Manitoba Committee Hansard — 6 June 1977 (Intergovernmental Affairs Committee, Sitting 1, 30th Legislature, 4th Session)

30-4-ir1

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Legislative Assembly of Manitoba HEARING OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS Chairman Mr. William Jenkins Constituency of Logan MONDAY, June 6, 1977, 10:00 a.m. Printed by P.N. Crosbie- Queen's Printer for the Province of Manitoba

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 III E: 10:00 a.m. t CHAIRMAN, Mr. William Jenkins. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. The Committee will come to order. This is the fi rst meeti ng of the justrial Relations Committee and we have the fo llow ing bills before the Committee for nsideration: Bill No. 26-

An Act to amend The Apprenticeship and Tradesmen's Qual ifications Act. Bill No. 45 -

An Act to amend The Vaca tions With Pay Act. Bill No. 47 -

An Act to amend The Department of Labour Act. Bill No. 50 -

An Act to amend The Payment of Wages Act. Bill No. 65 -

An Act to amend The Employment Standards Act (2). The only representations that I have so far on the list are twelve people on Bill No. 65. Is there yone wishing to make representation on any of the other bills before the Committee or maybe I ould read out the names of the people who are here making representation on Bill No. 65 and if you e not included and wish to make a presenta tion on that brief, you can come forward and give me 1ur name at the microphone. 1. Mr. Art Coulter, Manitoba Federation of Labour. 2. Deput y Mayor Bernar d Wolfe. 3. Mr. H. A. Crewson, Man itoba Health Organiza tion. 4. Mr.

Paul Hucal . 5. Dave Grant, Mayor's Office. 6. Mr. Tony Swann, Canadian Man ufacturers' Association. 7. Hugh Delaney, Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce. 8. Canadian Association of In dustrial Mechanical and Allie d Workers. 9. Mr. Hin ings, represe nting fo ur Aerospace companies. (Is stroked out.) 10. 11. Mr. Holmes, Labour Relations Counci l. 12. Mr. Hicks, Campbell Soup Company, Brandon. 13. Man itoba Cham bers of Commerce, Mr. Roland Painchaud. I have two more that have been just added. 14 . The Manitoba Fashion In stitute, Mr. Ray Winston. 15. Canadian Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Ral ph King.

Is there anyone else who wishes to make presenta tions on any of the bill s that we have including 11 No. 65? MR. ROBERT GOODWIN: My name is Goodwin and I wish to make representation on Bill No. 50, e Act to amend The Payment of Wages Act. MR. CHAIRMAN: Bill No. 50. No fur ther representations? I have another one for Bill No. 65 presenting Versa tile Man ufactu ring, Mr. Eric Nuer enbur g. We only have the one representation on Bill No. 50. Is it the Committee's will to hear that brief and en carry on with Bill No. 65? (Agreed) All right then, Mr. Goodwi n. MR. GOODWIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I' ve had photostatic copies of my notes prepared and 1e Clerk has them and will distribute them. I had written a le tter to the Committee conc erning this bill �cause I had under stood that it was mee ting on Saturday afte rnoon and I was going to be 1avai lable so when I heard that it was moved to today, I thought I would come down and present it yself in person. MR. CHAIRMAN: You got our message, Mr. Goodwin. MR. GOODWIN: Thank you very much, Sir. My concern, which is stated in the le tter which is 3fore you, relates to two matters.

Firstly, there is a confl ict in the provisions of The Payment of rages Act and The Corporations Act with respect to the di rectors' liabili ty for wages and, secondly, I n concerned about the procedu res whic h have been established under The Payment of Wages Act tr the issuance of orders and the enforcement thereof. The Payment of Wages Act provides in

Section 5 that a di rector of a corporation is secondarily �ble for the wages for an amount not exceeding two months and twelve months vacat ion pay, two ills. I note that Bill No. 5 states in the opening words of

Section 5 that it's notwithstanding any other et of the Leg islature so presumably it has precedence over The Corporations Act. But there is othing in either of the two bill s which states that once the liabil ity under one of the Acts has been · �tisfied, that there is no further liabili ty of the di rector. I know from personal experience of one tuation, where di rectors were bei ng sued und er the provisions of The Corporations Act and an rder was taken out at the same time under The Payment of Wages Act.

Now, I don't know, frankly if tey pay the liabili ty under The Payment of Wages Act, that they have met their responsibil ities and tat The Corporations Act action will cease. I think it should be clear in any event. 1

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 The other major concern - and this real ly is my major concern on The Payment of Wages Act that there is apparent lack of natural justice in the procedures set out tor the enforcement of ordt As I und erstand the procedure, the complaint cou ld be made to the Employment Standards Divis of the Department of Labour and the person heari ng the complain t cou ld, based upon the evidenc1 the com plaina nt alone, make an order award ing wages. This order could then be registered in County Court and it becomes an official court order and can be enforced as such.

Also, at the same time, if the corporation fai ls or refuses to make payment for whatever reasor be it val id or otherwise - a similar order can be made against the directors of the corporat whereby they become jointly and seve rally liable for the wages. Now, I note that there is no provis that there be any sort of notification to any person conc erning the fact that a com plaint has be made, that an order might be made against them, nor is there any provision for a hea ring whic h tal place before the order is made.

The re is provision for a heari ng, of course, but it is only after an on has been made and it is a review of the Order of the Employment Standards Divisi on. lf for any rea� the time periods, which are set forth in the Act, are missed by virtue of inadvertence or sheer neg iE then this is a Court Order and it awards a money judgm ent. That, I think, is contrary to the rule� natural justice and is a procedure which ought to be amended. I note that if there is some conc1 that people will evade their responsibili ties in respect of payment of wages, that you have propm an amendment to

Section 7 of the Act which will in effect make the wages in the employer's har trust funds in favour of the employee, and it would seem as if, on a bankru ptcy situation, for exam� which you must be concerned about, that the employee will have a first charge in respect of · ban krupt's assets for his wages.

So there is very little, if any, likel ihood of someone evad ing totally responsibil ity for the payment of wages. lt is also important to note that there is no de fi nition in The Payment of Wages Act as to who i dir ector of a corporation and I understand this matter is under conside ration by the Court of Quee Bench right now. At least I haven't heard of the ruling com ing down .

I also understand that the Labour Board is taking the position that if the fact of a person bein director is chall enged, they rule that he is a director, ostensibl y or presumably on the grounds that will have a greater abil ity to pursue the matter further to the courts by way of appeal. We ll, it seeml me this is a pretty imperfect base upon which to make such an award. There ought to be someth in� the bill which states just exactly who a director is and I suggest the appropriate wording should some reference to a di rector as that term is found in The Corporations Act of the province.

That's my submission, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Goodwin. Are there any questions any mem bers of 1 Committee may have? Mr. Wilson. MR. WILSON: I'm just ac tually looking for an opinion, Mr. Goodwin, but it seems to me that . Min d you, the Corporation Act has been changed, but in the past relatives and lawyers who plac themselves as a director in order to quali fy, und er your defi nition would they now be responsible wages if an order was issued agai nst "dir ector"? MR. GOODWIN: Yes, they would be, unless they are hold ing the share in trust as a qual ifyi share.

Then under the Corporations Act they woul dn' t necessarily be li able but they certainl y rr still be liable under The Payment of Wages Act. MR. CHAIRMAN: Any futher questions? Heari ng none, thank you. MR. GOODWIN: Thank you, Mr. Chair man. MR. CHAIRMAN: Bill (No. 65),

An Act to amend The Employment Standards Act. Mr. ArtCoul1 Manitoba Federation of Labour. Mr. Thiebault. MR. NELS THIBAUL T: Mr. Chairman, you will note that I am not Mr. Art Coulter, not that then any di fference between us in what we intend to represent here today. I do have a few copies of sol brief comment in respect to Bill 65, whic h I can offer here. The da te is inc orrect since it was intend to appear here on Saturday and there is one typographical error on Page 2, wh ich I have correc1 and you will note as we reach that

c) section on Page 2. The Manitoba Federa tion of Labour has in previous years made representations to govern men· the matter of voluntary overtime. We did so for valid reasons, some of whic h are: 1. The health and safety of workpersons. 2. Work persons expectation to benefit socially from new technolo gical methods in indus tr: 3. Elim ination of an area of strife between management and labour by standardization of daily a weekly hours of work. We have pursued for volu ntary overtime despite the historical opposition from "old school ty� empl oyers.

They predicted economic disaster when near a century ago workers in North Ameri agitated for dec rease in the fourteen hour day and the seven day work week. As each improvmen· labour standards occu rred they reiterated their fear; fear whic h in the end proved ground less. 2

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 Bill 65, as the M.F .L . und erstands, primarily establis hes that overtime work will be performed on a untary basis. This principle featu re is a paramount one and must not be undercut by various >visos. Ther e is provision now for overtime work to be performed under emergency ci rcumstances 1ich quite adequately takes care of a situation which might arise affect ing personal safety or ntinuanc e of employment wher e an equipment breakdown occu rs.

Over time work should not be relied upon by any emplo yer for the purpose of production of goods. is defeats the entire purpose of standar diz ed hours of work and detracts from employment of ditional persons, particularly in larger operations. The M. F.L. has expressed concern if Bill 65 does in fact al low employers to bargain with its 1ployees for co mpulsory work time over and above the limits establis hed in the Employment andards Act. We see these unfavourable possibil ities: (

a) The employer demand for extra work time lea ding to a locout or strike. (

b) The emp loyer demand bei ng made for the advantage of bargaining leverage. (

c) The employer advantage in influencing extra work time where empl oyees are not union ized or 1ere they are represented by an employee association. The proposed incr ease in overtime premium from one and ahalf to one and three-q uarter times 11, we hope, act as a deterrent; that is, will discourage those employers who feel they must rely on rertime in runn ing thei r busine ss to rethink the matter. We favour the clear -cut factor of one and ree-q uarter times rather than the involvement of calculating fri nge benefits.

Should the latter 1come permissible, differences would arise as to the hourly value of fri nge benefits. Such value :>uld have to be pre-ca lcu lated, agreed upon and regi stered in some formal V'{ay. The fact should be noted that several employers operate quite ef ficiently on the basis of mutual spect and under standing with employees in respect to overtime work. Where such advanced lations exist, the factor of compulsion is elimi nated . General ly and in conclusion, the MFL views Bill 65 as a fu rther advance in labour standards, one at we will monitor closely to evalua te the experience with.

We apprecia te the government's itiative in lea din g the way with legislation that rec ognizes the social expectations of work persons this province. That is the submission of the Manitoba Federa tion of Labour. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Th ibault. I have some members that wish to ask you some Jestions. Mr. Green . MR. GREEN: Mr. Thib ault, I am particula rly interested in the overtime provisions of this bill.

Would >e correct in saying that with respect to overtime the vast majority of employers and employees who ave coll ective bargai ning arrangements have between themselves come to satisfactory ·rangements with respect to overtime? MR. THIBAUL T: I think it would be correct, Mr. Green, to say that the vast majority, that is within 1e organiz ed

section ... MR. GREEN: Organized. I said where coll ective bargai ning exists. MR. THIBAUL T: ... have reached an agreement in one form or another on what the conditions �spec ting overtime shall be.

I am not prepared to accept the suggestion that you may be making that 1e agreements are all happy ones, because we do have the situation and the MFL brief indicates that rhere we have advanced thinking within the whole ind ustrial area, that we have happy experiences rhere the collective agreements or other arrangements provide for strictly volun tary overtime but, n the other ha nd, we have agreements that do not contain volu ntary overtime but it still is an rrangement on overtime, co mpulsory though it be.

The compuls ory aspect has been contained in 1ose agreements by virtue of the over-influence of the employer at the bargaining table or in some )rm or another an over-infl uence that labour was not prepared to strike back and has taken dvantage of get ting a compulsory overtime co ndi tion in that particular agreement. MR. GREEN: We ll, Mr . Thib ault, then I will have to amend my que stion. Is it a fact that under olle ctive bargaining that the vast majority of employers and emp loyees, wher e it is organized, have eached ag reement with respect to overtime? MR. THIBAUL T: Oh, there's no question, Mr. Gree n.

That suggestion would be correct. MR. GREEN: And when you say that the agreements are not all happy ones, I would presume nd you will correct me if I am wrong -t hat all of your agreements with regard to wages are not 1appy ones? MR. THIBAUL T: We're not talking about wages here today, but on the other hand if we compare he approach to wages and approach to overtime, we' ll find a lot of strikes occu rring over wages . vhere they don't occur over the issue of overtime, and that makes a very qua lified di fference in what ve are ta lking about here. MR.

GREEN: Wel l, can I repeat my question because I am aware of the co ll ective bargai ning 3

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 process and I know that rarely does a union in col le ctive bargaining regard all of the provisions of agreement as happy•ones. They could be better than what they have got, that that's one of featu res of co llective bargaining. MR. THIBAUL T: Wel l, at the part of the unhappy life we live, sometimes an inadeq uate so system, that's a natural consequence, yes. MR.

