no way of saying how many situations have been saved by the first contract legislation, because when you 're dealing with a gun at your head, you really don't have a whole lot of choice.

That's the whole problem with labour law in this province. Employers and employees don't have the same kinds of choices that the union bosses of this province do. That's what's unfair. The Minister knows it's patently unfair and refuses to do anything about it because we know where his loyalties are. We've been over it before . I just have to say it again so the Minister will know that I haven't forgotten about this, and we on this side of the House haven't forgotten about it and neither have the working people of Manitoba forgotten about it.

More and more people in Manitoba are coming to realize that a blind loyalty, like the kind the Minister displays to his union friends, doesn 't really achieve anything good in the long run . What's fair is what achieves the best results in the long run. Perhaps the Minister felt that the scales were tipped too far the other way before his government came along , but what they've done is they 've gone so far in the other direction that we've got something that's absolutely crazy. It's certainly unfair and I can bring many, many people forward to testify to this Minister of the truth of my statements. HON. A.

MACKLING: Well, Mr. Chairperson, I don't think that even if I strove over the next period of time in this committee to convince the honourable member that what he says is nonsense, he would ever agree . I don't think there's any question, but I will have to accept the fact that the honourable member takes a very negative attitude towards the conduct of existing trade unions in this province. He seems to be highly critical .. . MR. J. McCRAE: He deliberately misconstrued that again. HON. A.

MACKLING: . . . of their efforts whenever they're endeavouring to organize workers particularly in areas of industry and commerce that generally provide for relatively low paying salaries and where organized collective bargaining certainly would enhance the status of those workers. There's no question in my mind that collective bargaining and representation by workers of a union that cares and works hard to develop a reasonable income for those workers has proven dividends for workers not only in this province but throughout Canada and throughout the world.

The history of success of the Trade Union Movement in providing a more reasonable distribution of income and return from productivity , industrial, manufacturing or whatever activity is not a quest ion of speculation . It is a matter of fact, a matter of historical fact. Now there are those in society who feel that unions are unnecessary . I'm not suggesting that the honourable member says that unions are unnecessary, but he seems to be selective in his support for workers . He thinks that there are some unions that are bad . I don't look upon any union as bad or any employer as bad .

There are times when employers fail their employees . They strive to interfere with their employees' rights . They don't provide a reasonable opportunity for workers to bargain collectively , and there can be labour strife . Now in respect to individual situations such as Eaton's, I'm afraid that the historical record in respect to Eaton's isn't one that sheds a great deal of positive light in respect to the retail operations of Eaton's in respect to employee rights. It hasn't been a very glowing picture . Now I'm not saying that the management of Eaton's stands condemned .

It's up to the owners of Eaton's, it 's up to society to make that kind of evaluation . But what our first contract legislation has done is enable employers and employees to, through their collective bargaining, determine that even where they haven't been able to agree, and it's been the lot of the Labour Board to formulate a first contract for them , that in the overwhelming majority of those instances employers have found out that the union is not a diabolical threat to the survival of that enterprise, that they are able to work with the union and work in harmony, and the statistics bear that out.

I would like to point out that of the 26 applications, there were two occurrences when a strike was in progress and they were halted as a result of the first contract legislation - one at the request of the union, one at the request of the employer. The facts of the first contract history thus far speak for themselves and speak of success for what was once considered to be very unique . I understand it is now being studied, this first contract legislation, in Ontario . I don 't know whether it's been implemented yet .

I think it's certainly under active consideration there and, in my expectations, it will be pursued there. I have no doubt that once employers come to realize that the union wants to do a fair and reasonable bargaining job for the workers, that they can work with the union and mutually profit by it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: In dealing with this

section , one also has to look at the revenue side of the Estimates . 2622

Monday, 1 June, 1987 The revenue side of the Estimates indicate that the revenue from permits and licences increases by virtually 50 percent from last year from about $1 million to almost $1.5 million in revenue. Could the Minister give us a table outlining all of the increases? HON. A. MACKLING: Can I just have a minute? MR. G. MERCIER: Sure. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairperson, if I could look at the permits and licences, the approved changes for 1987-88 amount to $270,000.00 . I don't know where the member gets the million dollars . MA. G.

MERCIER: I'm getting it from the statement of revenue, details of estimated revenue that the Minister of Finance tabled with the Estimates on page 5 under labour . There are only two items of revenue . They show

a) as permits and licences, and it goes up from $1,037 ,000 to $1,479,800 .00. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairperson, I will get the statistics . Maybe that's the total amount that the honourable member is referring to but not the increase. It's the total amount, total revenue, yes . The'85-86 total actual of permits and licences was 1.237 million. The '86-87 published was 1,047 ,000, revised to 1,258,000 . The '87-88 estimated existing permit revenues, a guesstimate as to what we would obtain, was 1,209,000 . We approved changes of 270,000 which macie an estimated total fees from permits and licences of 1,479.8.

So it was an increase of 270,000, adjustments, various adjustments, and I could try and pick out the major ones . There are fees for hairdressers and barbers, which hadn't been set for many, many years, were increased: hairdressers 34,000; barbers 14.5.- (Interjection)- What percentage increase would it be? Probably a very significant one because they hadn't been looked at for many, many years. These are estimated figures, they're not actual. Apprenticeship, I think it was referring to 24,000, employment agencies 1. 7. MR. G. MERCIER: Employment agencies? What do you mean? . HON. A.

MACKLING: We do license some agencies who provide ,a head-hunter service of some kind, a placement service. MR, G. MERCIER: How much was the . . . HON. A. MACKLING: $1.7 thousand ; and pensions, we anticipate and these are again expected fees of $196,000, making a total increase of $260 ,000.00. MA. G. MERCIER: Did the Minister increase fees during'85-86? HON . A. MACKLING: There were some marginal increases in elevators and power engineers . MA. G. MERCIER: So the actual percentage increase in permits and licences revenue for this year would be more around 25 to 30 percent rather than 50 percent? HON. A.

MACKLING: One way of interpreting it is 11 percent , but I think that if you divide it the other way, it's a little higher . Yes, about 20 or 21 percent, if you do one way as against the other, it seems. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: Mr. Chairman, just to get back very quickly to a discussion we were having before the Honourable Member for St. Norbert got involved here a minute ago, the Minister referred to a negative attitude to unions on my part or on the part of members on my side of the House - another misrepresentation of the facts . MR. D.

ORCHARD: He said MTX was a money-making corporation at this time last year, too, so he always gets it wrong . MA. D. SCOTT: Not negative , just talks soft . MR. J. McCRAE: I do indeed have a negative attitude to unions who shove their way in when they're not wanted, into places where they're not wanted, abusing the democratic process and using the Labour Board and this Minister on the way to get there . Yes, I do have a negative attitude toward unions like that; otherwise I deny what the Minister says, and the Minister's being cheap when he makes comments like that .

I'd like to ask the Minister about representation votes. In the case of certifications, recently we've been asking for representation votes in cases where the wishes of the employees either were not entirely clear or were very clear in the case of Springhill Farms, and the Minister failed to get involved by means of ordering a representation vote . The board failed to order a representation vote . We find though, in the case of the decertification in the case of Eaton's in Brandon, there was a representation vote .

Can the Minister tell me why it is that there's a representation vote in the case of a decertification, but not in the case of a certification? HON. A. MACKLING: Would the honourable member like to leave that till we get to the

section dealing with Labour Board? Or do you want to have a free-for-all to begin with and then . . . MR. J. McCAAE: Actually, Mr. Chairman , the question has more to do with the law than it does the board . If I mention the board in passing, that really doesn 't affect my question. The question is: Why doesn't the law require representation votes in all cases so that the wishes of the employees can be kn wn without a doubt? HON. A. MACKLING: Well, Mr.

