Canadian workers’ gains are sliding back this Labour Day

Since 1894, Labour Day has been marked as a statutory public holiday in Canada on the first Monday in September. The day was the result of decades of work by labour unions who were organizing annual celebrations and demonstrations to promote solidarity among workers, and to advocate for their rights. These efforts gradually led to changing public opinion, which in turn led to political impetus for the recognition of the rights of workers. We have come a long way since then, and unions have secured many benefits for all workers. These include the right to collective bargaining, occupational health and safety standards, minimum wage, paid vacations, statutory public holidays, overtime pay, and paid parental leave. With a federal election due next year, political parties are once again courting unionized workers. These overtures can lead one to believe that it is governments that have granted these rights to working Canadians. In fact, it was organized labour that fought for and secured these and many other basic rights we take for granted in Canada. The standard 40-hour work week, as an example, was only instituted in Canada in the 1960s following Australia in 1948, the United States in 1938, and France in 1936. It was the result of efforts by the unions during the 1930s based on the notion that scarce opportunities for gainful employment ought to be shared among the largest possible number of workers. Unfortunately, Canadian workers are sliding back, regardless of which political party is in power. Large corporations and executives are recording huge profits and bonuses, while the incomes of workers stagnate and purchasing power declines. Public sector workers are generally considered better organized, and the federal government claims to be a leading employer. However, federal public sector employees have also been sliding back, often due to political expediency. Take the examples of public sector pensions, severance pay, and—most recently—the Treasury Board Secretariat's direction of prescribed presence in the office. In 1999, the government introduced Bill C-78, which enabled it to take away $28-billion from the surplus of the public sector pension fund (superannuation accounts). Its purpose was twofold: first, to reduce the government’s annual budget deficit by reducing annual pension expenditures; and, second, bring down the government’s net debt. Unions took the matter to the courts, but the lost at the trial court and all the way through to the Supreme Court of Canada. The courts maintained that the plan members’ interests were limited to their interest in the defined benefits to which they are entitled under the plan. The courts maintained that the superannuation accounts were merely accounting records, not funded and segregated pools of assets. In exchange for their contributions, and with each year of pensionable service, employees gained a legal entitlement to statutorily defined pension benefits. But in 2013, the government took the position that supporting the plan was not sustainable, and that employees must increase their share of contributions to 50 per cent. This increase in cost was downloaded to plan members whose pay was already lagging behind the cost of living, significantly. The Treasury Board report in 2023 stated that the plan was running a $42.4-billion surplus. Will the government raid it again, followed by a pitch to increase employees’ contribution? Even worse, the slide has not stopped. In the Policy Declaration from the Conservative Party's 2023 conference, the party that hopes to form government after the next election declares its commitment to switch public sector pensions from the current defined benefit model to a defined contribution pension model, which will expose retired employees’ income to the market upheavals. Severance pay provisions were negotiated in collective agreements in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and have been an important part of compensation package. In 1969, public servants gave up an existing right to cash in surplus sick leave. During collective bargaining in 2010, Treasury Board established the termination of severance pay for voluntary departures as a pre-condition to a settlement in that round of bargaining. The value of severance pay was estimated at one per cent of salary on resignation to 1.9 per cent on retirement, but Treasury Board maintained that it would add 0.75 per cent per year to the rate of pay as compensation. On May 1, 2024, Treasury Board announced that as of Sept. 9, all employees are required to show up in the office at least 60 per cent of their time. Meanwhile, since the pandemic, the government has drastically reduced work spaces so that many buildings have been shut down for long overdue repairs, or to repurpose them. The government has identified 56 federal properties across Canada, including 22 in Ottawa, to convert into residential properties in an effort to address the housing crisis. Employees have no more assigned desks where they can leave their computers and documents on which they rely for doing their jobs. Such a dramatic change to the workspace has been pushed through by the government in violation of collective agreements it has signed, its own guidelines on union-management consultation, and during collective bargaining for the past two years. Public sector unions, including the Association of Canadian Financial Officers, Canadian Association of Public Employees, Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, and Public Service Alliance of Canada have filed policy grievances and unfair labour practice complaints, but Treasury Board is not willing to discuss the issue to arrive at a reasonable solution. Political attention to resolve workers’ issues does not come by itself. It has to be directed, especially in the case of public sector workers. The temptation for governments—new or old—is the use austerity measures and program cuts to win votes. The people that suffer are the recipients of those programs, as well as the workers who deliver the programs, make policies changes, all the while remaining politically neutral. The point is that more than ever, organized labour needs to remain cohesive and proactive. Waheed Khan is the president of the Community of Federal Visible Minorities, and serves on the board of directors of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada. The Hill Times