GREEN: I, by the way, have no al lusions of making it perfectly happy even with a so-cal much better social system, that there will still be problems that people have to live with and I suggesting that the vast majority of organized col lective bargaining has resulted in agreement v respect to overtime. Sometimes it is comple tely volu ntary. Sometimes a cert ain number of hours com mitted by the union as being hours that the men will work. Sometimes there is provis requiring overtime personnel to be selec ted on a seniority basis.

But there are arrangments that h. been arrived at between the employer and the employee by mean!) of the col le ctive bargain process, in the vast majority of cases. MR. THIBAUL T: All that is true. I don't know if you are asking me a question .. . MR. GREEN: Yes, it is a question. MR. THIBAUL T: ... but I'm not sure I am agreei ng with your evalua tion insofar as justifying open aspect of the bill in it still being a negotiable question.

The brief here expresses some conc1 as to what might possibly happen and we have expressed those concerns based on the fact that th will now be primarily a volu ntary overtimebi ll. This will reflect itself at the bargaining table, where employer who has now a compulsory overtime feature will in effect lose that and will try to sustai through the process of coll ective bargaining. We're expressing a possible concern that leaving the open end can cr eate some ind ustrial unn I think we have to be entitled to put that thought forward for consider ation of this Committee. MR.

GREEN: I'm sorry; I assure you that I am not attempting to argue the position. I am mer trying to elicit from you what the facts are, and if I am correct in thinking that in a vast majorit� cases the employer and the employee have arrived at col lective agreements with regard to 1 provision of overtime, that's all that I am trying to determine. MR. THIBAUL T: it's not sufficient to stop at that point, if I might respectfully say so, because will be now bargaining under a bill that no longer gives the employer the built-in advantage where1 old Act says the worker shall be required to work.

Now this has been removed and it cr eates an co ndi tion that empl oyers are going to face in the event of new col lective bargaining. MR. GREEN: We ll, we would not be better off in taking out that provision. lt seems to me that ne with that provision in it, despite the fact that there is presently a provision which you say and I do ag ree, requires people to work overtime, despite that fact, the col lective bargaining process � resulted in many negotia ting agreements where overtime is volu ntary, and therefore the colle ct bargaining process has overcome what you say is a provision of co mpulsory overtime.

Don't y think it would be muc h more easy to overcome, or to abide with a provision that calls for volu nt1 overtime? MR. THIBAUL T: No, we just don' t happen to agree at that point. I don't think we can base c experiences or reach conclusion from our experience of what is the co ndi tion respec ting overtir within the organ ized sector, because a minority of contracts within the organiz ed sector would ha the volu ntary overtime to start with.

In any event, the organized sector represents a minority sector of the total Manitoba work ton we talk in terms of roughl y one- third, and we cannot exclude what happens to employees who are r unionized, employees who are under employee assoc iations with the old company union system, we used to refer to it. There is more going here than justthe organized sector orwhat thatexperien is. MR. GREEN: We ll, Mr. Thib ault, you know I'm trying to get some information and if it will or result in a debate, I'll save my de bate for the Legisla ture. MR.

THIBAULT: I don' t want to appear not to be answering your question, Mr. Green, but itwoL be helpful if you would put the question without the additional comments that you are making MR. GREEN: I will try to put the question agai n. There is an existing Act whic h you say requires; employee to work overtime. The Act before these changes are made - is that a com plic att que stion?.,-- you say requires the employee to work overtime. MR. THIBAUL T: That's what the curr ect Act is. MR.

GREEN: The existing Act, or the bill that's before you, makes it abundantly clear that overtin is not compuls ory by law and that it is not consid ered a management right. MR. THIBAUL T: That appears to be what the draft bill intends. MR. GREEN: That under the old Act, despite the requirement to work overtime, in some collecti• bargain ing arrangements the emplo yees have su cceeded in.bargai ning for volu ntary overtime? 4

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 MR. THIBAUL T: That is correct. MR. GREEN: And in many other cases the emplo yer and the employee have come to an ·eement, although you say not a happy one, respec ting some overtime hours? MR. THIBAUL T: Right, unhappily true. MR. GREEN: The new law whic h indica tes that it's not management right to require . overtime, J ind icate co uld have some co ll ective bargaining di fficulties, the employer cou ld use this. He Jld use overtime as a lever. He cou ld say unle ss he gets some compulsory overtime, he is going to t give in on three percent in wages or something else.

He will use that in the bargaining process. MR. THIBAUL T: That's what our brief points out. MR. GREEN: Is he not able to use that in the bargaining process today, before the bill ? MR. THIBAUL T: Yes, but it's not the issue today that causes labour to resist ... MR. GREEN: I und erstand that. MR. THIBAUL T: ... because the Act al ready has strike one against the employee group. lt says ertime is required, you shall work it. We're missing the point of quali fied change in the cu rrent and � new proposed Act. MR. GREEN: This improvement in the provisions of the Act will hurt the co ll ective bargai ning :>cess?

MR. THIBAUL T: No, I'm not saying that, Mr. Green. On the whole, I am endor sing the bill. MR. GREEN: Okay, that's fi ne. Now, I want to deal with one more issue and that is, you are not ggesting that overtime hours be prohibited as work for less than minimum wage is prohibi ted? MR. THIBAUL T: I am not following the question. MR. GREEN: You are aware that there is a law against working for less than minimum wages. The 1ployee could break the law, if he does it he breaks the law and could be fi ned , or the employer who tys less than minimum wages could be fin ed.

In other words, you do not permit any agreement with gard to minimum wages; it is prohibited? MR. THIBAUL T: Yes, I'm following that. MR. GREEN: You would agree with that. MR. THIBAUL T: I'm fo ll owing that. I agree with that. MR. GREEN: You woul d not agree, or you are not suggesting that overtime hours be prohibited in e same way?. In other words, that it be il legal for any employer or employee to agree to work for ore than 40 hours a week. That's not what you're suggesting? MR. THIBAUL T: Wel l, I am suggesting that other than the proviso that allo ws overtime in nergency situations. MR.

GREEN: Would you say that any overtime except emergency overtime be prohi bited against e law? MR. THIBAUL T: Not any overtime because at the moment we exclude northern areas and >nstruction because of the certain conditions that prevail there. We're talking of a bill now that >plies to the particu lar groups of workers that are under it. MR. GREEN: I under stand. Let us take a packing house. Let us say that the employer wants to lve an extra sh ift put on but it's not an emergency, it's not something wher e property is going to be �strayed, and the men want to work that extra time fo rti me and a-half.

Would you prohibit that type ' arrangement? MR. THIBAUL T: Where it goes beyo nd the 40 -hour week you're talking? MR. GREEN: Right. MR. THIBAUL T: Yes, we have to speak against that as labour because as our brief says we favo ur te volu ntary aspect because it is a health question. MR. GREEN: ow, Mr. Thibault, let's not mix up the voluntary and the involuntary. I am asking for te moment, because I respect this, if that's what's being pursued, then I understand it.

Are you Jggesting that it be prohibited, that it not be voluntary but that it be illegal to work anybody over 40 ours a week except in an emergency, just as we are making it illegal to work on Sundays? MR. THIBAUL T: That's exactly what we're saying. MR. GREEN: Okay. MR. THIBAUL T: That the 8-hour day and the 40-h our week has no meaning if we corru pt it or rape or impose upon it by side agreements. MR. GREEN: Then you want, not volu ntary overtime, you want prohibi ted overtime, except in mergencies. To prohibit overtime except in emergencies? MR.

THIBAUL T: That is what we are saying, that ther e is certain emergency work that has to be . one and this we under stand and this we accept. MR. GREEN: But you would not agree with a situation where overtime was volu ntary after 40 ours and a colle ctive agreement was signed and then dur ing the term of the coll ective agreement 5

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 the men tried to enter into an arrangement with the company to work overtime on a volu ntary bas MR. THIBAUL T: No, we th ink that would be wrong. MR. GREEN: That would be a very bad feature of a collective bargaining process. That would b1 very unfair type of situation for the men to involve themselv es in? MR. THIBAUL T: We ll, you're making that suggestion and I don't think it is quite fair here for a member of the Committee to make a point as to why something is unfair ... MR. GREEN: All right. MR.

THIBAUL T: ... without rela ting it to the purpose of the MFL presentation. When we s safety and health of workers, this is our principle motivation. If we have any real concern for t safety and health of workers such as is reflected in the government's bill on Safety and Health in t Workplace, we wouldn't be sitting here thinking in terms of how you contravene a basic work day a1 a basic work week for the purposes of health and safety. MR. GREEN: I'll take out the word unfair and I am sorry that I used it. But the collective bargaini1 process depends on a cer tain amount of good faith on both sides.

Would that be correct? MR. THIBAUL T: Generally. MR. GREEN: And that it would not be advantageo us to the co ll ective bargaining process overtime hours co uld be nego tiated after a co lle ctive agreement was arrived at? MR. THIBAUL T: I'm not going to mix up the advantage or di sadvantage to the process bargaining. The point I am making and con tinue making is that the deviation from a set number hours that rela tes to the health and safety of workers is what we would be devia ting from if we allc le eway from the intent and purpose of an 8-hour day and a 40 -hour week.

I am not going to mix t1 question of the process of bargaining because that's another field. MR. GREEN: And the way that you would ac hie ve that is that you would prohibit any overtime, would not be vol untary, it would not be compul sory, it would be illegal, except in an emergency aft, 40 hours? MR. THIBAUL T: That's what presentation says. MR. GREEN: Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Paulley. MR. RUSSELL PAULLEV: Mr. Thib ault, would the Manitoba Federa tion of Labour prefer to have provision in this leg islation that would prohibit in the co ll ective bargaining process any reference I overtime? MR.

THI If BAUL T: I might, Mr. Min ister, I don't think you need to say that in the bill insolong as tt bill simply says that the em ployer cannot require overtime, overtime will be worked only undt certa in emergency situations. That in itself takes care of the principle question we are trying to ta around here. MR. PAULLEV: But basically, is my

interpretation correct of what you have said in your brief, th; we should remove, in effect, from the free collective bargaining process, reference to overtime hour You say "except in an emergency." We would have to have a pretty cle ar-cut de fi nition of the wor "emergen cy" would we not? What would be an emergency? MR. THIBAUL T: If the legal advisors for the government or the Committee feel that that essential, then I would have no objection to it.

I would further suggest, however, that the inclusion i the bill should relate itself to the principle concern of the government and the labour movement c whomever in the health and safety of workers consistent with the principle intent of Bill 83 recent! ena cted and about to be proclaimed. lt is upon this premise that I am projecting this position- n ottier. MR. PAULLEV: But at this present time, however, most coll ective agreements that I have seen and I see pretty wel l every one - contains provision for working overtime.

Some at time and a-hal some at double time, the rate is of no consequence in this di scussion. But many collectiv agreements have that provision. Now is the MF L suggesting that not only are we withdrawing th managerial rights to compel anybody to work overtime, that we would withdraw the employees rigt to enter into an agreement for the provision of it? MR. THIBAUL T: In effect that is what it would amount to. MR. PAULLEY: That's the position of the MF L. Would you be satisfied ... MR. THIBAUL T: And I don't think legisla tion has ever turned on certain reac tions by certa i1 sectors of society.

We might well have working people who are opposed to The Safety and Health i1 the Workplace Act. That doesn't make the Act wrong. lt doesn't project an improper princi ple. MR. PAULLEV: I'm not going to argue with you on that one .. MR. THIBAUL T: I think we're in the same circu mstances in regard to this bill. MR. PAULLEV: Would you, Mr. Thi bault, agree with one jurisdiction in the Uni ted States- and it': 6

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 only one that I was able to fi nd- the State of Kentucky, wher e there is an absolute prohibi tion of • overtime under any ci rcumstance except such things as we normall y refer to as a national aster? MR. THIBAUL T: I would be very interested and quite prepared, Mr. Min ister, along with my other 1ister friend, Mr. Gree n, that the three of us should take a trip to Kentucky and just see how that 1g is working out. MR. PAULLEY: Oh, I have taken a trip to Kentucky. MR.

THIBAUL T: lt seems to me that they have survived quite well under that bill and it may well be ne thing we should look further into. I may well be an advocate of the Kentucky legi slation. MR. PAULLEY: Okay, one more question, Mr. Chairman. You mention in your brief, you refer to 1 possibili ty of strike action as a result of this bill and the fai lure to enter into a co ll ective agreement ·espect of overtime.