Chairperson , the honourable member, first of all, should recognize that our labour legislation was developed over many years in this province, and provided for the certification of unions and confirmation of representation of workers through certification procedures of the Labour Board. The certification procedures of the Labour Board have worked very well. Obviously, there are times when 26~3

- I Monday, 1 June, 1987 parties to a hearing before the board are dissatisfied - they didn't win; they didn't get their point of view. That certainly can be the case because there is one party that is opposing and one party supporting and both can't achieve their goal. The member, I hope, has had an opportunity to read the decision of the Labour Board in connection with the Springhill Farms adjudication . It looked at all the evidence . I thought it was a decision which reflected careful consideration , by the board.

It looked at precedents from jurisdfctions both from Ontario and Saskatchewan, and I thought dealt with the matter in a fair and reasonable way. MR. J. McCRAE: I'm going to clip this and send it off to Neepawa . I hope you remember that. HON. A. MACKLING: The honourable member thinks that the Minister of Labour should be ordering revotes or reconsiderations, and I disagree with that. I believe that workers utilize the existing law, and they did so. They had indicated by a sufficient majority that they wanted a particular union, apparently, to represent them, and that was the evidence that was found by the board.

This Minister does not feel it's appropriate to interfere with those decisions . I want to just indicate and respond to the generality of my critic's references . He said that what I said was cheap . If, from what the honourable has drawn from my remarks, he finds that offensive , then I would withdraw those offensive portions of whatever I said.

But I think that people, whether they be in the Legislature or whether they be in the public, when they note that members of the Opposition attend workers' meetings when the union is trying to hold a meeting with the workers and get involved in what appeared to be a confrontation between groups of workers , and appear to be taking sides in respect to those groups of workers, I think that is not helpful to the conduct of labour relations in this province . I think that workers and employers are armed with legislation that is fair, that is reasonable.

They are provided with a labour relations tribunal that I think is a peer, has an excellent record, not only in its history of performance in Manitoba but comparatively speaking across the country. I think its record of fair adjudication has been commented on not just once in awhile but most frequently by the courts of this province and found to be certainly fair and reasonable.

I believe that the Labour Relations Board, which is comprised of both representation from the organized worker sector and from management, adjudicates cases that come before them in accordance with the law and they do that in a reasonable way. I don't believe that a Minister of Labour should interfere with that fair adjudication of the processes which are the responsibility of that tribunal.

To start interfering and requesting changes in the facts or in the determination that an independent tribunal makes would be to politicize labour relations in this province to the detriment of both workers and employers, and I resist that very strongly. MR. J. McCRAE: Mr. Chairman, I didn't really expect much else from this Minister. 2624 Mr. Chairman, I'd like to bring to the attention of the Minister what I think is something that he and his department might like to take a look at.

I understand that there are people in this province, specifically in the nursing profession, whose religious beliefs would allow them to belong to a professional association but not to a union. As our labour law has been interpreted, I understand that

section 68(3) and

section 68.1(

b) have been interpreted to mean that professional association and union , I take it, are the same thing . In other words, a nurse applied for exemption from union membership and that was denied on the basis of the way our law is worded. I would be happy to provide the Minister with details outside this place if he would undertake to look into this with a view to allowing people to enjoy their religious freedom in this province. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, I'd certainly be interested if there's a situation where the honourable member feels that there's been a non-compliance with The Labour Relations Act .

Regardless of where a complaint comes, certainly we look into those matters. In respect to the duty of parties, the unions under the act have a duty of fair representation . I don't know what the particular matter is that the honourable member is referring to. Without having the details, it's pretty hard to comment on it. MR. J. McCRAE: I understand that, Mr. Chairman, and I'm not talking about a non-compliance with the act.

I'm talking about the act itself, and to protect the religious rights of people in this province, whether the Minister would agree to consult with me further privately as to whether the words "professional association" could be removed from the sections I referred to a little while ago, so that certainly the nurses that I'm aware of who are caught in this problem will be able to be exempt from union membership while still being members of professional nursing associations from which associations they get their licences to practise . HON. A.

MACKLING: Well, we certainly couldn't make a commitment of that kind, that I will look to change the act on the basis of some concern, unless I was satisfied that there was an injustice occurring and I could persuade my colleagues that some change in the act was necessary. MR. J. McCRAE: Well, perhaps I could put it more simply for the Minister. Would the Minister be interested in making sure the religious freedoms of Manitobans are protected through The Manitoba Labour Relations Act? Because if he's not, we'll have to pursue this matter in some other way.

If the Minister is interested in seeing that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is complied with in respect to not only freedom of speech and expression, as we've discussed before, but in respect, this time, of freedom of religion, if the Minister is interested in preserving those freedoms, then he will agree to work with me on a non-partisan basis to attempt to make the changes necessary to accommodate the religious beliefs of some people in this province.

Monday, 1 June, 1987 Now if he can 't answer the question that he wants to protect , the relig ious freedoms of people in this province in the affirmative, then we have a real problem with this Minister and with this government. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, I don 't want to engage in shadowboxing with the honourable member . He doesn 't give me specifics ; he doesn't give me details. MR. J. McCRAE: I did so. HON. A.

MACKLING: Apparently there 's some concern about one or more nurses who , because of thei r religious belief, do not want to belong to a union or don 't want their professional association categorized as a union. I haven't seen anything or heard any submission on the part of anyone . This is the first that the honourable member says that there is some problem there . I f he wants to identify it, certainly , I'll be obligated to look if there is any basis to a violation of human rights or Charter rights by virtue of the present act. I don 't believe that exis ts.

If the honourable member has a belief to that extent, he can send it to me and I'll look at it. MR. J. McCRAE: The act , Mr. Chairman, does provide for a conscientious religious objector to be exempt from union membership. The act provides for that . But it also , in its wording, refers to a union or a professional association in the same breath. This is the part that I would like to discuss with the Minister privately. This is the part that has been ruled to be one and the same . In other words , if you can belong to a professional association, then you have to belong to the union .

This apparently is the ruling that's been brought to my attent ion, the ruling I'd like to bring to the Minister's attention. I'm ask ing the Minister to work with me in a non-partisan way to protect the religious freedoms of working people in Manitoba . HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman , I don't want to say yes, I am going to work with the member. If the member has a particular case or concern , yes, certainly . If he wants to bring it to my attention , I will look at it, but I don 't wanato comm it myself to working with the honourable member to effect a remedy for something if I don 't know there's a problem.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Kildonan. MR. M. DOLIN: I'm somewhat sympathetic towards the Member for Brandon West , but I'm no more expert in labour law than he is. But it is my understanding that you have a clause that you pointed out which allows conscientious objectors not to have to join a union . However, they do reap the rewards and benefits of membership such as rates of pay, hours of work , pension benef its, etc . There is a requirement , I understand - I think it's called the Rand formula - that they pay dues. I would assume this wou ld be equ ivalent to professional associations.

Also, I'm not clear - and I would think the Minister should discuss with the member and maybe clarify for him - in nursing,

part icularly, you have a professional assoc iation , MARN, which is the Manitoba Association of Registered Nurses; you have MONA, which is the Manitoba Organization of Nursing Associations, which is the negotiating party. Now I think I'm not clear from the explanation of the member, and I'm sure the Minister is not clear, as to which organization he's talking about . Or is he talking about both? I can understand why the Minister is unwilling to make a commitment when he's not clear, and I'm not too sure the member is clear .

Perhaps he would like to clarify as to what exactly, what particular organization this nurse is talking about? Is she talking about MARN? Is she talk ing about MONA? Is she a relgious objector to belong ing to a professional asso ciation or to the MONA organization? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: As I said, Mr. Chairman, I do intend to raise this with the Minister privately .

But I'm really surprised - I guess it's in view of Bill No. 47 that's been introduced last week in this House - that members of the New Democratic Party are so slow now to commit themse lves to ensuring that people enjoyed the religious and other freedoms that are guaranteed supposedly by our Charter of Rights . Maybe I shou ldn't be surprised when I see in this act people being - their freedom of speech and expression being stifled by virtue of The Manitoba Labour Relations Act . Maybe I shouldn 't be so surprised , Mr. Chairman .

But I do appreciate it, if the Minister will agree to sit down with me, and I can take up the matter to which I've referred earlier. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Pembina . MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . On the general topic of The Labour Relations Act, can the Minister indicate to me, what are the abilities of elected MLA 's in relationship to communicating with their constituents as to union organizing circumstances? Are we disallowed , as MLA's, from speaking to constituents who are per chance being recru ited by a union organization drive? HON. A.

MACKLING: Well, the member asks a question that I believe is a fair one. An M l:A who may be asked questions or whatever by a constituent, can he respond to those questions and concerns and not be in breach of The Labour Relations Act that would indicate some areas where discussions with workers would be an unfair labour practice - I think that one would have to look at each case to determ ine whether or not there was any breach of The Labour Relations Act .

Generally, the provisions of the act are there to ensure that where certification or union organ izing is taking place , that no one, whether it be a lawyer or a judge or anyone involved in society, should be interfering with the cou rse of that effort by workers to agree upon a bargaining agent for them . But , as I say, I think that every indiv idual case would have to be addressed to determine whether or not the involvement of the particular person was within reasonable bounds and therefore not an unfair labour practice. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Who would make the determination as to whether that MLA was operating in such a manner 2625

I I Monday, 1 June, 1987 as to constitute an unfair labour pract ice? Would that be you as Minister, or would that be your designated board? Who would make that decision, and on the basis of what allegations and through what process? HON. A. MACKLING: Well, as the honourable member appreciates, that kind of decision ought not to be made politically. Where they are made by a tribunal operating at arm's length from government, it would be the Labour Board . MR. D. ORCHARD: Well, Mr.

Chairman, the reason I broach the subject is that one of my colleagues whose municipal employees were in the process of a union drive in the local municipality in which he represented that municipality in this Legislature, he was well acquainted, I believe, with all of the employees that were being unionized and had some discussions with the individual members and/or their spouses and was indeed called to a meeting on a Sunday evening, I believe it was, by those same employees. Mr.

Chairman, what he got for his efforts was a phone call to my leader's office from the head of that particular union, indicating to my leader that his MLA was engaged in unfair labour practices. To my knowledge, I don't think my colleague was doing any more than responding to some legitimate concerns on behalf of the wives of those employees who feared that their husbands may well not have a job after the union organization, because there was some discussion about contracting out the entire workload of the municipality. Indeed, he was invited by those same employees to meet with them on a Sunday evening.

It wasn't the MLA's invitation to the employees; it was the employees' invitation to the MLA. But yet the head of that particular union, as I say, placed a phone call to my leader's office on Monday, accusing our MLA, our colleague, of unfair labour practices.

You know, that was an issue, I suppose maybe we should have pursued to see whether your Labour Relations Act, that you hold up in such glowing terms, prevents an MLA from meeting with his constituents on matters of organization drives, because if that is the extent to which your Labour Board, your tribunal, can assess information and indeed lay charges of unfair labour practices to MLA's who are doing their job, in their best estimate, in representing their constituents, I think we've got a pretty onerous piece of legislation.

That is why I pose the question, because the threat was clearly there from the union organizer that our MLA was engaged in unfair labour practice. Now I don't expect you to comment on whether he was or was not, because you don't know the details, but I'd like to know who would have ended up making the decision that our MLA was indeed engaged in an unfair labour practice by meeting with workers of a municipality who are in an organization drive at the workers' request. Who would make that decision, Mr. Minister? HON. A.

MACKLING: Well, as I've indicated to the honourable member, any decision as to whether or not an unfair labour practice has occurred is, pursuant to The Labour Relations Act, a decision of the Labour Board. In respect to the news story and what the honourable member has also indicated before this committee, I read the

article about this in the media . It is obvious that the matter was not pursued. I haven't heard anything further in respect to it. Presumably , the union involved, or whoever it was on behalf of a union, called, agitated, feeling or believing that there was an interference; but whether or not a person is doing something that interferes with the union's right to collective bargain or to organize in its endeavour to certify is a matter of fact, a determination of fact by the board.

One can speculate that there may be instances where MLA's or any individual may, by deliberate course of action or whatever, be counselling and actively involved in a matter which could be construed as unfair labour practice. But there may be many instances where an MLA is providing useful information, is being called upon to provide assistance in the finding of fact for constituents that, while there may be an organizing effort on, would not be construed as unfair involvement or unfair labour activities on the part of the MLA. It's hard to generalize.

I'm sure there are instances, extreme cases, where such a finding could occur . But I don't believe that MLA's would normally put themselves in that position . I think that they are responsible . They know that there is a Labour Relations Act and provisions, they know that there is a Labour Board that adjudicates these matters, and would not, I would think, readily be party to or likely to be found to be involved in unfair labour practice, but each case would have to be determined on its merits. MR. D. ORCHARD: I guess, Mr.

Chairman, that's what is troublesome to myself as an MLA representing all groups of people in my constituency . For instance, let's consider a circumstance of a meat processing plant where a labour union leader is promising something that he cannot deliver in terms of wages to the workers that are there. That's pretty attractive to those non unionized workers .

Management knows that wage demand or that wage promise by the union organizer, by the head of that particular union, is not achievable, that it's simply beyond the capacity of the industry in Manitoba, indeed Canada, and simply would never be achieved around the bargaining table. Now the scenario straightforward is that if management of that meat processing plant say to their workers, "That is an unachievable promise that you have been given by that head of that particular union that is trying to organize you," immediately, as I understand the act, they're subject to an unfair labour practice.

Your legislation and you, as Minister, would stand there and allow them to be dragged through your tribunal, found guilty and fined .

Now I sit back as an MLA and I say to myself if that union comes in and they take that union out on strike, because once they're certified the decertification process takes up to a year, etc., they come in there and they have made the promise of those kinds of wages, and I know from my understanding of 1he industry that those aren't achievable, that that is just pie in the sky that is being promised to those workers simply to get them to sign the union card and get more members to pay dues to fund the union organization. 2626

Monday, 1 June,.1987 I know it's not achievable and, furthermore, I know that if that union comes in, it may well reduce the employment and the activity in that processing plant in my constituency . I'm the MLA; I represent not only the workers that are there . I represent the growers who provide the livestock to that plant; I represent the owners of the plant who are resident. I represent businesses who supply services to that particular packing plant . I mean I have everybody's welfare foremost in my concern .

In protecting the welfare in my constituency, if I say to those workers, by letter , what is being promised to you by the labour union organizer is unachievable and may cost you jobs, hours of work, salaries and benefits and cost this community, knowing that I'm speaking the truth to those employees , would I be subject to an unfair labour practice when I'm doing it to represent employees, owners, businesses in the communities, the rest of the ratepayers in the communities, that if that business goes broke there are no taxes being paid so that everybody else's levies will go up?

If I make that kind of a statement as an MLA representing all groups in my constituency , does your legislation allow that labour union boss to drag me through the tribunal, lay an unfair labour practice and make it stick when I'm only speaking out on behalf of the people who elected me? HON. A. MACKLING: The honourable member is asking a speculative question.

I indicated that there may be instances where the Labour Board could adjudge that, on the basis of the kind of involvement that any individual had, it was of a nature that was unfair in respect to the effort of the workers or someone on behalf of the workers to organize . Each case would have to be determined on its merits . There may be many instances, as I've said, where the role of the MLA may be adjudged by the labour tribunal as only reasonable, but that would have to be determined by the Labour Board . MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, one final question to the Minister.

Because his act allows me, as the MLA, to be potentially dragged througtr the legal process before your three-person board, to go through considerable legal expense as an MLA representing those people, I guess the question I'd pose is: Am I then covered by this blanket legal fee policy that the government has in place for all MLA's? Would my legal fees be covered by that so I wouldn't be out of pocket to cover those? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairperson, as I am not a Minister responsible for the insurance coverage on MLA's, I'm sure that question could be put to either my colleague, the Minister of Finance, or the First Minister in respect to the kind of protection that MLA's have. Again, I reiterate that no one is above the generality of the law. Just like MLA's are subject to the statutes of Manitoba, generally, whether it be The Highway Traffic Act, The Health Act or any other statute of the province, MLA's are not above either the federal laws or. the provincial laws .