How many incid ents are you aware of in the last twenty years wher e there. was equired provision, the word "requi red" to work overtime as is contained in the present Act, and :ich is going to be elimina ted under this one, so overtime cou ld be required for over 20 years how tny strikes are you aware of as a result of the application of that? MR. THIBAUL T: A very minimum number of strikes, Mr. Min ister, but primarily because the law in elf says to working people you are required to work overtime and the strike would not in effect be ainst the employer, it would be against the legislation of the province.

This was a factor in the nimum number of strikes but und er the new bill, with an open end right of employers ... for the 1ployer to bring the proposal or the demand to the bargaining table will create a whole new uation and we say possibly, quite possibly; we're pointing out the possibili ty of this. MR. PAULLEY: But, Mr. Thib ault, isn't that the present case under the present law that that can be area of col lective bargaini ng between an employer and a trade union, or a group of emplo yees? ; there now. MR. THIBAUL T: Well, it has been a matter of col lective bargaining, that is true, Mr.

Minister, but it s been a right of collective bargaining with the employer enjoying one or two strikes on his side, ·cause the law is on his side. lt cou nterposes the employees into a position where they have to 1pose what the law principally endor ses. it's a very di fficult situation and you guys got as much 1iskers at the bargai ning table as I have. MR. PAULLEY: Only because of my advanced years. You're just a youngster yet. MR. THIBAUL T: Than k you. Thank you very kindly, sir. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Wilson. MR. WILSON: I'd lik e to clear up a couple of things on your comments of the Man itoba Federation Labour.

You talked about your two friends on the Committee, I hope that that isn't a closed doo r tcause of some of the questions I might ask. I think under the health and safety question you said is was the only criteria. I wonder if you could com ment on the second jobs by organiz ed union embers. I think of fir emen and policemen and other people who engage in, sort of, second ful l-time bs. Would you outlaw that? If you are going to suggest here that this bill will outlaw overtime, �riod, and you talk about rape and corruption. Do you thin k that this doesn't go against the wishes your members and the huma n needs?

Maybe people might want to better their lot. Do you think ey really would be happy with government dicta ting a maximum of 40 hours, period, and outlawing •erything else? MR. THIBAUL T: Wel l, you seem to be posing several points. You fi rst talk about fi remen and I ·esume you're talking about public safety when you raise the question of fi remen. MR. WILSON: Yes. MR. THIBAUL T: And you come down to a react ion of employees generally if the government 1poses something. What, precisely, are you asking me? MR.

WILSON: Your presentation seems to indic ate that you're talking about outlawing overtime 1d you're talking about protecting your members because you represent the Manitoba Federa tion ' Labour and yet your members may very we ll go against your wishes and be engaged in ful l-time nployment; two jobs, in other words. I'm saying what is your comment on tha t? MR. THIBAUL T: I'm still not sure if you've asked me a question or just took the li berty to make a 'oad comment. MR. WILSON: I'll word it a dif ferent way.

What you're saying is ... you're representing your 1embers and you're suggesting you're going to protect your members by outlawing anything over 1d above a 40-ho ur work week. Are you going to have any directive or any suggestion to your 1embers that if you are successful in obtaining this objective then, if you are endorsing the bill, as a . tir union boss would you leave that up to their own personal choic e, or would you have a directive 1at would ind icate, we've got you this maximum 40-ho urwork week; we hope that you will, for health nd safety reasons, adhere to it. 7

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 MR. THIBAUL T: We ll, we certainly have a directive from the membersh ip of the MFL and I de know to what extent I am required to deal with authorities or lack of authorities. I don't know w authority you have from the constituents of your party. But apart from that extraneous matter, cert ain ly do have ender s. ation from the membersh ip of the MFL . The moment they call for a Sat and Health Act they place the responsibil ity upon the Federation to pursue for legislation that will just that - provide the greatest deg ree of safety and health protection to workers.

Where workers 1 compelled or in any way bamboozled or intrigued into enjoi ning , into working longer than a health set of hours, eight and forty at . the moment, then again, they are immedi ately under cutting their o health by working long hours. This was the whole problem in the old days, as our brjef refers to, when there was the 14 -hour d. when there was the seven day week, when the health and welf are of workers suffered through inju through im mature death. The whole principle doesn't change. You have to decide what side of 1 fence you're on.

Are you on the side of the fence of the bill that guarantees or assures protection workers in the sense that they don't have to work excess hours? This is what the MFL is concern about. This is the end orsation that the MFL has from its membership to pursue. MR. WILSON: Wel l, the answer I' m trying to get from you is ... Mr. Green was successful getting you to admit that you'd say "Yes, we're going to outlaw overtime." The question I want to ha you answer is, would you outlaw two jobs? MR. THIBAUL T: Which ones? Which ones? MR.

WILSON: In other words, in emergency fields would you outlaw, or take a stand to outl1 over 40 -hour work weeks? In other words, moonligh ting, if you want to say - two jobs? In ott words, if you are successful in getting your member s a maximum 40- hour week and they have t1 jobs, I think you can't have it both ways. You've got to stand up and be cou nted and say, "Yes, I� going to outlaw overtime and yes, I' m going to outlaw two jobs." MR. THIBAUL T: Wel l, the fi rst thing you are doing, sir, is confusing moonl ighting. Moonligh til has got nothing to do with what we are talk ing about.

Overtime is wher eJhe employer whom you we for in some way arranges with you to work more than the basic hours of work. That's overtirr Moon ligh ting is any individual may go and work after his work hours with his reg ular employer 1 some other employer or for himself, but for other employers. That's moonlig hting. I don't think we here to talk about moonli gh ting because that has happene d sinc e Methuselah. -(I nterjec tion)- T MLA's are the worst off enders. Of cou rse you are. MR. WILSON: All right. Well then since you're not willing to comment on that part, how abouttl emergency aspect? MR.

THIBAUL T: You mentioned some thing about firemen. Let's get down to firemen. lt seer that you had something about firemen. MR. WILSON: Well it's practical knowledge most of them run most of the painting companies town. There is no secret about that. All right, we'll talk about the .. .. MR. THIBAUL T: No, but I want to talk about firemen. Don't pose something and then run. This not a hit-and-run aff air. The question of firemen you earlier raised .. . MR. WILSON: What I wanted you to do was admit that you're here to outlaw overtime, perio under the guise of health and safety.

That's a terrific stand if you're going to also say that you do n approve of your membersh ip having two full- time jobs and you refuse to say that. So I'm going leave the matter lie right there. Now I wanted to ask you about emergency. MR. THIBAUL T: Wel l, it lie s very unsettled but that's your prerogative. · MR. WILSON: We ll, I'll le t you answer if you want. I haven't heard an answer. MR. THIBAUL T: If we're talk ing about firemen working, they come under what we ca ll tl emergency requirements, safety and health of persons, etc. MR. WILSON: Wel l, I use them as an example; there are many others. MR.

THIBAULT: Wel l, it was a poor example because the brief would bring them under the safe of people - public safety. The bill al ready provides for these escapes. MR. WILSON: We ll, you're talking about hours of sleep , etc. However, we're talking about livir and we're talking about the emergency aspect. I think of my own personal needs in this city ... wh do you think of the idea of including or making amendments to clear up this emergency sec tion. C you have any suggestions to help me?

I can think of snow-cle aring and maybe things as bridge repa and stuff li ke that, that would come to mind pertaining to emergenc y? I mean how is the governme1 to respond to whatdoesn't seem to be very clear in here.

Section 6 talks about civil disaster, and Wi emergency, and public emergency. Are you lea ving that vague term open to the

interpretation of board or some ruling body to determ ine what is a public emergency? MR. THIBAUL T: No, I think the party that drafts the Act, and I think the body that ena cts the Ac then it reverts back to the government or that department of government to interpret the Act. I dor 8

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 nk I'm in here to write the Act, to try to write the Act. We're here to point out certa in conc erns that � Federa tion has to the extent they und erstand the Act or the intentions of the Act. I can't get down th you into the question of dotting i's and crossing t's and what the fi nal lang uage will be, or who 11 make the dete rminations as to what a civil di saster or emergency is. lt may have to rest with some 1ard. The Labour Standards Board, I wo uld suppose. MR. WILSON: All right. MR. THIBAUL T; You and I can have a discussion on it.

I don't think we'll reach any profound or �ting conclusion. MR. WILSON: Wel l, if we are to make amendments, I was kind of looki ng for some suggestions. I ade a couple; maybe you could think two or three come to mind that you want to possibly exclude, >wever, if your desire is to outlaw overtime, period, then I guess that it would be up to the >Vernment. MR. THIBAUL T: We ll, may I make a correct ion, Mr. Chairman.

I think the gentleman is taking very 1fair advantage by con tinuing to say, "You are here to outlaw overtime, period ." That is a falsit y on s part; consciously he knows it to be because the brief very caref ully allo ws for emergency overtime > it's not outlawing overtime, period. I wish to make that correct ion for the record and for the ucidation of the gentleman . MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. McKenzie. MR. McKENZIE: Mr. Chai rman, through you to the Mr. Thibault. On the first page, you say here in Jur brief, overtime work shou ld not be relied upon by any employer for the purpose of production of oods.

Why did you not include the word "services" in there? MR. THIBAUL T: Wel l, goods to me incl ude services. You can say goods and services but there is a ttle difference really when you come down to the application, Mr. McKenzie. Take a production I ant, a machin ery plant, a clot hing plant, goods come out of it as opposed to services as such. But 1ere is rea ll y no dif fer ence between goods and services in the end effect.

But /' more commonl y we ilk of goods in the sense of production plants where an employer will just fail to work out pre chedules to base his production on the 8-hour day and beg ins to rely more and more, habitually, arelessly rely upon overtime, an extra Saturday, etc ., etc. Putting on an extra shif t is not overtime; 1at inc reases the number of empl oyees. He puts on a third or fourth shif t; that's still an 8-hour sh ift so 1at doesn't come into the question of overtime. But there's real ly no difference between goods and ervices. MR. McKENZIE: Mr.

Chairman , I come to The Farm Machin e ry Act whic h is a law of this province nd farm implement dealer s are required by law to- it's sort of an emergency setup but nevertheless 'Y law they are required to work the hours of 8 in the morning until 10 o'clock in the eve ning on any lay except Sunday during the season of use of mach inery and equipment. Is that an emergency? MR. THIBAUL T: Oh, whene ver a farmer's mach ine ry breaks down, you're damn right that's an mergency. No question about that.

I understand, as you say, that there is requirements, agislatively, upon mach ine ry companies to provide depots where machi nery parts are availa ble in :ertain sectors of the cou ntry. With a law li ke that in effect, then conside ration has to be given to that 1mployer who is compelled by one law to do a thing, not to be penal ized by another. So I don't think here's much to argue about there. lt's a matter of common sense and rational ity. MR. McKENZIE: Mr. Chairman, then you would consider that that should be cl assed as an lmergency under the

section of the bill in the defi nitions. MR. THIBAUL T: Very we ll would be and would be well within the government or the Labour )tandards Board to so de termine that as an emergency under this bill as I would see it. But, >rincipally, I am saying I would not ask for the penalizing of one group of people who are required mder another cer tain law to do a cer tain thing, that they shouldn' t have double jeopardy as you night cal l it. So I don' t think we have any differ ences there, Mr. McKenzie. MR. McKENZIE: Than k you, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Sherm an. MR. SHERMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chai rman. Mr.

Thib ault, you said, independent of your brief but n response to Mr. Green and on the record, wel l, as a matter of fact, I guess you say it in your brief, I Nil I correct myself on that, that you endo rse Bill No. 65 gene rally but you have also said very clearly that the MF L stands opposed to the kind of overtime provisions as are contained in the bill, that you :�re concerned with the confl icts it might lead to in terms of strikes and lock outs and that it is di rectly fuxtaposed to your view on the whole question of overtime.

My question would be, why then does the MFL not oppose Bill No. 65 rather than endorsing it? MR. THIBAUL T: We ll, because the social advance represented in the bill is far greater than the points agai nst which we are commenting and it would be rather irregular to deny a bill that has basically good social advance for the sake of a seco nda ry point of objection but it seems to me, Mr. 9

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 Sherman, you are going beyond what the brief of the MFL represents.

We are making one prim point of suggestion as to the possibili ty of industrial unrest wherein the bill provides that an emplo can bring a demand for com pulsory overtime to the bargaining table or to his employees if they not organized in some form, that this is the change that cou ld open a way for industrial unn Premised as a whole on the fact that this occurring would then deny the principal purpose of overtime bill similar to the principal purpose of The Safety and Health in the Work place Act, th! would allo w an escape for longer hours that would be detrimental to the health and safety of Wt people.

This is al most our singula r position. We make passing reference to the one and three-quar time hoping it will be a deterrent. If not, we'll probably have to have it go hig her. MR. SHERMAN: Okay. MR. THIBAUL T: That's about all we're saying here. Other than that, we think the bill is goo' wouldn 't say throw out the baby with the bathwater. MR. SHERMAN: Let me ask you this, Mr. Thi bault.