There would have to be a determination of the Labour Board on the basis of whether or not the involvement of the individual was unreasonable , was such that constituted an unfair labour practice . I don 't think that matter has been determined by the Labour Board or a court heretofore it. It may be that it has in the past - I'm not familiar with that - but I would say that the Labour Board is charged with making reasonable adjudications of the cases that come before it.

I would assume that unless there was some very significant unfair role of the MLA in this process, that the MLA would be recognized for playing a helpful role in most instances if he was providing information to his constituents . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . Mr. Chairman, a question to the Minister: Why do representatives of the Manitoba Federation of Labour regularly attend his NOP Caucus meetings? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairperson, l'.m not familiar ~ with whether or not we do have - I don't know whether ~ the Conservative Party does this or not - but we certainly make no secret of the fact that we have people from our New Democratic Party attend caucus meetings , but they're there as members of the New Democratic Party. They may belong to trade unions; they may belong to professional associations; hopefully, they don 't belong to your party. MR. G.

MERCIER: Mr, Chairman , could the Minister confirm that the outside representatives of the Manitoba Federation of Labour regularly review legislation before it is presented to the House? -(lnterjection)- HON. A. MACKLING: The Honourable Member for Pembina has provided the answer - no. MR. G. MERCIER: The Minister is absolutely denying that representatives of the Manitoba Federation of Labour do not see legislation before it's introduced into the House . HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairperson, let me reiterate - no.

When there is consultation on the part of this Minister, and I assume for all of my colleagues , we respect the requirements of the Legislative Assembly and any review of proposed legislation would be a review of the principles that may be contained in legislation, but not the legislation itself . MR. G. MERCIER: The Minister then is acknowledging , at least to this extent that the principles of proposed legislation are reviewed by the Manitoba Federation of Labour before it is presented in the House? HON. A. MACKLING: t Yes, Mr. Chairper~on .

For example, in respect to pay equity legislation introduced by this Minister in the previous Session, principles of pay equity legislation were reviewed with representation from the Trade Union Movement, from the Chamber of Commerce , from the Canadian Manufacturers ' Association, from the Status of Women and women 's 4

Monday, 1 June, 1987 organizations , the principles of the legislation , but not t he draft legislation itself . MR. G. MERCIER: Would the Minister not confirm that there is some legislation in which the only group to see it are representatives of the Manitoba Federation ·ot Labour? HON. A. MACKLING: Not to my knowledge. MR. G. MERCIER: Could the Minister confirm that in !the selection of the Leader of the New Democratic Party, 'the Manitoba Federation of Labour has automatic delegates to a convention? HON. A. MACKLING: I'm not going to plead , Mr.

Chairperson; that question is out of order and has nothing to do with the Estimates of the department . A MEMBER: It sure does. HON. A. MACKLING: Oh , it does. Well , we have some ·constitutional legal experts here . I don't think the Honourable Member for St. Norbert is saying that, because, after all, he is Opposition House Leader and iknows what the rules are.

But in respect to the 1representati on at conventions of the New Democratic Party, it is a matter of public record that there are delegates that attend conventions of the New Democratic Party who are delegates elected by workers through affiliated unions . MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, as one of the representatives of the Manitoba Federation of Labour , has Mr. Will Hudson attended NDP caucus meetings? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairper son, again I say that I believe that question is out of order, but I have no hesitation in saying " no." I don 't recall Mr. Hudson attendi ng a caucus meeting where I was present.

I would say there are people coming and going from our caucus rooms, but whether they attend caucus meetings is another matter . I assume there are people who go into the Conservative Caucus Room that one might question as to whether or not they sit down with the Tory Caucus and advise and counsel them, but I'm not familiar with that. People do come before our caucus and make representation . I think sometimes there are good Conservatives who do that, but do we listen to them? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: Mr.

Chairman , the point raised by the Honourable Member for Pembina about the rights of MLA 's vis-a-vis The Manitoba Labou r Relations Act and some of the provisions in it which make it difficult for an MLA to have contact with his constituents, is the same problem faced by reeves and councillors and mayo rs and aldermen . any elected official whose duty it is t o be in contact with its constituents , many of whom may be employees of the corporation, the city corporation or town corporation , of which he is a representative so that the argument can go really quite a distance beyond this place and into a real argument about the fundamental principles underlying our democratic system and the right of elected representatives to represent constituents whether it be at a provincial, federal or municipal level.

So the matter dealing with the Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain and indeed the allegat ion s raised by this Minister and his leader and others about myself attending meetings to which I was invited, those remarks ring pretty hollow, but they are also pretty serious if they 're tak en to their logical conclusion as written in The Manitoba Labour Relations Act. I find that kind of law offens ive, I find it oppressive and I find it anti-democratic.

It is law put into place by the New Democratic Party governm ent and I maintain that the myth that has been spread by members of the New Democratic Party for many years of this province is nothing more than that - a myth - and little by little, Mr. Chairman, we are finding some success in breaking away the myth that surrounds honourable members sitting opposite from us in the Legislature. HON. A. MACKLING: Well , I'm just going to indicate my disagreement with the honourable member .

I think that he misses the point that throughout Canada - and Manitoba is no exception - and Courts of Law , from our superior courts here to the Supreme Court of Canada , have adjudicated on a great many occasions on the fact that the workers , when they are organizing , when there is an endeavour to organize workers into a bargaining unit , that there ought to be, and enshrined in law, there are provisions to prevent the deliberate interference with those rights. It is not something unique to Manitoba .

It is common practice in the Western World for that organizing period to be protected from arbitrary interference from anyone, whether it be someone in the legal profession, whether it be someone who is a politician or otherwise. But as I indicated , there may be circumstances where the MLA can show that it was communication of reasonable information. It could be someone in the municipal field showing that they were merely providing information that those constituent people needed and that didn 't amount or wasn 't tantamount to interference or could be found to be unfair labour practice . MR. G. MERCIER: Pass.

MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(b)(1)-pass. 2.(b)(2) - the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mechanical and Engineering, Mr. Chairman, a matter that was raised to me by a constituent relating to the inspection of elevators. The report, for example, indicates last year there were 1,600 inspections .

Where an order is made by an inspector , I take it, from The Elevators Act , there is an appeal to the board and there can eventually be an appeal or at least the board makes a recommendation to the Minister and the board or the Minister can accept the provisions of the act to the regulations to a particular elevator installation. Is that correct? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes. MR. G. MERCIER: Could the Minister indicate how many such appeals there were, say, last year? 2628

Monday, 1 June, 1987 HON. A. MACKLING: There were no appeals last year. MR. G. MERCIER: So that there were no exceptions. HON. A. MACKLING: No, I didn't recall any and that's confirmed. MR. G. MERCIER: How often does this board sit? HON. A. MACKLING: Basically as required. MR. G. MERCIER: In the past prior to this year, have there been appeals or exceptions made to, I guess, orders of inspectors? HON. A. MACKLING: Not in the last four years. MR. G. MERCIER: Also under this

section I believe are inspections of amusement rides and booths. Again last year there were in the Annual Report, from April 1, 1985, to March 31, 1986, their total number of inspections of some 363; 250 orders issued for remedial action, number of rides condemned, zero. I think this is consistent with the last number of years, although perhaps the total number of inspections have increased. But the question has to arise, when there are 250 orders issued for remedial action, no rides condemned, how were those orders complied with?

Were they complied with right on the spot, or were the rides taken out of circulation? HON. A. MACKLING: I'm advised that they are either completed, done on the spot, when the deficiency is pointed out; or the ride is not allowed to be operated until the deficiency has been remedied. I can confirm to the member that while there are a large number of remedial orders and no condemnations , that is, I think, reflective of the fact that the department is quite rigid in its detailed requirements in respect to the operation of those amusement rides .

And I want to go on record as being very supportive of detailed requirements and very thorough investigation by the staff, because I can indicate that I recall quite a violent thunderstorm occurring in the city - I believe it was last year - and I was very concerned because I'd heard about amusement rides being affected by unusual weather conditions; and I think the staff called upon me to re-ensure my concern in that area. I think that the public is well served by a very thorough inspection of those facilities. MR. G. MERCIER: How many inspectors perform this work? HON. A. MACKLING: Three inspectors.

During the summer months there are three that are doing that work, and they do other duties the rest of the year. MR. G. MERCIER: Obviously, they do other activities during the rest of the year. I take it they would have to perform a lot of work on weekends for these rides and travel around? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, both weekends and evenings . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to raise with the Minister a matter that's been ongoing for some time concerning a resident of Brandon who has written to the Minister a number of times , and the First Minister.

It deals with Manitoba Regulation No. 146 of 1978, dealing with mobile homes. Would that come under Mechanical and Engineering, Mr. Chairman? Would that be Fire Commissoner? HON. A. MACKLING: Under the Fire Commissioner's Office . MR. J. McCRAE: Then I think we should go ahead then. I wonder , Mr. Chairman, I know the Honourable Member for Gladstone had a question under Mechanical and Engineering . HON. A. MACKLING: We can come back to it. MR. J. McCRAE: Could we come back to that? HON. A. MACKLING: Sure, no problem. MR. J. McCRAE: Okay. With respect to Fire Prevention then, Regulation No. 146 of '78 . HON. A.

MACKLING: Can we pass this item then, so that, Mr. Chairman, we can come back to it anyway? MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(b)(2)-pass. 2.(c)(1) - the Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: Yes, Mr. Chairman . The Regulation No. 146 of '78 deals with the condition of mobile homes upon sale . This is a matter I raised with the Minister last year. But a resident of Brandon has had a difficult time solving his problems. He had purchased a mobile home which never had repairs completed to the satisfaction of the Minister ' s department .

The department informed the vendor of the mobile home that the repairs would have to be done, and a time was given for those repairs to be done . They never were done. My correspondent asks whether Regulation No. 146 of '78 is or is not enforceable? If it is enforceable, why was it not enforced in his case? The Minister will be aware of this file. HON. A. MACKLING: The staff don't have the particulars of the matter that the honourable member is referring to.

If it's the matter that was also referred to the Premier's office , a gentleman had purchased this mobile home, the department sought relief for the purchaser from the vendor, weren 't able to obtain that, but the vendor did offer to take the mobile home back , pay the purchaser the money and apparently that hasn 't happened. The purchaser didn 't want to do that. I guess he felt he'd struck a good deal, and, quite frankly, I don 't know where it's at right now. MR. J. McCRAE: Mr. Chairman, the purchaser did go to some expense, I can't tell you how much, but the purchaser did go to some expense to make 2629

Monday, 1 June, 1987 improvements to it, so that the offer of the vendor to buy the thing back wasn't satisfactory to the purchaser.

The purchaser is upset that it took several months from the time of the department's order to the vendor to bring the mobile home up to the proper standard so that by the time the matter was referred to the Attorney-General's Department , the opinion was that the thing had gone on for too long and that the Attorney General 's Department couldn 't get involved because of the time limitation having expired, leaving the purchaser in the position that he's angry with the Department of Labour , or whoever it is that would be charged with the responsibility for enforcement of that.

So I take it the answer is, yes , that it is, but because of negotiations and correspondence, there was a time lapse which left this purchaser out of luck in terms of the lapse of time . HON. A. MACKLING: I'm not familiar with the details of the case . My Deputy Minister , as well, doesn 't recall all of the details either , but we'll certainly have a look at the case to see whether or not there's anything further that we can do or to see whether or not there was some weakness in our system because if there was, we'd certainly want to address it. MR. J. McCRAE: I bring it to the Minister's attention .

The last communication from this person to the department was April 22, 1987. If the Minister could provide me with the response that he's made, if he has made it; if he hasn't made it, if he could let me have it when he does, so that I can put some finality to this matter. HON. A. MACKLING: Will do. MR. J. McCRAE: We can move along, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(c)(1)-pass; 2.(c)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass ; 2.(cX3) Engineering and Technical Services-pass; 2.(d)

(1) Employment Standards: Salaries- pass. 2.(dX2) Other Expenditures - the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: On page 31 of the annual report it shows Special Permits and Licences Issued by The Employment Standards Branch - Child Employment, 505 . .. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, if I might , is there any prior arrangement to go beyond the hour of ten o'clock? What is the committee 's wish? HON. A. MACKLING: I leave it to the critic. MR. J. McCRAE: I think we should continue , Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: Would the committee inform me as to how long you'd like to go? MR. J.

McCRAE: I believe there's reason to think we can get finished tonight HON. A. MACKLING: I leave it to the critic to determine . MR . CHAIRMAN: ls that the committee's wish? (Agreed) The Membe r for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, on page 31 of the annual report, there is indication under Special Permi ts and Licences issued by the branch, Child Employm ent, 505. Could he explain that? HON. A. MACKLING: Young people under the age of 16 require to get a permit and the bulk of these would be students employed largely weekends and after school at a variety of occupations . MR. G.

MERCIER: That's 505 students under 16? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes. MR. G. MERCIER: I would suspect that's a pretty low number. Out of the number of kids who are actually working - I was aware of that - but I think there are a lot of kids who don't realize you have to get a special permit . HON. A. MACKLING: The honourable member's speculation may be correct , but if they are 16 or over they don't require a permit. It may be that there are a significant number of employers who don't appreciate the fact that the worker would have to get a permit, but those are the numbers that we have recorded. MR. G.

MERCIER: Under 16, it's the employer's obligation to apply? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes. MR. G. MERCIER: On the minimum wage changes , there was a minority report with respect to that matter? HON. A. MACKLING: While staff are looking, if they can find more details for me of the report, I recall that, as is frequently the case, there were areas of disagreement; that is, there wasn't unanimity of opinion in respect to the extent that the minimum wage should be changed . There was agreement in respect to some factors of the changes we affected. One was in respect to the elimination of the youth differential.

That was a unanimous recommendation of the board. Also there was unanimous recommendation of the board in respect to elimination of language which was determined by the board to be sexist in respect to working conditions that had been specifically related to females. It was no longer felt to be appropriate in the legislation in two instances , but there was disparity of a recommendation in respect to the quantum of minimum wage to be recommended to the government. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, M. Dolin: The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman, could we have a copy of the report - both the majority and the minority report? HON. A. MACKLING: I'm sorry , what was your .. . 2630

Monday, 1 June, 1987 MR. G. MERC IER: Could we have a copy of the report from the Minimum Wage Board? HON. A. MACKLING : I'm advised that it is a report to the Minister and, as such, it is normally not subject to public release . I am rather open on matters like that. I don't want to establish a problem for colleagues in respect to that. I really don 't know whether that is something that we ought not to release as a matter of course , but I really don't know. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, we have had that before .

The Minimum Wage Board, as I recollect , holds public hearings before making their recommendation or, at the very least, seeks submissions from the public and then makes - you know, when you have a board seeking public representations, then I don 't see how any Minister could not release that kind of a report . HON. A. MACKLING: I don't know whether I'll be establishing a precedent , but my own views are that that kind of report should be the subject of consideration publicly, and I will provide a copy to the member. MR. G. MERCIER: I thank the Minister for that. Mr.

Chairman, would the Minister indicate whether or not there 's any monitoring of jobs for young people under 18, in view of the doing away of the differential? Is there any way of finding out if the changes will affect jobs for younger people, whether employers, who may have had a financial advantage in keeping on younger people under that age at a lower rate will now, because they have to pay the same rate, be employing older younger people.

I think we're all aware of some of the chains who, I think, made it a practice to employ younger people or people under the age of 18 because they could pay them the lower rate. HON. A. MACKLING: I don't know whether there is any monitoring of that. I think very often business resents the kind of intervention that government makes, seeking so much information on their operations . But if that is possible, I'll certainly endeavour to get that information because I would and the department would like to determine whether or not some of the concerns that are out there, that might happen.