If you ban all overtime, except emerger overtime, if you had the kind of bill that you would prefer as a step that would go further than this I envisages, do you not inhi bit the ba rgaining leeway of unions and colle ctive bargaining units if y ban the concept of overtime except in those situations that you have mentioned, the constructi ind ustry, northern projects and eme rgency operations. Do you not take a card out of the poker ha that the coll ective bargaining unit and the union has always had in bargaining negotiations? MR. THIBAUL T: I don't see it that way at all.

I don't have any concern in the area that you suggesting, Mr. Sherman. I will admit, though, I am not muc h of a poker player so you have me thE MR. SHERMAN: I couldn't accept that, Mr. Thib ault. All union le aders are good poker playe MR. THIBAUL T: But we don't have the money to play with. MR. SHERMAN: You pla y with a dif ferent kind of medium of exchange and colla teral as I Osl and says. MR. THIBAUL T: We ll, if you're saying that compli mentary, I accept it. MR. SHERMAN: I say it co mplimentarily. I say it complime ntarily. I just don't accept ye content ion that you're not a poker player.

We ll what about the question of the earning potential of many workers? If you ban overtime in t sense that you're talking about, do you not then red uce and inh ibit the potential earning power many working men and women? MR. THIBAUL T: Ah, you raise a good point. Do you want me to talk about it? MR. SHERMAN: Yes. MR. THIBAUL T: You see, overtime, unfortunately, similar to bonus, job bonus, like miner's bom piece-work bonus in manufacturing plants, has imposed a way of life upon working couples when they have, as a matter of social permission, bud geted reli ant upon the extra income over and abo the basic wage.

Over time quite similarly has become such an an imal.

Unha ppily, you have difficu lty - as would I -i n having one or more work people, incl uding the spouse to say to you a ne "Do es Bill No. 65 endanger my opportunity of earning some overtime money?" And I would say, w the position of the MFL, "Yes, for this and that reason." And there would be objection to it becau this co uple that raised the question have for years relied upon the income from overtime, extra hou as they have rel.ied upon the miner's bonus, what we cal l the orphan and widow maker, the speed up make bonus piece-ti me, piece..:work, in manufacturing plants.

Over time has to be put in the sar category. Of course it will be a denial to the income factor to some degree but one that has go< social purpose about it and we view the social purpose when we talk of this question. I'm gl ad that Y' raised the question, I did n't know that I had the lee way to make this speech. MR. SHERMAN: Wel l, we're in a poker game here, sir, and ... MR. THIBAUL T: Well I think I put an ace on you at that point. MR. SHERMAN: I'm occa sionally leading into your hand, but I want your information for r edifi cation and that of the com mittee.

You're concerned and have emphasized the whole aspect injury and health and safety vis-a-vis the overtime question.

Woul d you agree that quite apart frc the area of emergency, with your experience in the workplace and in indus try, that there are ma1 many industries not rel ated just to northern projects and construction who function on tl con tinuous flow operation concept and who have emergency orders - not emergency situations b emergency orders - that come in an unexpected, unanticipated way, who have for exam� unanticipated demands because of the season or the marketplace or the cyclical nature of indus t or who, just by the nature of their work, have functions and operations that can't be stopped at 4:1 o'clock in the afternoon or 5:00 o'clock in the afternoon and walked away from, would you agree th many indus tries live under that kind of environment?

MR. THIBAUL T: lt's an indisputable fact that you have this variable within the types of industr That doesn't necessar ily mean that - as our brief said, if that kind of an emplo yer or the employer 10

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 at kind of an ind ustry, rather, rethinks the practice he has been followi ng in relation to meeting that quirement, we don' t say that his problem is insol uble under the Act. Now if we say that the status ·o is totall y unchangeable in this or another circum stance then I think we would be wrong. The 1ole demand of social requireme nt, the needs of workers, the needs of the work force, of )rkpersons is bei ng given a new stress in this more enligh tened day and age.

The government has dicated that through the Safety and Health in the Workplace Act. it's not because someone alLot a 1dden said workers should have a better de al. it's because of the age that we're living in, the new mgers that employees face in the workplace that new consciousne ss has been given to the amount time the y work in relation to the stress of that employee. So we should be talking and thinking >out the principle s of why we're doing something like this rather than nibbling at why we don't have do something lik e this and to heck with the con ditions of the working people, you see.

That's the ffer ence. We're in a new century, it's not a hund red years ago, it's not fifty years ago. Thank the Lord s not ten years ago. MR. SHERMAN: You would say - at least I infer from your remarks and correct me if I'm wrong - 1at where that conti nuous flow operation has to be conti nued beyond 4:00 o'clock or 5:00 o'clock or hatever the end of the sh ift was, that workers on that work site should not be expected to do it, that :her workers should be brought in to do it.

My question to you is, with the emphasis you've placed on 1fety and health and protection against inj ury, whether you think you cou ld do that kind of thing, •ing in outside occasional workers for stations let's say in a foun dry, let's say in a forge, let's say here molten metal is bei ng poured, where you can bring in occ asional workers to fill those jobs on 1e occas ions that they require without any endange ring the safety and health of that workplace? MR.

THIBAULT: You cou ldn' t have used a better example of industry when you talk about tundries and forges, the worst ·man killer that we've known in the sense of chest silicosis. I don't 1ink you were real ly talking about those kind s of empl oyers or that type of ind ustry fir st off, Mr. herma n. You were talking more so about the farm implement thing where there has to be staggered ours in order to service the farm public. MR. SHERMAN: Any manufact uring indus try. MR. THIBAUL T: But just a minute. I want to say some more on this. You keep bringin g in, hire new mployees.

In the larger ind ustries that would be a net result to some extent, there's no doub t. We 1ake that suggestion here, that it would affect particul arly the larger ind ustry. But the question of 1ore empl oyees is not automatically the imposition because there could be a staggering of work mes to meet cer tain off cond itions. There can be the remuneration in the sense of compen satory me off still resulting in the eig ht-hour day' still resu lting in the forty-hour week.

But we're speaking f the employer who has, without particular thought, said to himself, "I cannot operate any other way 1an what I have been operating for the last number of years." We're simply asking him to rethink the ituation. Now anyone that comes in at 8 o'clock in the morning, there isn't anything to stop them ·om co ming in at 9 o'clock and working until 5 o'clock. That takes care of an odd hour for example. le have that in numerous agreements. But in the end the result is not in excess of the stipulated tatutory time. So you see it's not just a one -road affa ir.

If you're fa milia r with collective bargaining then you'll now precisely what I' m talking about. The end result of time is what we're concerned about. Two 10usand and eig hty hours a year based on the 40 rather than 3,080. If a work person is working 3,080 ours in one year there is something wrong with the system and the health of that person is not going ) stand that. lt would be interesting to look at what we have. I bel ieve some recent fig ures showed a 42 .3 weekly ours of work in this province.

So we haven't had a real great imposition of it other than it goes to xcess in cert ain ind ustries or by certa in employers. MR. SHERMAN: Let me ask you one more question, Mr. Thi bault. My last question, Mr .. :hairman .

You have made refer ence in your brief, sir, to the fact that, as you put it, "As each nprovement in labour standards occu rred they" -t he old school type employe rs- "reiterated their 3ar, fear which in the end proved groundless." I take it from thatthatyqu mean and I would certainly gree that there has been enormous social progress made in terms of the cond itions of work for the 1orking man and woman of North America. But let me ask you this: do you think that the other side of he equation has been effect ively met?

Do you think that along with the improvements that have been 1iven the worker legitim ately and deservedly so, that we've had anything like the kind of response in 3rms of productivity that we need in this cou ntry and in this province to en able us to remain :ompetitive in a very competitive world? MR. THIBAUL T: Well I think the answer has to lie not so much in personal opinions that you and I night harbour, Mr. Sherman, but in the statistics of the province as they relate to productivity, as they 11

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 rel ate to the strong position of Man itoba in the financ ial world. I belie ve our rating is what Man itoba? Tremendously high. I haven't seen any great excess of ban kruptcies in this provir comparably speaking, I haven't seen a great exodus, apart from some comment now and again fr, some employer, from this province. I belie ve we have a high based economy in Man itoba, that func tioning well and bodes very well. I see no danger in what you seem to be com ing to, Mr. Sherm that it will create a more difficult economic cli mate for business.

I think it will en hance it, as long we're not talking about old school employers. MR. SHERMAN: Well that was to be my last question, Mr .. Chai rman, this will be. l ha ve to respo with a question to Mr. Thi bault's last commentary. How do you feel about Co-op Im plements a Chr istie Biscuits, to name ju st two? MR. THIBAUL T: Well I don't know, you may be privy to certa in information which is causing 1 problems at Co-op lay-off, I am not in particular.

I do know earlier on in the dry spell Go Im ple ments along with others were laying off people, were projecting lay-offs because of 1 position of farmers in not purchasing farm implements due to the weather conditions. We don't kn1 yet whether the May rains will continue into June and the change of cli mate within the fa purchasing or farm consu ming

section will occur, hopefull y it will. I'm going to be an optimist attl point, not a pessimist. MR. SHERMAN: Thanks, Mr. Thibault; thank you, Mr. Chai rman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Barrow. MR. THOMAS BARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. During some of your answers, I think it was Mr� Green, you said there should be some amount of flexi bili ty in construction in the north pertaini to the 40 -hou r week. MR. THIBAUL T: Structure in what? MR. BARROW: In the north, you mentioned the north at the same time. You said there should some fle xibility in the 40 -hour week.

I can see where construction, of course, would have to b1 special case on account of weather effects and so on. MR. THIBAUL T: The seasonal factors. MR. BARROW: Yes, so they work long days and long hours in the summertime and possibly ve little in the winter. Is that the idea? MR. THIBAUL T: That's what I was ref erring to. MR. BARROW: And the north, of cour se, you're refe rring to remote areas and not the big centn MR. THIBAUL T: To what? MR. BARROW: To the remote north. MR. CHAIRMAN: Use the microphone please, Mr. Barrow, so we can hear you and Mr. Th iba1 can hear you. MR.

BARROW: For instance, Fl in Flan, Church ill and Thom pson are big centres, so the 40-ho week would apply there. And wher e it wouldn' t apply would be the remote areas where you are mo or less in isolation. Is that what you are saying? MR. THIBAUL T: Wel l, no. More rather I wo uld be of the opinion that the question of overtime hours related to construction - and I don' t know whether it becomes a question of geography, 1\ Barrow, whether it is north of 53 or so many miles south of 53, or whether it is wherever constructic is.

Construction is all affected in the seasonal sense but more so the fur ther north you go. MR. BARROW: That's right. MR. THIBAUL T: I bel ieve ther e are special arrangements for this now, legisla tively speaking, ar it rs a matter that should be more so determine d by the Construction Trades Council conj unc tive with the government or its Leg islative Committee or its Labou r Standards Branch. I would not I prone to become involved in that particular phase of the industry situation. MR. BARROW: And of cou rse you have answered my next question. You say the 40 -hour week w create more employment.

You've answered that before. MR. THIBAUL T: We see it as an ironic thing, with a mil lion and a half unemployed - a mil lion ar a half, I said , unemployed - that there is still an expectation that one work person should work 3,01 hours rather than the standard work week. lt has to have its effect upon unem ployment, there is r question about that in my mind. MR. BARROW: The next question: Would you advocate the 40 -hour week be from Monday Friday incl usive? MR. THIBAUL T: Most definitely. MR. BARROW: Good . MR. THIBAUL T: Monday to Friday is what we regard as a work week. MR.

BARROW: Now, they have experimented with fou r 10 -hour sh ifts with three days off . MR. CHAIRMAN: Use the microphone ple ase, Mr. Barrow. 12

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 MR. BARROW: They've experimented with the four 1 0-hour da ys and three days off. Have you any �ws on that? MR. THIBAUL T: Yes, I have a very definite view on that. Labour, in princi ple, is opposed to the , nger work day. We are aware that the Manitoba leg islation has, and will still permit, that rangement. But the basic position of lab our, s'peaking from the Canadian Labour Congress, )eaking from the Man itoba Federati on, is the fou r-8, a 32-h our work week, but not a longer work �y.

A shorter work week but not a longer work day because, again, it is a question of health and lfety of work persons. MR. BARROW: Thank you, Mr. Thib ault. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Banman . MR. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chai rman. Just to get a clarific ation on the questions that were sked by the Member for Wolseley. You mentioned that one of the main reasons for li miting itto a40- our work week is the health safety factor, if I und erstand you correctly. Is that right? MR. THIBAUL T: That's correct. MR.