That is, when you eliminate the youth differ ential, it may have a serious negative effect on younger people obtaining the same degree of acceptance in the work force. That's a matter that can't be readily determined without an adequate monitoring. But how you can get that monitoring without being quite intrusive in respect to the operations of businesses is difficult. Maybe some sort of a survey could be conducted. I don't know. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman, there was a minority report that was received by one of the Minister 's predecessors a number of years ago, which recommended a study of who receives the minimum wage and who is affected . It would enable people in government to be able to deal with this issue on the basis of some real knowledge of who is receiving 2631 min imum wage and how it affects people , because the argume nts are always made, well, you can't raise a family on the minimum wage - we sure know that - but how many people receiving minimum wage are actually supporting a family or what kind of circumstances?

It seems to me that it would help those in government making decisions on this, on an item like minimum wage, to be able to have a comprehensive study on who receives minimum wage . The Minister has already indicated that it could possibly be a significant effect on young people under age 18 because of the change that has been made, but no one has the facts . No one knows. I'm wondering if the Minister would be prepared to embark upon a comprehensive study of who is receiving minimum wage and the effects of increases. HON. A.

MACKLING: I think the honourable member is making a worthwhile suggestion; that it would be I think valuable to have a more clear understanding as to the number of people who are dependent upon minimum wage, or how people in wage categories that are close to the minimum wage are affected by the changes in the minimum wage. My Deputy Minister is pointing out to me that in Ontario - I don't know whether it's the Ontario Government - it's a social planning council in Ontario , in Metropolitan Toronto, has done a study in respect to minimum wages and adequacy of income.

I might say that those studies reflect the concern that we can 't hold our heads very high as a society generally in Canada and I don't think we can be all that proud in Manitoba of the fact that, over the years, minimum wage has not kept pace with the percentage of the average industrial wage that it once had . The increases that have become effective as of April 1 and then will be effective as of, I think it 's October 1, will still not bring our minimum wage back on par with what it was some years ago. It may be a costly survey, but certainly it's a good suggestion.

I certainly will discuss with the department whether or not - we don 't have the money, I can be certain of that in this year's Estimates - but I think it would be something that we should plan for in the future to be in a position to make a more careful analysis as to what the results are and how many people are affected by minimum wage decisions . MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, one of the ... I'd appreciate receiving a copy of that, and I'm sure the Member for Brandon West would.- (Interjection)- One other comment I'll just make.

I note from the report there were in the last year, some 63,000 telephone inquiries, and some almost 7,500 in person , I guess , inquiries. I must say that it's amazing , how many times over the course of the year you get inquiries from either small business operators in your constituency or from employees about some very, usually very detailed standards in The Employment Standards Act , about the number of hours and what can you do here , and what are you entitled to here .

I, frankly, never had a complaint abou t anybody phoning this branch to find out information that does seem to be readily available and accessible to them. I think it's a service that should be continued at that level, because the kind of standards

Monday, 1 June, 1987 that are contained in the act are something that an ordinary employee or ordinary small business operator simply doesn't have the time to keep up with. This kind of information that , I think , is available through the office is awfully important to them , and to get the information through a quick , easy phone call is very hel pful. HON. A.

MACKLING: I want to be very clear with the honourable member and point out to him that one of the one areas in employment standards , which I regret to advise in the budget exercise , that we reduced somewhat is the telephone open line or free line , the toll-free line. The elimination of that is effective for half of the year. Apparently what was happening is that is that with the toll-free line, people were tying it up for extensive periods. If the person doesn 't have the funds we will take the call. That is, if they say that they have a problem and can't afford and whatever, we'll take the call.

But we felt that we could make a savings there because people would get on the line and just feel that they could talk forever. You know , get a whole history lesson if you like of what employers' and employees ' rights are over a broad spectrum, rather than focusing in on their particular problem. So I agree with the honourable member that information and communication is imperative. I was troubled when that item was brought to me but I was reassured that we could live with that change. Certainly, I'll be monitoring it to make sure that there 's no problem. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 2.(dX2)-pass. 2.(dX3) - the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, I note that in this

section last year, or at least in'85-86 , there was some $408,000 paid out under the Payment of Wages Fund . What was the actual amount in '86-87? HON. A. MACKLING: Well , the net in'85-86, after recoveries . . . MR. G. MERCIER: Do you operate on the net or the gross there? HON. A. MACKLING: It's on the gross. Then we could take the deductions off. I just want to confirm to you what the net was in'85-86. It was $334,300.00 . In '86- 87 the Adjusted Vote was 320, the net expenditures were 349, 110.

We believe that, given the fact that we've been doing very well in respect to recoveries , the 320 ,000 is a reasonable estimate of what we will require in '87-88. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , the Minister has talked about increases in the minimum wage and how they haven't kept up with the industrial wage index over the past number of years. Payment of Wages Fund was established in 1980, I believe, at $1,200 per employee , maximum. Why hasn't there been any consideration given to increasing that amount with the industrial wage index? HON. A.

MACKLING: I'm given to understand that even at that figure, it recovers about 90 percent of the outstanding wages. I might say also that there have been discussions with the Consumer and Corporate Ministers - I wear that hat as well - under amendments to The Bankruptcy Act to provide for a Payment of Wages Fund.

Regrettably, that hasn't proceeded to any extent but certainly an ongoing concern of our government , both from the point of view of protection of wages - and it certainly would be of great assistance because at the present time the courts have a very mixed attitude in respect to the priority of wages in the event of bankruptcy. You may recall - I don't know whether I commented on this last year or not - there was a deemed trust provision to our legislation which regrettably was not upheld by our Court of Appeal.

While deemed trust provisions have been found supportable by other Courts of Appeal, our Court of Appeal and one other Court of Appeal - I'm just trying to recall which one now - went the other way. We applied to the Supreme Court for leave to appeal and were denied.

So I've just recently written to Harvie Andre , with whom I disagree violently on one other matter, asking him to further the concerns that we have in this area - payment of wages - by either changing the bankruptcy law to provide for the priority of wages in the deemed trust provisions , or to develop this Payment of Wages Fund, which has been discussed with the provinces but has not materialized yet. MR. G. MERCIER: In how many cases in'85-86 and '86-87 did the lost wages exceed $1,200.00? HON. A.

MACKLING: Well, the answer I have again is that the payment from the fund generally satisfied about 90 percent of the cases. Ninety percent would receive all of the wages that were due to them under that ceiling. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(dX3)-pass. 2.(eX1) Salaries , Labour Board - the Member for Brandon West . MR. J. McCRAE: I'd like to ask the Minister if he's made any appointments lately to the Labour Board. HON. A. MACKLING: Recommendations have been received from the chairperson following his communication with both the management side and the trade union side in respect to proposed nominations.

The chairperson has referred those names to me. I will be taking them in due course for further consideration by my colleagues. MR. J. McCRAE: The Minister says "in due course" and my mind boggles a little bit because when I asked questions about the appointments he made in February and then rescinded in March, the Minister's explanation was that in February, when he first made the appoinments , there was some urgency ; and now we're at June 1, almost June 2, and now we're going to hear about this in due course. I understand the chairman of the board turned those names over to the Minister recently.

If there's so much urgency back in February, what's happened between February and March when the positions were rescinded to make it so that there's no urgency anymore? 2632

Monday, 1 June, 1987 HON . A. M ACKLI NG: The hon ourable memb er, obviously - and I don 't expect him to recall the deta ils of my answe r I gave him in the House . MR. J. McCRAE: I do recall. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, then he will recall my indicating that at the time I had been away. I did take a break in the winter and then there was a period when I came down with that very persistent flu . When I returned to the office, I was given to understand that there was some concern, some urgency , with proceeding because the appointments had become due .

I proceeded to take the matter to Cabinet, and as I indicated, following the initial decision , I realized that there was a net reduc tion of one woman from the Labour Board and we'd had a concern prior to these appointments that there be certainly a keeping of the number of women on the board . If anything, we wanted to see more women on the board because there's no parity at all. There's a relative dominance of men; perhaps that reflects the workplace .

But we feel we want to have more representation by women on the board and a request was made through the chairperson to both parties to reconsider those names so that we could have better representation by women. MR. J. McCRAE: Mr.

Chairman, we are reminded almost daily by honourable members of the New Democratic Party that 14 of the last 18 years, or 13 of the last 17 years , something like that , the New Democrats have been in power in this province, and it's passing strange that in the spring of 1987 the Minister of Labour, who's been around for many of those years , should start to understand that there 's a dominance of men on the Labour Board. I really find this explanation hard to swallow. If it's a new-found interest in seeing that women are properly represented on the board , I say fine, good, it's about time .

But there 's something not ringing quite true here , because the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation, who is responsible for the Status of Women , will tell this Minister, if he doesn't already know, that we've had in this province a policy for the appointment of women to boards and agencies for some time. She could also tell the Minister what that policy is. I sympathize with the Minister; I had some health problems this winter, too, and I d idn 't have the opportunity to get away as he did.

I really find this quite incredible that the Minister should appoint people to the board and then rescind those appointments. Is there something wrong with the appointments that were made, that for the sake of one woman he had to rescind the appointments for two people on the management side, two people on the labour side? You know , I don't know Mr. Tripp , for instance . I have not had the pleasure of meeting the gentleman; but I know of a Mr. Gardner, a well-known labour lawyer, and have no reason to think he couldn 't do a fine job as a member of the Labour Board .

For the sake of, I take it, one appo intment, one woman for the labour side and one woman for the employer side, the Minister chose to rescind four appointments . All this doesn't seem to add up. The timing is awfully strange, too. HON. A. MACKLING : Mr. Chairperson , the honourab le member can have all of the suspicion s and doubt s. The balance of the representation on the board , as the honourable member knows , is for an equality and out of a concern to ensure that at the very least we had the same kind of balance that we had in the past.

I requested that we only proceed with four from each side rather than pull back two from each side , to afford each party an opportun ity to see whether or not at least one or more of those - the balance of four positions - could be a woman . The honourable member knows , or may recall , one of the women representatives on the board , on the management side, Ms. Laurina Perfume, did not wish to be reappointed. There was , therefore, going to be only one woman on the board on the managemen t side, compared to 11 -(Interjection)- well, 11 positions and on the employee side, there were three women representatives .

I would have hoped that we ' d ge t two women recommended from the management side . That would give us three women on each side of the balanc e. I won 't comment on the recommendations I've received, because that's a matter that I have to bring forward. MR. J. McCRAE: Has the Minister written letters of apology to the four whose appointments he rescinded three weeks later? HON. A. MACKLING: I don't think that's necessary. MR. J. McCRAE: Some people see things differently, I guess .

The Premier and the Attorney-General and this Mini ster have referred at various times to the Manitoba Labour Board as a quasi-judicial body, a judicial body, or the judicial arm of the Government of Manitoba . Is it the position of this Minister and, by extension , all his Cabinet colleagues , that judges , for instance , in the Province of Manitoba or anywhere in the country should maintain their contacts with political parties and their contacts with their former occupations , and that they should continue to donate money to pol itical parties? HON. A.

MACKLING: Quasi-judicial tribunals are distinct from judicial tribunals , and the honourable member appreciates the differences . I don 't think this is the occasion when I give the honourable member my assessment as to why those differences have been built into the system . If the honourable member would like, I will take some time to do that. Let me say that quasi-judicial tribunals are an extension of government, a direct extension of government. They are at arm 's length, but they 're an extension of government.

Judicial tribunals, on the other hand, have been deliberately fashioned to be a complete separation from government. Thus it was that judges , once appointed to cour ts, the federa l courts , lost their right even to vote, let alone participate and be contributo rs to a polit ical party. They became political eunuchs in the fullest sense, not even having the right to vote. That is being subjec t to review at the present time . I think the Attorn ey-General , in the review that's been made of provisions of the Char ter, has brought to our 2633

Monday, 1 June, 1987 attention the concern that judges feel that they should not be denied the right to vote. Certainly, people who are appointed to adminis trative tribunals have never been put in the same category, have been recognized to be participants in the fullest sense of any processes availab le to citizens , including pol iti cal involvement, campaigning or otherwise. That is certainly not the case in respect to judicial tribunals. MR. J. McCRAE: The Minister 's referenc e to a direct extension of the government was a pretty telling comment.

Of course, he was quick to add, " but they are at arm 's length ," and this is what we've been hearing a lot of with respect to the Labour Board and other boards and agencies of this government . The Honourable Member for Kildonan wants to get into the act and remind us that it's management and labour on the board , and I wish he would take note of the fact that ther e are no employee representatives on that board. There are no representatives of non union employees. There are no representatives of in plant-type union employees.

There are representatives of the friends of the New Democratic Party on the employee side . I can't comment so much on the employer side , but the Minister keeps forgetting that there are workers out there who are governed by these two bodies, the employer side and the union side. This is something I've been reminding the Minister about quite a lot, and I wonder if the recommendations that have been placed on his desk contain names - I know there will be names of women, which I applaud - but will those names be names of representatives of working people , not unions.

I've been trying to make the point that there is a very distinct difference between a union leader and the people who he claims , in some cases, to represent and , in other cases , very adequately does represent. This is a point that I think the Minister should bear in mind and see if he can 't find some way to better represent the average working man and woman in this province . It's a very, very important principle , and I think it's time that in our society we recognized that there are very powerful forces on the organized union side as well as on the employer side .

Let's remember that many of the employers in this province are not international employers, as some of the unions are international unions and , of course , many of the unions in our province are not international too. So a lot of employers are small, and whose interests are very, very much the same as are employees. Certainly , that is the case to a large extent in non-union shops . But I do ask the Minister to keep some of those things in mind when appointments are being made to the board .

Maybe we should be getting away from perhaps getting the list - maybe the re should be a different way of appointing members to the board , so that we don't end up with people who are obviously good .friends of the political parties . We know that the lists I have show that a number of the members of the Labour Board - whom I hate to impugn in any way at all because I would like to believe that the decisions they make are totally fair aml totally equitable and non-biased in any way.

But when we know that they have connections to the New Democratic Party , certainly by virtue of cash donations to the party, it makes one wonder, especially in view of some of the situations that have been developing in this province . The Member for Kildonan can keep shaking his head until it falls right off - I don 't care. In fact , we might be better served if it did . MR. M. DOLIN: When you start facing reality , I'll stop shaking my head. MR. J. McCRAE: The member wants me to face reality. The fact is I have faced the reality.

I know the reality , and the reality is not very pleasant for the workingmen and women of this province. MR. M. DOLIN: I didn't hear anything about Obie Baizley when you guys were government, who was a former Tory Cabinet Minister, as chairman of the board. You forget to mention who you people appoint, so let's not be so holier than thou, Jim . MR. J. McCRAE: Mr. Chairman, the Member for Kildonan should raise his hand if he wants to get into the debate .

The point is the law that we have before us has been very carefully tailored for the union movement in this province , and then this Minister stacks the Labour Board with so many union representatives, forgetting all the time about the working people of this province and forgetting that we need very much to be competitive in this province. We need a fair investment climate for businesses to locate here. Obviously , it is businesses that put people to work, so there is no need for us to apologize when we try to promote a healthy business climate in this province either.

I just ask these things of the Minister and that he keep them in mind when the time for appoin tments comes. Maybe there 's nothing wrong with a little reform when it comes to making appointments to such important boards as the Manitoba Labour Board. I wouldn 't be making these comments if everything I had witnessed in the last year or two had been demonstrably fair and equitable to the working people of this province . HON. A. MACKLING: Well, to the extent that what the honourable member is saying indicates a lack of fairness or reasonableness on the part of the board, I vehemently disagree .