BANMAN: I have a hard time rec onci ling in my mind, what is the difference if a person works 0 hours for one em ployer and then goes to moonligh t 10 hours for another employer? MR. THIBAUL T: lt is still bad for his health but we have no control over the chap or the girl who lo onli ghts. That's the only difference, we have no control over it. MR. BAN MAN: So basical ly, what you are saying, you are for li miting it to a 40 -hour work week, 'anning any overtime, and if you had it your way you would ban any moonli ghting. MR. THIBAULT: You are making the same mistake as the other gentleman .

You say, "any 1vertime except emergency overtime." MR. BANMAN: That caveat, ·yes. MR. THIBAUL T: Now if you are making that qual ification then you put it on that basis. What was •our question? MR. BANMAN: You would lik e to ban any overtime over 40 hours except emergency, then you vould also be saying that your way of thinking, you wou ld like to ban any moonligh ting that was 1appening at all. Is that right? MR. THIBAUL T: Wel l, that's two questions. I'll deal with them one at a time. The first one, ban )Vertime except emergency, yes.

In the interests of the health and safety of the work people, yes, lefinitely yes. Moonlighting has the same end effect on the health and safety of people. And if in ;ome way we co uld establish a sufficient basic wage that would make it unnecessary for people to ·ely on a supplementary income through moonl ighting, overtime, or bonuses, then we would be nuch better off for it in the sense of the health of our province or the health of our nation. MR. BANMAN: Aren' t you lea ving out one particu lar aspect of an individual or person?

In other Nords, some people have more dr ive than others and some people want to attain more than others �ither finan cial ly or physically or whatever it is. And basically what you are tel ling me is that thatone �riteria will then, under this particular legislation, be denied to an ind ividual. MR. THIBAUL T: Again the question of the opposition of the individua l is something that occurs, I suppose, in whatever legisla tion. We have indi viduals who would prefer to pay a high car insurance rate by reverting to private insurance rather than Autopac, just for example.

This is what we have so I clon't know what the point in coming at me and saying, "Well, will there possibly not be some objection to ind ividuals who feel that th eir free rights, their free rights to get sick and die at an immature age, is bei ng imposed upon." Of cou rse you will have the indi vid ual who feels that, with ail respect to him. But we are either going to advance socially or we are going to live in the old age when the val ue of life and health didn' t mean very muc h to very many people. MR.

BANMAN: In reply to the questions from the Member for Roblin you mentioned the production of goods and you also incl uded services in that. MR. THIBAUL T: That's our general descripti on. MR. BAN MAN: I refer specific ally to the small service indus try sector in the province of Man itoba, many of whom I know right now are working on a 40-h our plus fo ur hours overtime and paying their empl oyees along that line. Do you feel that it is going to cause an incre·ased cost to the consumer of the produc ts? MR. THIBAUL T: What isn't an incr eased cost to the consumer of the product?

Any time the minimum wage is incr eased; any time compens ation assessments are incr eased; it is loaded into the cost of the product and the consumer pays for it anyway. So what's the difference or the significance in this one? Why do we individ ual ize this deve lopment? Of cou rse it will go on to the consumer price, . that's why we are paying prices that we're paying now because it's part of the whole system. Un til we change the system, then we are going to have to live with this anomaly. MR. BANMAN: No, I just want it und erstood that it is going to cause ... 13

Indu strial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 MR. THIBAUL T: I don't think it has muc h relation to the bill, the princ iple of the bill, really, with respect to your right to ask questions. MR. BAN MAN: Yes. No, no, I just wanted to get it on record that it will mean an incr eased cos · the consumer. MR. THIBAUL T: Well I' ve dis puted the relationship of it to the bill. MR. BANMAN: You don't think the bill will have any effect on that, on the cost to the consum1 I'm talking now about the small industry that employs three or fo ur people. MR.

THIBAUL T: I can't project how a certain employer might use figu res to show that it t incr eased his cost. I can 't go into that area. Some employer who is conscientious and belie ves the I is good can possibly adj ust to it in rearranging his whole practice, in rearranging his costs. I do know. You are asking a question that I am not qual ified to answer. But I am sure we will hE employers say, "lt has increased my cost." We will probably hear empl oyers say, "lt hasn't incr eas my cost because I have adjusted in this way." I don't know, don't put me down on the record refusing to answer.

You are asking an impossible question. MR. BAN MAN: Well fi ne, if you feel that it is not within your expertise to answer that, that's fir Mr. Chairman, that's all. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dillen. MR. DILLEN: I just have a few questions. I just want to follow up, I think, from wher e Mr. Ban m; left off, in that he is refe rring to an incr eased costto the consumer. Mr. Ban man can nod or co rrect n if I'm wrong, when he refers, I bel ieve, to the increase in the overtime rates from one and a half tim to one and three-q uarter times. Now Mr.

Banman has cor rected me and his under standing is tha not going to incr ease the cost to the consumer. -(I nterject ion)- Well let's get it straigh t. fll Ban man asked whether or not the increase from one and a half times to one and three-q uarters, pl1 the reduction in the hours from 44 to 40, whether that's going to have any impact on the cost of goo1 to the consumer. I want to pursue that with you, Mr. Th ibault, in this way.

If an emplo yer has reduced his number of hours from 44, whic h he was required to pay time anc half for four hours, to 40 hours, he is no longer required to pay that time and a half for the addition four. Shou ld that not result in a red uction for the costs of good produced to the consumer? MR. THIBAUL T: That's your question? MR. DILLEN: Yes. MR. THIBAUL T: I would say yes. I wo uld go beyo nd that and relate it - and I didn' t want to g into this area - back to the earlier days when we were red ucing hours from the old 56 dur ing wartinr down to 50, down to 48 and 44 and so on.

In each instance the employer alwa ys said that it is going I incr ease my costs. But in the final analysis - and the balance sheet showed it, the fi nancial stateme1 of empl oyers showed it and ind ustry as whole, the fi nancial statements showed that tt corresponding incr ease in eff iciency of the worker, when he had to work less hours, was, in fact, benefit to ind ustry in the economic sense rather than a loss or disaster as some employers woul describe it. MR. DILLEN: Okay. Now, I want to follow up on the safety and health aspect of your remarks.

Th standards, I belie ve, that have been accepted for Manitoba are based on the American ln d ustri1 Hygiene Association standards that were establ ished by the Un ited States on thresh hold limit value for certa in toxic gases and dust and so on and in every case have related to an exposure period < eigh t hours. I want reaf firmation from you, Mr. Thib ault, if it is possible, that in your view, the lea! amount of time that a person can be exposed to the hazards of his workplace, through legislation, th more beneficial it is in the long run for that person's health and safety. MR.

THIBAUL T: Oh yes, of cou rse .. .. in the States, that you are talking about, provides a basi eigh t hours but that eigh t hours as well is modified , the same as, to some extent, here it is modifie< depe nding upon what you are doing, what chemicals or toxic materials you are han dling, wh� exposure you are subject to. And you can have a duration of only one hour when you have to have break, it is not eight hours of solid work. And that's because of the health factor, the effect on health. I we look at the Mines Act today, or the hours in relation to mines, you don't work underground mon than eigh t hours.

And the reason you don't is because of the danger of silic osis. The damage to th' lu ngs because of the inha lation of dust. There is the question of exposure to excessive noise, to excessive heat.

All that has to b1 reg ula ted for the safety of the health of the indi vidual is the question of how long he is exposed to i1 And we've got a long way to go in that field and certai nly we are going to go into it in Man itoba hen now, through the opportunity under The Safety and Health in the Workplace Act. lt is a tremendou: thing that we are moving into here in the sense of protecting the health and the safety of work peoph in this province. MR. DILLEN: I have just one fi nal question. Reference was made to northern Man itoba and thE 14

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 ssibil ity of you bec oming inv olved in finding some ways of reducing the hours of work in the nstruction ind ustry. During the periods of peak - I am ref erring to the north now - dur ing the riods of peak construc tion, it is probably the period where we have the lon gest periods of daylight the north. Un der those cir cums tances and given the opportunity to become involved in the futu re, >uld you not think it would be more advantageous to put two 8-hour sh ifts during those longer 1riods rather than one 12 or 14 -hour sh ift? MR.

THIBAUL T: Two 8-hour shif ts back to back? MR. DILLEN: No, no. Two different ... MR. THIBAUL T: Oh, two sh ifts of work crews. MR. DILLEN: Work crews, two dif ferent crews. MR. THIBAUL T: Of course, to us this is the answer. This is the answer. If we are going to protect e health and safety of work persons, these are the approaches we have to think in terms of. Noth ing solved by a 14 -hour day even if it is only three in the week. MR. DILLEN: I have heard it argued that under those ci rcumstances no one would go north to ark.

I'm wonderi ng now if it wouldn' t be possible to take the position that all of those amenities that ·e taken for granted in southern Man itoba shou ld not also be provided on construction sites in the xth. You know, those kind of amenities that we take for granted down south. MR. THIBAUL T: Wel l, if there is any lesson to be drawn from mee ting the question of incentiv e of ark persons to go into the less favo urable cli mes of the north, we only have to look at the practice of 1e Federal Govern ment.

If we go into the Yukon, if we go into the Northwest Territories, where ederal civil servants are provided the incentive by living allo wances, certain remissions of cost, but ot at the expense of having to work extra hours. They are working standard work hours set up under lderal standards. And that is met quite handi ly. And this is something we may be able to look at. MR. DILLEN: Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: No fur ther questions? Thank you, Mr. Thib ault. MR. THIBAUL T: Thank you, gentlemen. MR. CHAIRMAN: Deputy Mayor Bernard Wolfe. MR. BERNARD WOLFE: Good morning, Mr.

Chairman, and the remaining members of the :ommittee. City Council on June 1s t di rected that representation be made to this Committee, specific all y in 1e area of the problem that arises related to the de fi nition of "emergency." I would like to just read, in 1art, from the Counci l's of ficial approval of the material it dealt with.

If overtime is assigned under Subsect ion 33(1 }, then, accord ing to Subsection 33(3) , a full report 1f the emergency work must be forwarded to the Labour Board for any ac tion it deems appropriate. iuch action could presumably incl ude instruction that the emergency work did not in fact qualify 1nder the provisions of 33 (1 ). 33 (1) as amended provides that an employee may be required to work overtime but only to the 1xtent necessary to avoid serious interference with the ordi nary working of the plant.

We reali ze that the th rust of the leg islation and the proposed amendments rel ate perhaps more >articul arly to the field of manuf actu ring or ind ustry, but cert ainly not real ly to the field of municipal JOvernment which is a highl y personal service orientated del ivd ry system. The words "serious interference" require that each set of ci rcumstances be interpreted. The li fficult y is that the subsec tion does not really contempla te the service provided by a municipal :orporation, or indeed, the Province or Man itoba Hydro.

Your Committee is also of the opinion that the subsection shou ld be clarified so that clearly the �et covers urgent work relative to essential services such as water treatment and del ivery, waste, ;ewage colle ction and treatment, hydro, fire, police, health services such as hospital, and ransportation which takes in the entire spectrum of hig hways, transit, traffic control, snow and ice ;antral. lt would seem to us at the City of Winnipeg, that the City's concern shou ld be shared by every nuni cipal ity in Manitoba, not to mention the province's own High ways Branch , the Man itoba felephone System and the Manitoba Hydro.

Un der the proposed amendment, the Lieu tenant-Governor-Or der-in-C ouncil whic h reall y says the Cabinet will declare an emergency. ! think that when you're talking about the kind of emergencies that are referred to, they are of the day-to-day emergencies that those of us responsible to see that you your water runs and your toile t flushes and the transit system moves and the del ivery of groceries get to the corner store during a snowstorm had in mind. We are concerned that the definition of . emergency is one of degree.

The City Council fe els, in its colle ctive opinion, and they al most made it unanim ous, the vote was 40 to 3- which has got to be a remarkable achie vement some days - but we would like to feel that the municipality would be in the best position to judge when an emergency 15

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 was required. I think that in the normal cou rse of col le ctive bargaining we have an effective and v cordial rela tionship with all of our organized co ll ective groups. So that basically our concern cent on

Section 33 .1 whic h sets out when an employee may be req uired to work overtime. The C contends that this sec tion is too narrow and too restrictive and does not take into account · spec ialized nature of municipal public service.

One of the examples that I can remember so well was that du ring the last three or fo ur years have had major serious snowstorms - cert ainl y not last winter; we could have welcomed some sn - but on those occa sions we were forced to co-ord inate and integrate not only our own services I the Man itoba Hydro, the Telephone System to set up emergency line s and co-ord inate and place i1 operation a whole network of support systems which in volve streets, Hydro, fir e, police and 1 inside support staff to do the co-or di nating.

One other example that we are suggesting and it may not really impress too many people exct that if you have had to wait at a bus stop, you would then be impressed; that if because of unf ortunate personal situation the relief dr iver at the end of a transit run isn't there, the dr iver the operating that vehicle just can't then be assumed to wal k away and le ave it knowing that back do• the line somewher e there may be 30, 40 or 50 people waiting at 30-below. lt depends on wher e y stand and how you interpret real ly what we're talking about when we say an emergency.

We dete somehow, that perhaps there wasn't really the full appreciation of the fu nction of munici1 governments in deal ing with this particula r leg islation. Of ficially, from the City of Winnipeg, this is our concern. We would li ke to feel thatthe amend me could be clarified to perhaps exempt the municipal government from determ ining and let us work c our own desti ny with our own people as to the effect iveness of our compensation through whate\ colle ctive agreements we have. There, Mr. Chai rman, very briefly is the area of concern that the City of Winnipeg has in respect this proposed amendment. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Wolfe. I have Mr. Paull ey who wishes to ask you some questior MR. PAULLEY: it's really not a di rect question to Mr. Wolfe, but I thought it would be advisable indic ate there will be an amendment in the definition of what is a plant which I think will meet t point raised by the City of Winnipeg. I am inform ing the members of the Committee they will be ask1 to consider this amendment when we are considering the bill. I think it will overcome a lot of tl difficulties by the City of Winnipeg and the other municip al ities for rendering such services as snc removal.

I just make one observation insofar as the poor old man, like I, waiting for a bus to come. I reca waited for 18 days before they came and I don't know whether that was an emergency or not. MR. WOLFE: Where were you during the rest of the 47 days, Russ? MR. PAULLE Y: But, anyway, I do indic ate that I intend to have proposed an amendment, I thin that migh t overcome the difficulties. I wo uld , say, Mr.

Wolfe, in the absence of any data collectil agenc y as to the input of overtime, the requirements, would you not think that it is reasonable th there be some place where this is registered so that we would have some accu rate figur es as to tl incid ence of overtime - which we haven't got at the present ti me other than DBS. MR. WOLFE: Mr. Chairman, to the Min ister. We would be delig hted because, you see, I can off you, as of this morning, our research departments assessment of what the difference would be as September to the end of the year. MR. PAULL EY: That's the dol la r figur e, Mr. Wolfe. MR.

WOLFE: That's just the dolla r figur e, but in add ition to that we monitor very care fully tt normal overtime because we feel as perhaps many of the others do, that if the pattern re-occ urs, ye should be doing something to correct it, either with a change in management ad ministration 1 another body. But what we are really basically concerned - I think you've identified it- is how c you determ ine an emergency and let us work that destiny out so that we can conti nue to deliver tt kind of level of services that people expect of us.

If you are prepared, we'd just dearly love to make tt offer that if our solicitors co uld work with yours in just making sure that what the City's concern · and I say that it just doesn't only exist in cities, because when I think of the problems with the Hyd1 cr ews and your Hyd ro crews are in the same boat and your problem ... and I can remember c occas ion seeing some mighty fine washouts out in rural Man itoba that you co uldn' t have waited f< another two or three days to put the road back into shape so that things co uld get back to normal understand it's even happened the odd time up in the north between The Pas and Flin Flon when tt beavers get busy and decide that they are going to reroute things for you. l know, because I got stuc up in Swan River. -(I nterjection)- That's right.

That's before you le ft and things improved. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for your consi deration , we would be just deligh ted to wo1 with the Minister of Labou r in seeing how this thing can be worked out to the satisfac tion of bot 16

es. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. McKenzie. Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 1977 MR. McKENZIE: Yes, Mr. Chai rman. Mr. Wolfe, do I read your figur es here that from September on that this will cost the City $250,000 per annum in your estimate? MR. WOLFE: As a matter of fact, you can correct that. The up-to-date figur e I got this morning m our research people indic ate that that would result in $350,000.00. On the basic dif ference of tt fir st . . . · MR. McKENZIE: A second question. Did I read you correctly, Mr.

Wolfe, that you said that the licitors or the cou ncil had no input into this legisla tion at all, you weren't consid ered when it was ing drafted? MR. WOLFE: I wouldn' t say that. I said that I was prepared to suggest that we would be in a 'sition as of right now to sit down with whoever was going to red raft this and perhaps more clearly fine it because I think from time to time we have some more fairly good commun ication with al l les of the House. MR. McKENZIE: Thank you, that's all the questions I have, Mr. Chai rman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Any fur ther questions? Mr. Dillen. MR. DILLEN: Mr.

Wolfe, you have just amended that fig ure of $250,000 up to $350,000.00. I want to 1ow if that is for what is consid ered to be sched ul ed overtime or for emergency overtime, what is garded as emergency overtime? MR. WOLFE: I think it would be a mix of both, real ly. We have to antici pate what emergencies we ight run into towards the end of the year not knowing what weather is going to bring us, but this is in lmparison to the track record of last year and the year before so that it's on that basis. You'd be ithin the ball park with that fig ure lumping the two categ ories together. MR.

DI LLEN: Can you give me an idea of - we're talking about the hourly rated work - what the ages and ad ministrative costs are for one person in the hou rly rated cla ssifica tion? MR. WOLFE: No, I can't answer that. MR. DILLEN: Would it be $1 0,000 a year - Wages and ad ministrative costs? MR. WOLFE: Ther e's just no way I can ... lfy ou wanttogive me thatquestion in writing I'll feed it to the mach ine and I'll get you the answers. I' m not quite clear as to the thrust of your question ther. MR. DILLEN: Okay.

What I am trying to establish is, how many more people cou ld be employed by iminating overtime and red ucing this figur e? That's what I am trying to get at. If it's $350,000 - nterjection)- okay, we'll take it as an average of $10, 000 and we 'll throw in an extra $2,000 for ::lministrative costs so there's about $1 2,000 a year. If you divide $350,000 by $1 2,000 about 30 ::lditional employees could be taken on by the City and reduce over time altogether. MR. WOLFE: No, you can't. Mr.

Chairman, with respect, I can see that the problem of operating 1unicipal government and del ivering services such as sewer and water, you can't use a third of a erson, a quarter of a person, an eighth of a person, when you're deal ing with a problem. The extra me is something that has to be done right then and there; you don't have another body just lying round surplus because that's how we were able to cut our taxes this year. MR. DILLEN: Is there some way that you can respond for the Committee's benefit to determ ine of 1at $350,000, if you can respond in writing ... MR. WOLFE: Mr.

Chai rman, I can respond right now to suggest to you that if the thrust of your uestion is how many jobs can cr eate in addition to our present numbers, I would say none because 1at's the normal requirement to operate the pecu lia r kind of a business in the del ivery of personal ervices in a city the size of Wi nnipeg. MR. DILLEN: But the City does work an 8-hour day. MR. WOLFE: Oh yes. Wel l, we hope ... sometimes. MR. DILL EN: But you co uld n't make the differential between what would be scheduled overtime O'ithin that $350,000 and what would be classified as an emergency, a power line down ... MR.

WOLFE: Oh, the spoke of that would be emergency because, you see, you take for example, !lr. Chairman, this spring we had some disastrous weekends wher e we had 50 water breaks and I tell 'OU it may not be an emergency to anybody except the people on that street, but if that tap doesn't un ... Bill, I think we got you on a couple of them ... but that's the kind of thing that happens. You :an't wait until Monday unless, you know, you can shower with a friend down the street somewhere .. MR. DILLEN: I think that's fine. MR. CHAIRMAN: Any fur ther questions. Mr. Paull ey. MR. PAULLEY: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Mr.

Wolfe, in your presentation you mentioned, as inde ed Mr. )ill en has pursued it to some degree, the question that the overtime cost includ es almo st tantamount he scheduled and emergency. I wonder if you cou ld sup ply the figur es as to the number of hours 17

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 19 77 required in each of those sec tions. MR. WOLFE: We' ll try to give you a breakdown on that, Sir. MR. CHAIRMAN: Any fur ther questions? Hearing none, thank you, Mr. Wolfe. MR. WOLFE: Thank you very much. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. H. A. Crewson, Manitoba Health Organ ization. MR. H.A. CREWSON: Mr. Chai rman and members, I think perhaps my presentation would somewhat redu ndant after hea ring Mr.

Wolfe inasmuch as our organization represents 16 0 hospitl and nursing homes in the province and the Board of Di rectors of our organiz ation at its last meeti1 in review ing this bill, ac tually came forward with essentially the same suggestion that has been m a, under the City in respect to the fact that in the health faci lities there is no intent for the sche duling overtime, that is not the concern, that doesn't happen.

We attempt to provide a maximum of an 8-ho day, and in most cases it is now less than that, but you'll appreciate that in the facilities that there a many things happen, particularly in the critical care areas, which require that individuals go w' beyond thei r scheduled sh ift for the purpose of look ing after special problems and it is our hope th under the amendment to which Mr.

Paulley refers that health fa cil ities in the province would be giv4 consi dera tion for thei r bei ng able to look after this with a minimum amount of disr uption ar problems in respect to de fini tion of what constitutes emergency and what does not constitu emergency. We would be ple ased to supply whatever data or information is desi red by tl depar tment in terms of what is inc urred in respect to overtime provisions and so on. MR. CHAIAN: Thank you, Mr. Crewson. Mr. Paul ley has a question. MR. PAULLEY: Mr.

Crewson, can you give us any ind ic ation of the number of hours involved overtime work such as you are ref erring to? MR. CREWSON: I do not have that with me, Mr. Paul ley, butwe do have a run that is coming off tt computer that will be able to tell us that. it's not a great de al, I might say, it's minimal but ther e certai nly in each and every week a situation where a faci lity runs into a very special problem. MR. PAULLEY: But it would n't be a very large amount in total. MR. CREWSON: No, it is not' no. MR. PAULLEY: Fine, thanks, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. McK enzie. MR. McKENZIE: Yes. Mr.

Crewson, I was wondering are you in agreement with Deputy May< Wolfe when he said lik e in the case of the City, the municip al ity is the best one to declar e what a emergency is. Would you rec ommend that your organiz ation would be the better one to declare whi ac tually a an emergency is or when it is an emergency? MR. CREWSON: I think the best, in terms of de fini tion, is most obviously the health fa cil ity itsel that is, the hospital or the nursing home. We would be pleased to assist in helping with the word in that would cover this particular aspect but these things happen and they are truly emergencies.

The are situations which arise near the end of a shift whic h obviously the fa cil ity itself must have dire< control over, not any other organization. MR. McKENZIE: One other question, Mr. Chairman. Then you feel that you could i define it fo rth Committee so that it ... MR. CREWSON: Yes, I am sure we ca n. MR. McKENZIE: Than k you, Mr. Chair man. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Di ll en. MR. DILLEN: I just have one que stion.

Would you prefer that there were ... oh, we'll use a example of maybe ten fulls cap pages of those areas wher e it is a clear-cut de fini tion of what a emergency is, or would you rather have the term "emergenc y" remain as it is for a broade

interpretation? MR. CREWSON: Wel l, I think the broader

interpretation would be useful if it is possible to be abl' to ident ify those particular ind ustries where the public service is involved and where emergency is , very obvious requirement. There has been a precedent that we are aware of in the past when essential services to the public have been ind icated and references made at that point to those area such as hospitals, nursing homes, fi re, police, etc., that would be obviously more desirable than 1 detailed listing but it may not be possible in this case. MR.

DILLEN: I wonder if you co uld sort of confirm what my fear is, that you would have ten page1 of clear-cut emergen cie s listed and then one emergency would arise that is not listed and then y01 would be, you know ... And real ly, Mr. Chairman, that is our problem that I think we are trying to pu foward in that, under the present wording of the Act, the Board of Di rectors of our organization jus had no way of be ing able to grasp what would be meant by the classification "emergency " as i applies in the hospital and nursing home field.

We co uld n't come to grips with that because of thE wording as it now exists and we would lik e to think that in the clarification it would be in broad term! 18

Industrial Relations -M onday, June 6, 19 77 would give the opportunity for the health facil ity to ad minister that de fini tion. Obviously, in those cases where there is co ll ective bargaining and where there are unions Dived, that de fi nition would have to be clear-cut in terms of unde rstanding on boths ides. MR. DILLEN: I want to know if you have any history of where an emergency has existed- or what s consi dered to be an emergency by the organization - wher e an employee refused to work when was called upon to do so, beyond his eigh t hours? MR. CREWSON: Mr.

Chairman, we are not aware of such an incident having occurred. I think, by j large, employees of our hospitals and nursing home s look at the need of indi viduals as bei ng 1ir prime concern and I suppose, in some cases, would even go the length of working the extra time hout thought bei ng given to whether or not they were even going to be paid, let alone walk away m it.

That is, I think, the general motivation of the people who work there, but we cou ld perhaps see the changes come about, in terms of perception of what is an emergenc y, that we could run into all "ts of di fficulty if we had to go through a lot of ad ministrative red tape to establ ish it. At the moment, those who are the head of the team that is caring for the patient call the shot as to tether it is or is not emergency. Those who work in the establish ment, in some cases, may or may t perceive it to be.