I think the board has conducted itself in a fair and reasonable manner, and I think tha t the record of the board in respect to its adjudications speaks for itself. The courts of this province and of this land, including the Supreme Court, have had occasion to adjudicate on the decisions and the care in which this board has handled the cases that come before it, and I find no reason to be troubled about the continuing excellence of this board in respect to labour matters that come before it. I reject categorically the suggestion that somehow there is inadequacy and an unfairness and a prejudice there.

Historically , the Labour Board has been representative of the two significant factors in the industrial society in which we live, industrial and manufacturing society in which we live. They reflect the composition of the board by management and by organized workers who , over the years , have developed significant skills in adjudicating the questions that arise 2634

Monday, 1 June, 1987 under The Lab our Relations Act, involving certificatio n, the conduct of labour relations by both parties to the labour relations equation , and questions of decertification where they arise, all of the matters that properly are there before that tribunal under The Labour Relations Act. I think they do an excellent job and I have no reason to agree with the honourable member's suggestions at all. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman, the annual report indicates that the board dealt with a relatively small number of cases under The Workplace Safety and Health Act. Could the Minister briefly outline the kinds of cases that were brought under that act to the board? Do these in any way involve instances where an employee refused to work under conditions that he felt were detrimental? HON. A. MACKLING: A number of cases that the chairperson, Mr. John Korpesho - I should introduce you - has pointed out to me were smoking in the workplace, unsafe working conditions, scaffolding, lead emissions in air. That's a quick cross-section. MR. G.

MERCIER: There were apparently two rulings made. Can the Minister briefly outline what those rulings were? HON. A. MACKLING: The chairperson would have to check the records and his notes. One of the orders involved made by the board - it was a consent order after a hearing - the board has just recently confirmed an order that the parties agreed to in connection with the safe handling of batteries , lead emissions. MR. G. MERCIER: The Minister doesn't ... information with respect to the other ruling that's not available. HON. A. MACKLING: I'm sorry, I can't.

If you can give us - it's just a line there in the report that says "two rulings"? MR. G. MERCIER: M'huh. HON. A. MACKLING: I'm sorry. MR. G. MERCIER: Well, if the Minister could supply that to us at a later date. The report also indicates there were another six applications withdrawn! Are those withdrawn after some sort of discussion or conciliation or mediation between parties? HON. A. MACKLING: I'm advised that those cases were likely the result of mediation on the part of the board and then the parties got together and agreed to the necessary satisfaction of the problem . MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(fX1)-pass. 2635 MR.

J. McCRAE: Are we in Conciliation and Mediatio n Services ? MR. CHAIRMAN : Yes, Conciliation and Mediation Services. The Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: I understand the director of this branch has retired or - I think the Minister dealt with that in his opening statement. Has he been replaced? HON. A. MACKLING: The competition has been advertised. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Has this area been involved in the Supervalu strike that's to take place Wednesday night? HON. A.

MACKLING: I just want to introduce Jim Davage, who is with us now; and the answer is yes, there is a conciliation officer. MR. G. MERCIER: There has been? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes. MR. G. MERCIER: There were recommendations made to both parties? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, and there are continuing talks with the parties. MR. G. MERCIER: The conciliation is continuing right up until Wednesday, I guess, until the final . HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, and thereafter. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(fX1)-pass ; 2.(fX2)-pass. 2.(

g) Apprenticeship and Training:

(1) Salaries - the Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: I just wonder what the long-term plans for this part of the department are . I see there is a reduction of a staff year and that reflects the elimination of a vacant Manager of Field Services position. I am just wondering if the Minister can very briefly tell me if there are any longer-term plans for Apprenticeship and Training in our province, or is the thrust of this type of thing going to be more and more in the Employment Services Department? HON. A.

MACKLING: There is ongoing concern in respect to the area of Apprenticeship and Training , particularly in view of the signals that the Federal Government has been sending, indicating their unwillingness to continue the level of funding that they provide for Apprenticeship and Training, particularly through the Community Colleges, and the whole area is under very active consideration to reinforce , particularly, our concern that Apprenticeship and Training is still a very important segment of the neede d programs in the province . MR. J.

McCRAE: The hope for the next year is the registration of approximately 1,000 apprentices. How

Monday, 1 June, 1987 many were registered in the last fiscal year, and the year before that? Which direction are we going, regardless of the Federal Government's part. HON. A. MACKLING: My understanding is that the total enrolment has been on the increase from 2,500 to 3,400 with a significant part of that being with respect to Native employment on the northern training . MR. J. McCRAE: Is this program involved with the Limestone Training ~rogram? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, we're involved in registration of the apprentices and the curriculum of the program. MR. J.

McCRAE: Would you know how many people have registered for training with the Limestone training plan, and how many have got employment with Limestone? HON. A. MACKLING: I'm given to understand that full detail of that would have to come from the Employment Services branch , but we have 450 registered at the present time , approximately . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Norbert . MR. G. MERCIER: Can the Minister indicate the success of the apprenticeship . and training programs over the past number of years? How many people are obtaining permanent employment as a result of these programs?

Is there any monitoring or study of it to indicate the number who are successfully obtaining permanent employment? HON. A. MACKLING: I'm given to understand that all of this is market-oriented and is fully supported by both management and union points of view, and that in many instances, the apprentices are fully employed while they're under apprenticeship, and continue in full employment when they receive their journeyperson status. MR. G. MERCIER: So there's no hard statistics, though, or monitoring of it? HON. A. MACKLING: No, I don't believe there are stats.

I think there is an assumption that once they have attained their trade status, their chances of being fully employed are very, very high. There are times when, of course, in a particular field, whether it be in the construction trade, there is some reduction in the workforce seasonally. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(g)(1)-pass; 2.(g)(2)-pass . 2.(h)

(1) Pension Commission : Salaries - the Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: I think in the future the Minister might want to consider "journeyer ," rather than "journeyperson ." Try it and see how it feels. How many applications since the legislation was passed in the last Session? In the last Session, we passed legislation dealing with the withdrawal of surplus pension funds, and I'd like to ask the Minister how many applications have been made since that legislation was passed to the Pension Commission; and how many applications were granted and how many were declined? HON. A.

MACKLING: I want to introduce Gail Feindel. The superintendent of Pensions has left the service. He got a very attractive offer, I believe, in Edmonton. That position is going to the subject of competition within the department . I'll get the number as quickly I can. I don't believe there has been any final adjudication or any determination by the Pension Commission yet on the cases that were pending. MR. J. McCRAE: Was there a report of the Pension Commission filed? I don't have it amongst all my documents. Was there a report filed? HON. A. MACKLING: No, I don't believe so. There is never. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: I thought there was a separate report. HON. A. MACKLING: I don 't think there 's a separate Pension Commission report. It's a combined report; it's within the departmental report. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: So all we would have . . . HON. A. MACKLING: -(Interjection)- Money saving, I'm given to understand, which is . . . I should get that on the record . Did you identify me, please? MR. CHAIRMAN: I can now. Mr. Minister . HON. A.

MACKLING: I'm given to understand that economy in including the Pensions Report within the department report was to effect a saving to the department. MR. J. McCRAE: You wouldn't happen to know - I'd like to give you the opportunity to tell us how much you saved by doing it that way. HON. A. · MACKUNG: A couple of thousand dollars likely, and we run a very tight ship '. MR. J. McCAAE: The people who use the Brandon General Hospital will be pleased to hear that, to know that in one area of spending in this government, we have found a saving. I appreciate that; it's good to hear that . HON. A.

MACKLING: There have been many other instances, Mr. Chairperson, where we pinched and squeezed to make sure that we were getting full value for our dollar. 2636

Monday, 1 June, 1987 MR. J. McCRAE: The Minister is telling us that so far all we've got is applications and they haven't been processed? HON. A. MACKLING: That's correct. ,· MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Norbert . MR. G. MERCIER: I believe it was last year that 'legislation was passed relative to the withdrawal of surplus refund monies? HON. A. MACKLING

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	33-2-59b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	33rd 2nd hansardpdf 59b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	05d1bee94758369763c6451c4da3b3517f12fc3a

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).