But it becomes a rather difficult thing to deal with each indi vid ual employee ten these things arise. it's a matter of the team going to work to do whatever is called upon by the ad of the team. MR. DIL LEN: I think you're referring specifically to the del ivery of health care to a patient. MR. CREWSON: Yes, yes. MR. DILLEN: I want to know, as wel l, if there have been any ind ications that the support staff chen, maintenance, electrical power, steam or whatever - have ever, to your knowledge, refused work overtime when an emer gency has existed. MR. CREWSON: Not to my knowledge, not to my knowledge. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Any fur ther questions? Mr. McKenzie. MR. McKENZIE: Mr. Chairman , I have one more question. Mr. Crewson, ha ve you come up with y figur es, or have you done any studies - is it possible that this legisla tion will incr ease the health sts? MR. CREWSON: Wel l, yes it will to a degr ee. To the extent that the hours that are put forward by 1y of emergency overtime at the moment, as we would see it, are unl ikely to change, those hours-are 1ing to cost us more. From what I've gather they are going to cost us more and we would have to ok to what in essence is 1 % instead of 1 1h times. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr.

Paulley. MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Crew son, have you any objec tions to the provision in the Act for the reporting overtime to the Labour Board? MR. CREWSON: No objections, Mr. Paull ey. MR. CHAIRMAN: Any further questions? Hearing none, thank you, Mr. Crewson. MR. CREWSON: Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Paul Hucal. MR. BOB HUCAL: Gentlem en, my name is Bob Huc al, and I have prepared and presented briefs 1ich, in thei r original form, took the form of letters to the Honourable Mr. Paui ley and to the Premier. 1e briefs are relatively short.

They are on behalf of the Mea t Packers Council of Canada (the anitoba members) , and the Mea t Packers Council of Canada itself. The Man itoba member s are >nstituted of Swift Canadian, Canada Packers, O.K. Packers, East West Packers (1 969) Ltd., Jack >rgan's Meats Ltd., and Burns Mea ts Ltd. The presenta tion will be made by Mr. Nicolas Palylyk, who the General Manager for Burns in Man itoba and he is, of course, also here to answer any questions hic h you may have. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Huca l. There may be some questions that some members do 1ve. Mr. Paulle y. MR. PAULLEY: Yes, Mr.

Chai rman, I have a .... MR. HUCAL: Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Palylyk wanted to read these briefs. I said he was going to present tem to you. They are relatively short. · MR. PAULLEY: I'm sorry. Oh, wel l, that's fine. MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you proceed please. MR. PALYLYK: Mr. Chairman , I wo uld like to present the brief of the Manitoba members fi rst. Our ,tention in this submission is to ide ntify the areas of our business on whic h the effect of these nendm ents would create considerable concern and which amend ments, if they become law, would . ·eate lasting and permanent damage.

The indus try com petes on a national level with other packers in other provinces to the extent that ver 50 percent of the product of the Man itoba ind ustry is exported (primarily to Eastern Canada and 19

the Un ited States). Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 19 77 Even though most meat packers operate two and three sh ifts, fluc tuating receipts of produc ts 1 to commod ity prices, weather conditions, heavy shipping and del ivery obl igations, overtime : becomes a virtual necessity. Consequently the curr ent colle ctive bargai ning agreement, which governs the entire Canad ind ustry, provides for overtime services on a "reasonable request" basis of the employer. The potential effect 9f voluntary overtime is several fol d.

We are of the opinion that the indu� would be unable to function in its traditional most ef ficient manner. Namely, by making availablE its suppliers the services of the packer on short notice and after regular working hours and weeke nds. The indus try's source of supply is basically from the producer. The tendency of the producer i� deliver products when commodity prices flu ctuate to his advantage or when it is convenient for h Ther efore, the producer tends to deliver cattle and hogs when he cannot work the land.

A rainy s� immed iately incr eases deliv eries to the packers on short notice and the packing ind ustry traditionally ... MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm sorry to interrupt you, sir, but we didn' t quite get your name and we have have it and if you cou ld spell it for us, we could get it for our recor ding. MR. PALYLYK: P-A-L-Y-L-Y-K . MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Palylyk, would you proceed. MR. PALYLYK: A rainy spell immedia tely incr eases del iveries to the packers on short notice a the packing ind ustry has traditionall y accepted deliveries at all times.

Acceptance of del iveries of tl highl y perishable product requires that it be processed immedia tely and this logically requi1 overtime on very short notice. The inabil ity of the ind ustry to require reasonable overtime would put it in the position when would be non-competitive with out of province packers shipping to the same markets, and at t same time reduce the retu rns to the producer.

Despite the industry's attempts to control the use of overtime, the requirements of the ordim da y-to-day busine ss, plus the relationsh ip with the producer, caused in excess of 300,000 hours overtime to be util ized in 19 76 by the Manitoba members of the Meat Packers Counc il. Prel iminary estimates indic ate that the additional costs cou ld be one mi lli on dol lars per year. · an industry al ready plagued with low profit margins, the effect of such an incr ement in cost would most dama ging. We might point out to you that grievances in the indus try rela ting to overtime have be ne gli gibl e.

Because of this ind ustry practice whic h is primarily for the advantage of the producer, overtirr as you can see, has been extensively used. Any cur tail ment of such use would put the packers in t position where they would of necessity level off acceptance of deliv eries on a shif t basis and su< level ling off would place the producers in a position where they could not take advantage of pri changes nor weather conditions and this change would in turn cr eate an economic di sadvantage them.

We belie ve that any changes caused by external sources will not only create a situation where tl producer will be unable to optimize his returns but also wher e the Manitoba industry will be fac1 with continued and additional competitive pressure from foreign packers.

And the second brief is from our national office. · As a consider able amount of overtime operations is normal in the slaug htering and meat pack ir ind ustry in order to ef ficiently se rve both livestock producers and meat consumers, our members a greatly concerned that the proposed amendments do not, as we fear they will, upset prese schedules and establ ished patterns of plant operations in the meat industry, including overtime wo wher e required, or significantly incr ease the cost of overtime operations.

The operation of packing plants who slaug hter and process livestock is basically geared to tt flow of livestock to market. This varies from day to day in the week, as we ll as sea sonally ar cyclically, reflecti ng production and marketing decisions of farmers, which are part of a gener timetable determined months before and then adjusted in the shorter run accord ing to weath1 co ndi tions, market trends, and other factors.

Packers have no control over the cur rent volu me of livestock marketings, and always try to cle1 the market, slaugh ter livestock they buy promptly, and keep the meat moving into the comple distributive network stead ily. When the market volu me of cattle and /or hogs is heavy, plants normal sche dule some overtime as required to handl e the incr eased through put ef ficiently. Packing plants do not sched ule overtime unnecessa rily. One check is clearly the extra cos associa ted with it. However, there is no alternative when market volume is heavy, and coolers have 1 20

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 19 77 clear ed out and the meat cut up and processed , to make room for the cu rrent slaug hter. The meat ind ustry was one of the fi rst to use a moving rail production lin e on a 'dis-assembly' nciple, as carcasses are cut up, trimmed, de-boned and the meat fabri cated and processed in ·ious ways. Thus, plant labour is organized on a specializ ed teamwork basis, and if operations tend beyond regul ar time a comple te gang is necessary. A few missing link s cou ld tie up the whole eration.

The Canadian livestock and meat industry has to exert every effort to remain com petitive within a 1rth American economy, par ticu larly with respect to U. S. ani mal agriculture, whic h has a natural vantage in economies of scale. For this reason maintaining productivity is of prime concern. 1other concern, particul arly in view of the cu rrent high replacement cost of plant facilities and uipment, is to keep throughput at an economical volu me. I hope the fore going will indic ate to you and your Min isters, Mr.

Premier, that the meat packing ju stry, one of the chie f secondar y manuf actu ring ind ustries in Man itoba, is concerned at the oposed amend ments to the Employment Standards Act. Particula rly, we feel the amendment to claus e 29(

c) wh ich would raise the overtime rate from one 1d one-half, to one and three-q uarters, of the reg ul ar rate, would raise costs excessively and hurt e com petitive position of the Man itoba meat industry. While hopefully the effect of the new clause 33(4) will not prejudic e existing mutual emp loyer nployee agreements on reasonable overtime sched ul es, it is hard to eval uate the extent to whic h is philosophy might be used to obstruct overtime for wh ich there is sound economic justifica tion.

We would therefore respectfully ask that you give consider ation during the Committee stage of 11 65 to what we be lie ve are legiti mate ind ustry concerns with the proposed amendments. Our du stry cannot avoid a certain amount of overtime if it is to ef ficiently se rve livestock producer s and eat consu mers, and contribute importantly to the Man itoba economy. We simply ask that further gulations do not hamstring plant operations or raise costs unreasonably. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Palylyk. There may be some questions. I think Mr. Paul ley had a Jestion. MR. PAULLEY: Yes, I would lik e to ask Mr.

Palylyk if he is aware that acco rdi ng ·:o the DBS the rerage, throughout the year, of the weekly hours of work in the packing indu stry is less than 40 )Ur s? As a matter of fact, I bel ieve, sir, it is around 38.5, or something of that figur e. Now I can )preciate that this is an average and there may be situations where the 40 hour is exceeded but, �car ding to the information I have, that the average througho ut the year in your indus try is less than ) hours, and, of course, therefore would not be subjected on an average basis to the payment of vertime, except in exceptional ci rcumstances. MR.

PALYLYK: I can speak for Burns Foods and Swift Canadian and Canada Packers, and our l(perience last year was 83,000 hours on a work force of 850 people. MR. PAULLEY: The average for Man itoba, too, if I may say, is indic ated as less than 40 hours. MR. PAL YL YK: Yes, we have a 37 -hour guaranteed work week. But last year the actual was 83,000 ours. Swift Canadian was just size of the work force. MR. PAULLEY: 83,000 hours of overtime? MR. PALYLYK: 83,000 hours of overtime. MR. PAULLEY: And yet your average is less than 40. MR. PALYLYK: We cannot level oft. We have a 37-hour guaranteed work week.

So this week we ould work 37 hours but then next week, when the livestock flows in to market, we work over 40 ours. This is what happens. MR. PAULLEY: 83,000 hours. And the total number of empl oyees? Or total number of hours? MR. PALYLYK: Approximately 850 people on the payroll between Burns Brandon and Burns ilinnipeg. MR. PAULLEY: What is your work week? You gua rantee 37 ... MR. PALYLYK: Thi rty-seve n, a 40 hour work week in the plant and 37 V2 in the office. MR. PAULLEY: In the office? MR. PALYLYK: Yes. MR. PAULLEY: Are the office staff inclu ded in this 850 emplo yees? MR. PALYLYK: Yes, they are. MR.

PAULLEY: Do they work overtime as wel l? MR. PALYLYK: Yes. Because when the plant is working you need the clerical backup. MR. PAULLEY: Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Any further questions? Mr. McKenzie. MR. McKENZIE: Mr. Chairman , Mr. Palylyk, would it be possible for the same reg ulations as the llanit oba Hog Marke ting Commission to reg ulate the del ivery of beef? They get a phone in, don't 21

Indu strial Relations Monday, June 6, 19 77 they? They phone in and you can only take the deliv ery of so many per day. MR. PALYLYK: I don't belie ve they can even control the hogs because even with the hog rece we run into overtime. Say there is a weather di sturbance in Ontario, snowstorms and the del ive are down. Ontario and Man itoba service the same markets so naturally the price of hogs goes u Ontario and it goes up in Man itoba. Then the farmers wish to take advantage of the higher p1 because it will only be for several days. The Manitoba Hog Marke ting Commission does not s them from deliv ering.

They al low them to take advantage of the upswing in price. MR. McKENZIE: You then have no control over the del ivery of livestock coming in fr Saskatchewa n, Albe rta or Ontario or the Un ited States in that case. MR. PALYLYK: Not real ly, no. MR. McKENZIE: The other fi gure that I wo uld lik e to di scuss with you is the one wher e � mentioned that you see the costs increa sing by approximately a mill ion was it? MR. PALYLYK: Yes. MR. McKENZIE: That's amongst all the packingho uses? MR. PALYLYK: That's amongst all the packingho uses. lt's a preliminary rough estimate look in! our experience from last year. MR.

McKENZIE: I wonder if, in the next few days, you cou ld break that figur e down and give committee something tangible that we cou ld take a look at for fu rther debate. MR. PAL YL YK: Sure. MR. McKENZIE: The other question was about reg ul ations. "We simply ask that fu rt reg ul ations do not hamstring plant operations or raise costs unreasonably." What do you expect the reg ul ations that might hinder you or raise the costs in that point? MR.

PALYLYK: The main one would be the time and three-quarters for overtime because com pete in the same markets as the provinces to the west of us, the provinces to the east of us, asv as our southern neighbour . If our costs should go up- our margin is very marginal and if our ea go up we would naturally be at a disadvantage because we deal on the same markets. We service to Newf ound land and we also service right down to Vancouver. MR. McKENZIE: Would this then encou rage the produc ers to have thei r meat processed outs of Man itoba? Is that possible un der this legisla tion?

Would it be cheaper for them to ship it to · east? MR. PALYLYK: Certainly it could infl uence the Saskatchewan producer to go west rather tt east. MR. McKENZIE: That's all I have, Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bilton. MR. BIL TON: Mr. Chair man, I just have one question to the witness. With the adoption of t overtime legislation do you see a de clin e in the production of livestock in Man itoba that will affect I farm ing ind ustry? MR.

PALYLYK: Yes, there co uld be because our abil ity to process is naturally dete rmined by I markets available to us that we can success fully com pete on and this could have that effect, y MR. BIL TON: Than k you, Mr. Chai rman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Are there any further questions? Mr. Paul ley. MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if Mr. Palylyk cou ld tell us what percentage - wh you're ref err ing to overtime - what percentage -w ith your guaranteed work week of 37 hours, de everyth ing beyond that 37 overtime? · MR.

PALYLYK: No, in the office, anything beyond 37 % because that is the work-week and in tl plant, anyth ing over 40. MR. PAULLEY: Have you a breakdown of that precisely that we co uld see? MR. PALYLYK: 1 don't have it with me but I cou ld make it available. MR. PAULLEY: We ll, 1 can appreciate, sir, that you may not have it with you but I am sure it wou be of interest.

I did a rough calculation, sir, on your figur es that you presented to us of $83,000 wi 850-odd em ployees whic h amounts - if my ca lcula tor was working properly - to two hours p week per employee over a year, 10 0 over a year, which would amount to two hours overtime p employee per week, if evenly distributed. Would that basically be co rrect? MR. PALYLYK: lt sounds right mathematical ly, yes. ' MR. PAULLEY: Mathema tically. Then the incr ease from one and a half times to one and thre quarters would not exceed, if my figur es are correct, about two percent of the hours that are actual worked overtime?

The hourly wages. MR. PALYLYK: I'm not sure I follow your calculations on it. MR. PAULLEY: I'm not sure of them either real ly but the point though is that the net cost a� 22

Industrial Relations Monday, June 6, 19 77 11pute it, based on two hours work per week of overtime, is not a great percentage incr ease. What fOur base rate? MR. PALYLYK: Our base rate is just over $6.00. We have a new con tract to negotiate and then the se rate, if you look at what's allo wed under the AIB, would be $6.50 an hour and that is the base rate. :t we have bracke ts - what they cal l bracke ts-- certain jobs demand cert ain increments so the top .e would be $8.00-plus unde r the new agreement. MR.

PAULLEY: Do you, in your co ll ective agreement, have provision for a greater percentage m one and a half times after a cert ain number of hours? MR. PALYLYK: Yes we do, such as for statutory holida ys we have it. MR. PAULLEY: No, I was really refe rring to overtime. Is it all at the present time in your col le ctive reements at time and a half for overtime hours worked or is there another provision, any provision r a greater ... MR. PAL YLYK: Yes, there is. MR. PAULLEY: What would that be about? MR. PALYLYK: Sunday is double time and I bel ieve it is after twelve hours that it becomes doubl e ne .. MR.

PAULLEY: The fi rst four hours would be then basically one and a half and after that double ne. MR. PAL YL YK: Right. MR. PAULLEY: And that's incl uded in your cost computation of your 83,000 hours of overtime. MR. PALYLYK: No, because we figur ed those are hours, the 83,000 is hours ... MR. PAULLEY: Yes, is hours. ' MR. PALYLYK: ... rather than money. MR. PAULLEY: You haven't a breakdown of how many hours are incl uded in that figu re at time 1d a half and how muc h at double time. MR. PALYLYK: That had no bear ing on ... MR. PAULLEY: Oh yes, it has because, in my opinion, I don' t argue Mr.

Chairman, but when we are ·riving at the cost input of the increase from one and half times to one and three-qtJarters time, for 1ose hours that you are presently paying doubl e time, they would not be affected. Yet you say that )U have 83,000 hours of overtime. MR. PALYLYK: lt woul d influ ence the computation of ... MR. PAULLEY: Yes, but to what percentage? MR. PALYLYK: Yes, it would influ ence the computation of the cost but it would not influence the umber of hours ac tually worked but the cost of that overtime it would affect. MR.

PAULLEY: But, at the present time, sir, what I am trying to get at, at the present time you say 1at there are 83,000 hours of overtime worked. A portion, I would presume, of that figur e of 83,000 , ou would be required to pay for at the present time at double time. MR. PALYLYK: Yes, that is true. MR. PAULLEY: That is true. Now, can we have any idea of a percentage ratio of the hours at ouble time as against time and a half. MR. PALYLYK: I can make that available to you. MR.

PAULLEY: Yes, I think it would be interesting because I have seen numerous colle ctive greements that make the similar provision that yours does as to double time on Sunda ys and after )Ur hours of overtime and the incident of the incr ease from one and a half to one and three-quarters 1ay not be quite as signif icant as it appears just on surface. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dillen.

Ju st before I cal l him, I would lik e to, for the benefit of the Committee nd for the delegations that are here, advise that it is our intention for Committee to rise at 12 :30 ora s lose around there as possible and it is also the intent of the Committee to meet again in this room at8 1.m. this even ing so, for the delegations that are here, I would imagine that there would be no more 1eard this morning but we would be deligh ted to hear you this even ing. Mr. Dillen. MR. DILLEN: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the dele gate, he made reference to $1 mill ion of ncreased cost.

Is that for the entire meat packing ind ustry or is that broken down to just one tackingh ouse? MR. PALVLYK: That is an estimate for the meat packing ind ustry in Man itoba. MR. DILLEN: In Manitoba. MR. PALYLYK: Right, $1 milli on. MR. DI LLEN: Can you give us some idea of how many pounds of produc t the meat packing ndustry processes in Manitoba and what that means in terms of an incr ease per pound? MR. PALYLYK: I cou ld n't, no, unless you can get it from DBS because volumes moving through he plant are classified information. We don't give ours out and I wo uld have no idea what goes 23

Ind ustrial Relations Monday, June 6, 19 77 through the other plants. MR. DILLEN: Would you hazard a gue ss that it would be less than half a cent a pound? MR. PALYLYK: I wouldn' t even want to hazard a guess but if you are suggesting that possibly t a cent a pound is a small amount, I would lik e to suggest that a quarter of a cent a pound sells yt beef as opposed to someone elses. A quarter of a cent deter mines a sale .. MR. DILLEN: You are on a conti nuous sh ift operation. MR. PALYLYK: In most of the departments, we are on a con tinuous basis. There are soi departments that do not operate around the clock.

MR. DILLEN: So, in some departments then you have a two shift operation? MR. PALYLYK: Right and in some we have one. MR. DILLEN: A one sh ift operation. MR. PALYLYK: And some we have three. MR. DILLEN: Now, in these, which makes up the greater proportion of the operation of a packi plant? MR. PALYLYK: I wo uld say the two shift, double sh ifts, would be the largest part of ye process ing. MR. DILLEN: Now, in a continuous shift operation, your sh ifts do not necessa rily start on Mond and end on Friday. You would go through the weekend so that a person may not necessa rily work t 40 hours in the one week. MR.

PALYLYK: We have overlapping sh ifts, this is true. MR. DILLEN: So a person could work seven sh ifts before he would get a day off, because it is two separate weeks. MR. PALYLYK: You co uld if you were in the engine room. Say you were a steam engi neer, y could conceivably do it. The rest of them are sched ul ed. If your work week starts on Sunday, Y' would be, say on a Sunda y night, you would be fini shed on a Thu rsday night, so we do have a we week and a calendar week. MR. DILLEN: Okay. Do you know of any instance wher e emplo yees have refused to volu nteer work overtime? MR.

PALYLYK: I can only speak for Burns here in Winnipeg, for ou r firm. lt is not a problem with under the present arrangement of reaso nable overtime. We have had men refuse to work which or leads us to sit down and come up with a compromise but it has been no problem. MR. DILLEN: it's not been a problem. MR. PAL YL YK: No. MR. DILLEN: As a matter of fact, if I read your brief correctly, the time and a half payment has, fact, acted as a deterrent to the company for the requirement of overtime. MR.

PALYLYK: Yes, very definitely because there are other overhead costs that are based on yo dollar payroll, lik e compensation costs, for instance. If they are based on so much per $10 0 of pay re ours in Manitoba, in our group are $1.50 per $10 0 of payroll. So, if you inf late your payroll, yt naturally inflate your compensation cost. MR. DILLEN: Now, if the dif ferential moves from time and a half to time and three-q uarters, th would act as a greater deterrent to the working of overtime. MR. PALYLYK: That is right. MR. DILLEN: Will it result in the requirement for an increase in the number of employees? MR.

PALYLYK: I would have to say no because you cannot predic t what you are going to get. Yt cannot pred ict when you are going to have a fa vourable market condition and the producer will wa to move his livestock. You ca nnot predict when you will have a rainstorm and a farmer will come c the land and decide to run his livestock in.

You can't predict when your fi rst snowfal l will come ar the farmers will be bringing their cows off the com munity pastures and they will want to move them very fast, move them into the market. lt is very difficult to predict and it is something that is of suet short dur ation that you cou ldn' t get another sh ift going. By the time you would be fin ished evE getting the shift, the urgency would be over. MR. DILLEN: Right.

Can you give me an average of the number of overtime hours required by or person, an average of the required number of overtime hours for each of the three sh ci rcumstances that you've descri bed? MR. PALYLYK: We have a clause in the agreement which says, "a reasonable amount overtime," but it is not defined and I just cou ldn' t tell you. MR. DILLEN: Is there not a requirement in the con tinuous shift operation for at least eigh t hou per month, compulsory in the shif t change process? MR. PAL YL YK: No. MR. DILLEN: In the four-shif t system? 24

Indus trial Relations Monday, June 6, 19 77 MR. PALYLYK: No, the only thing we have is "a reasonable amount." If you have as hif tthatworks nours, even in there you run into overtime because if you have a heavy volume of business, then at you do is you overlap a numb er of employees from the shift that is finishing into the next shif t I then you do the same with the next sh ift. In other words, you spike-up the gangs to handle the 1duct. So even if you are operating with three sh ifts around the clock, you still run into this lrtime. MR. DILLEN: Okay.

Now can you give us some indic ation of the number of overtime hours 1uired as a result of absenteeism as opposed to sched ul ing of overtime? MR. PALYLYK: Yes, our absenteeism could run at 10 percent. I don't know what portion of it you Jl d apply in there because there are days when that 10 percent doesn't affect you but on the days en you must work overtime that 10 percent absenteeism definitely becomes a factor. MR. DILLEN : So that is absenteeism as a result of injury through Workmens Compensation, kness or just somebody that took a day off. MR. PAL YL YK: That is right. MR.

DILLEN: So the com bination of that would be about 10 percent? MR. PALYLYK: lt would be about 10 percent but there would be da ys when this wouldn' t affect ur overtime because of the lower vol ume. On days when you have the ad ditional vol ume it would a definite factor. MR. DILLEN: I can work out the mathematics on that, thank you. MR.

PALYLYK: There is someth ing else that I wo uld li ke to add here too, that when you are >rking overtime it does not neces sarily involve your whole work staff, it co uld in.volve justa certain 1eration. lt co uld be yo ur slaugh tering, or it could be your processing, or your beef -boning in the 11, so it is just departmental more or less. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Osl and. MR. OSLAND: Mr. Chairman, just one short question. You mentioned 37- V2 hours for your clerical fice staff. MR. PAL YL YK: Righ t. MR. OSLAND: Guaranteed? MR. PAL YL YK: They are on a salary basis so it is guaranteed. MR.

OSL AND: And how about the 40 hours for the plant empl oyees? MR. PALYLYK: Thi rty-seven hours guaranteed. MR. OSLAND: Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. McKenzie. MR. McKENZIE: Just one brief question to Mr. Palylyk. Could you bring us those hours of tertime of the other plants that you don' t have? Can you get those figu res? MR. PALYLYK: 1 will get them, I will attempt to get them all because the com petitive nature of the LJsiness is such that some of these people are very touchy about thei r statistics. MR. McKENZIE: If you cou ld provide those to the Chairman of our Committee. MR. PALYLYK: I will , de finit ely.

I will go out to every one of our members and solicit that 1formation. MR. CHAIRMAN: No fur ther questions? Hea ring none, thank you, Mr. Palylyk. Committee rise and we will reco nvene at 8 p.m. this even ing. 25

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	30-4-ir1
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	30th 4th hansardpdf ir1.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	937fe659ef21625ecf7aecf6e9eaf6b37ca74097

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